UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Vernacular form in an urban context; a preliminary ivestigation of facade elements in Vancouver housing Holdsworth, Derek William 1971

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

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1971 A8 H642.pdf [ 38.73MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0107069.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0107069-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0107069-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0107069-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0107069-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0107069-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0107069-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0107069-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0107069.ris

Full Text

VEMA.CULAE. POEM IN AN URBAN CONTEXT A Preliminary Investigation of Facade Elements i n Vancouver Housing *>y DERYCK WILLIAM HOLDSWORTH' .A., University of Newcastle upon Tyne, England 1968 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OP THE REQUIREMENTS POE THE DEGREE OP MASTER OP ARTS i n the Department of G-eography We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OP BRITISH COLUMBIA September, 1971 In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the r e q u i r e m e n t s 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 C olumbia, I agree t h a 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 r e f e r e n c e and S t u d y . I f u r t h e r agree t h a t p e r m i s s i o n f o r e x t e n s i v e c o p y i n g o f 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 g r a n t e d by the Head o f my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s u n d e r s t o o d t h a t c o p y i n g or 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 g a i n s h a l l not be a l l o w e d w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department of The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia Vancouver 8 , Canada Date ( Q&t C 1*1-1/ ( i i ) ABSTRACT V i s i b l e facade elements are important i n the assessment of the age of r e s i d e n t i a l s t r u c t u r e s . I n t h i s study a c l a s s i f i c a t o r y procedure i s developed i n which reference to combinations of c r i t i c a l facade elements enable a house to be categorised according to i t s p e r i o d of con s t r u c t i o n and also to be assigned a vernacular l a b e l . The case study i s placed i n the K i t s i l a n o area of Vancouver, Canada. The housing forms of a community (other than a r u r a l or p r i m i t i v e l e v e l ) have often not been given the a t t e n t i o n they deserve i n r e l a t i o n to t h e i r numbers or t h e i r p o t e n t i a l c o n t r i b u t i o n to an understanding of the evol u t i o n of the North American urban landscape. Examination of a r c h i t e c t u r a l h i s t o r i e s i n d i c a t e d a pre-occupation with p r e s t i g i o u s and monumental archi t e c t u r e rather than the vernacular. I n a d d i t i o n , the few general s t y l e s embrace too wide a period f o r use i n areas of recent growth, and are not Immediately tr a n s f e r a b l e to Vancouver which has only e i g h t y - f i v e years of b u i l d i n g and a d i s t i n c t i v e c u l t u r a l h i s t o r y . Geographers who have attempted s i m i l a r taxonomic exercises found that s t y l e alone was an i n s u f f i c i e n t basis f o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n ! i t was necessary to i d e n t i f y the v a r i a t i o n s of the s a l i e n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the s t y l e s . Therefore, a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of four elements - window s t y l e , roof l i n e s , porch and entrance appearance, and external cover m a t e r i a l -provided the basis f o r the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of vernacular s t y l e s and t h e i r construction periods, A regression of ac t u a l year of construction against the four facade elements i n d i c a t e d t h e i r r e l a t i v e importance but d i d not y i e l d weightings by which the i n d i v i d u a l year of construction could be c o n s i s t e n t l y recognised. However, p a r t i c u l a r element sub-types appeared to be associated with general time periods, and time period boundaries based on b u i l d i n g cycles i n Vancouver were imposed on the data to examine the a s s o c i a t i o n of ( i i i ) each, sub-type with p a r t i c u l a r years. S i g n i f i c a n t overlaps across the time boundaries prevented the a l l o c a t i o n of i n d i v i d u a l facade element sub-types to d i s c r e t e time periods; however, examination of the d i s t r i b u t i o n of combinations of three elements - window, roof, and entrance - i n d i c a t e d the concentration of the majority of houses i n r e l a t i v e l y few combinations of element sub-types. A two-tier c l a s s i f i c a t i o n emerged, i n which p r e c i s e c l u s t e r s of combinations based upon a roof sub-type core accounted f o r the majority of occurrences i n s p e c i f i c time periods. By amalgamating adjacent c l u s t e r s , the overlap of element sub-types from one small time period to another disappeared i n a more general grouping,. Using the a r c h i t e c t u r a l l a b e l s , the various three-element combinations could be conveniently described, and t h e i r time-popularity assessed f o r the Vancouver case. The s t y l e s were: Swiss Chalet (1910-1918) and Bungalow Proper (1912-1925) equal Bungaloid (1912-1925); and Cottage-like (1926-1938) and Boxes (1938-1945) equal B i j o u (1926-1945)° Other a r c h i t e c t u r a l l a b e l s were then added to t h i s basic grouping, with the place of Queen Anne, Sastlake, and Cubic Styles suggested f o r e a r l i e r Vancouver housing, together with the contributions of modern developments I n s p l i t - l e v e l , ranch s t y l e and apartment design <> Overlaps found i n the examination of s p e c i f i c sub-type time spans could be explained through s t y l i s t i c t r a n s i t i o n s from one s t y l e to another, since i t was recognised that very few s t y l e s command a period I n absolute terms. A summary d e s c r i p t i o n of the s t y l e s was presented, and also suggestions f o r i n c r e a s i n g the r e s o l u t i o n of the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . F i n a l l y , p o t e n t i a l uses of the key were suggested, focussing on three main t o p i c s where models of urban s o c i a l structure might be tested: the impact of transportation technology on i n f i l l patterns and process; the s p a t i a l pattern of d i f f e r e n t housing q u a l i t i e s to i n d i c a t e d i f f e r e n t i a l m o b i l i t y and status i n various time periods; and s t r u c t u r a l modifications as a measure of changing land use and as an outward manifestation of the ( i v ) c u l t u r a l mix of occupants. Mention i s made of the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n ' s p ossible r o l e i n c r e a t i n g awareness of the everyday urban environment, and also i t s important value as a more objective approach to a theme i n c u l t u r a l geography where the use of a r t i f a c t s as a data source has been vanerable to c r i t i c i s m s that they were based on subjective i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s 0 - V -Table of Contents Abstract . . . . List of Tables , List of Figures List of Plates , o o o o o . X X . . v i i o o v i i i Acknowledgements Frontispiece • • x x i i Chapter I II III IV Vernacular Building Types . . . . . ..<>...... 1.1 Introduction 1.2 General position within cultural geography 1.3 Absence of useful architectural taxonomies 1.4 G-uidelines from previous work Description of facade elements in Vancouver housing < 2.1 Plan 2.2 Window styles 2.3 Roof lines 2.4 Entrance form 2.5 External cover material 2.6 Consideration of other external facade elements 24 55 Time-period and Facade-element Associations . o . o . . . . .. 3.1 Introduction Accuracy of subtypes for predicting actual year of construction Meed for independest time-periods Classification of period groups Resolution of element sub-types for dating purposes Combinations of element sub-types Applicability to non-random sample 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 Classification of Vernacular Styles applicable to Vancouver Housing o . . « . . . . . . . . . o . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 What type of classification? 4.2 Ressurection of architectural labels 4.3 Extension outside the central time-periods 4.4 Areas of Improvement Possible Utility of the Classification in Testing Various Urban Modelso . o . o . . . . . . . . . . . 0 . . . . 0 . . . 84 .114 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 Bibliography . Residential pattern amd transportation technology Housing quality and socia; distance Structural modifications and urban cultural ecology Awareness of environment Methodological Value .148 Appendix A FACADE ELEMENT DETAILS OF HOUSES SELECTED BY RANDOM SAMPLE . .154 B DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CORRECT YEAR OF CONSTRUCTION AND VALUES EXPECTED FROM MULTIPLE REGRESSION WEIGHTINGS OF ELEMENT SUBTYPES . C DATA ON HOUSING COMPLETIONS IN KITSILANO STUDY AREA AND ANNUAL VALUES OF BUILDINGS IN CITY OF VANCOUVER . ,jJ5fi_. (vi) List of Tables Page I. House characteristics by era (after Eickert, -\967) . 17 II. Correlation matrices from original (ila) and modified (lib) field data regression O . o . . o o . o . o o . . . » . . o . . 6 0 III. Incidence of facade elements by time periods .. 0 . . . . . . . 6 7 IV. Proportion of element sub-types in specific time periods . . . . 6 9 V. Proportion of specific element sub-types through time o o . . . 71 VI. Most frequent sub-type (grouped by non-error error rule) in specific time periods . * • • • • • . . . » < > o . o . . . . 7 3 VIIo Incidence of three element combinations, by time period , ; 0 . . 7 4 VIII. Incidence of facade elements by time period (non-random sample).77 IX. Proportion of facade element sub-types in specific time periods (non-random sample) , 1 . 77 X. Proportion of specific element sub-types through time (noa-random sample) 0 . . . . . . . . 0 0 0 0 0 . . . 0 0 . . . 7 7 XI. Test of most frequent sub-types/ time period categories (non-random sample) . . . . . . ..<>. . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8 XII. Incidence of three element combinations, by time period (non-random sample) o . 0 . . . . 0 . 0 0 0 . 0 . . . 8 1 XIIIo Comparison of sample sets, by element sub-type/time period combinations .. . . . 0 . o 0 . . 0 . . 8 2 v i i List of Figures 1 . Windows: sub-type characteristics . . . . . 3 0 2 . Roof-line: sub-type characteristics . . . . . 3 5 3 . Entrance area: sub-type characteristics ..<>•. . 3 9 4 . Suggested chronological sequence for cover materials 4 7 5 . G-uide for field work coding o . 5 6 5a.Example of field recording format „ , o . . . o o » . o . . o . o o . o 5 7 6 . Vancouver housing cycles: Annual Figures, 1 9 0 0 - 1 9 6 9 . . . 0 . . 0 . . . 6 4 7 . Vancouver housing cycles: 3-year moving means . . . . . . 6 4 8. Scalogram-type presentation of random sample data . . , . • . . . . 0 . 6 6 9 . Scalogram-type presentation of aon-random sample data » o . . . o . . o 7 6 1 0 . Association between random and non-random sample sets, by occurrence of expected' time^eriod/ element sub-type categories 0 0 . . 8 O 1 1 . Schematic linkage tree, showing increasing error with progressive < . grouping. . . . . . o o . . . . . . . . 8 6 1 2 . Grouping of Type 2 and Type 3 element characteristics into Bungaloid style O . . . . . o o o . . o o . . . . . . o o o . o . . » o 8 9 1 3 . Possible extension of grouping to incorporate 1 9 2 6 - 3 6 housing . . « . . 9 5 1 4 . Linkage of bungaloid and bijou housing , « « < • • « « o 95 1 5 o Grouping division into two- and single-storeyed structures, acknowledging stylistic connection with earlier housing 0 . o . o . . . 9 5 1 6 0 Suggested linkage tree for the spectrum of Vancouver vernacular forms , 1 0 7 1 7 . Kitsilano Study area: patter*, of residential accretion and l o t - i n f i l l 1 1 6 18. Kitsilano Study area: Mean construction year - perspective surface. 0 . 1 1 8 1 9 . Kitsilano Study area: Standard deviations by block level -perspective surface o o . o . o o o . . • 0 0 0 . o © . . . o 1 1 8 2 0 . Model of residential accretion and i n f i l l based on transportation constraints through time. 0 0 . . 0 0 » 0 1 2 4 2 1 . Hypothetical neighbourhood occupatxaffl/time-period matrix. . . . o . o . 1 2 7 2 2 . Approximate location of "threshold" in three cultures (after Rapoport) 1 3 4 z$o Elements of historical enquiry (after Berkhofer). . ° . . . 1 4 2 v i i i List of Plates Page 1 . Wilson aungalow Book, page .113, Design No.708 • • • < > • • . <>11 2 . Wilson Bungalow Book, page 1 6 , Design No. 1 9 5 • . • . . • • • • • < > • • 1 2 3 . Wilson Bungalow Book, page 62, Design No.492 • . o © 1 3 4 . Field diagrams for coded descriptions of buildings (Brunskill,1970) . . 19 5 . " 1 9 0 3 - It Was A Very Good Year" . . . © . © . . . . © . < > . 25 6. 'Pioneer' Cottages .,<,•<,... © » o . . 28 7 . Example of typical window of 1912 housing O 0 o o o . o . . • • < > . • . 32 8 . sketches of thatched cottages showing truncated hip roof (Woodforde). « 37 9 . Stone pier remains: 2 7 0 0 block west 8 t h Avenue . . . © O o o o o . . © 4 l 1 0 o Extensive stone trim: 1 7 1 i Dunbar Street 0 0 o . . o . . » . . . . . . 4 1 1 1 o Lonely stone pier: West 3 r d Avenue c e o o . o . • • . < > * 4 1 1 2 . Detail to show irregular brick courses as pier material:2900 block ¥ . 5 t h 4 3 13©'Examples of pairs of houses built in same year, with one house in each case having undergone modification to the veranda . 0 . o » . © « 4 5 1 4 O Floor Plan of Wilson Design No .492,(illustrated in Plate 3) o © . . . © 4 8 15© 1912 house on corner of 2nd Avenue and Alma St., showing side bay window48 1 6 . Example of house incorporating a continuation of cross-gable line to suggest larger front perspective « . 0 . 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 9 17 . 2689 West 6 t h Avenue: Dummy extension to front wall, assisting triangular front perspective • . . . O o o o . . o « . « o . » . o e © 4 9 18c Different set-backs between 1 9 0 8 and 1 9 1 z houses: 3 2 0 0 block "West 2nd . 51 1 9 o 6 t h Avenue and Alma Street apartment ukder construction,1969 . . . . o 5 1 2 0 o 3696 Point G-rey Koad o . © o . . . . . . . . o © . o . o . o 5 8 2 1 o 2 9 0 0 block west 5 t h Avenue; a l l 1 9 2 0 - 2 1 © o © . . . o . o . . o 0 © o o 9 1 2 2 0 A-frame 1 9 1 2 house . O . . . . © o . < > . o o , 9 3 2 3 . A-frame 1 9 i 2 house and forerunner(1912J Bungalow Proper 0 0 0 0 . 0 . . 9 3 2 4 . Transition from Bungalow Proper to ? : examples from 3300 block W.2nd » 9 4 2 5 o Illustrations showing overlap of facade element categories to unite time IV and time V housing 0 ..'© . . . © . . © © . . © © 9 7 2 6 . Styles of earlier cultural age found in 1912 Kitsilano housing 0 . o . 9 8 - i x -L i s t of Plates Con't. 2 7 o S-ood examples of Queene Anne-style housing i n Vancouver . . „ . < > . . 1 0 1 28. 1 3 0 1 West 7th Avenue: Eastlake s t y l e 0 . . . . . o . . . 1 0 2 2 9 o Low form of 1 9 5 0 ' s housing O . 0 o o . . . . . . . . 0 . 0 0 . . . . 1 0 4 3 0 . Second generation housing: 2822 West 11th Avenue . . . . . . . . . . 1 0 4 3 1 . Marine Apartments: Point G-rey Road o . 105 32. Apartment block: 1 9 0 6 Stephens Street 0 0 . . . I O 5 3 3 . CMHC Apartments: 2 9 0 0 block West 4 t h Avenue » o < , » . . . . 1 0 5 3 4 . Examples of vernacular s t y l e s as i n Figure 16 . . 0 . 0 108 3 5 . 3 5 8 1 West 1 1 t h Ave&ue: 1 9 4 0 two-storey house 111 3 6 . D i f f e r e n t q u a l i t i e s of 1 9 1 2 housing . . . 0 0 . . . . . . . < > . . . . 1 2 1 3 7 . Examples of delayed i n f i l l of vacaj&t l o t s 1 2 9 38. P r i v a t e r e s t homes . . o . o o . . . . . « « . . o o o o . o o . o o 1 3 1 39. Type 4 window i n basement of 1912 house: 3 3 4 8 West 1st Ave. 1 3 2 4 0 . S t r u c t u r a l modifications to houses: 2 1 0 0 and 2 2 0 0 block Stephens St. 133 4 1 Sketches of vernacular housing i n Vancouver ( a f t e r K u t h an , 1 9 6 2 ) . . «, 1 3 6 4 2 o Another source f o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of vernacular a r c h i t e c t u r e ; suggestion of h o u s i n g / l i f e - s t y l e / s o c i a l status c o r r e l a t i o n s i n Vancouver's B r i t i s h Properties ( N o r r i s , Vancouver Sun) 0 , , , , , » ,, 1 3 8 4 3 . New hi g h - r i s e s and o l d houses i a West End of Vancouver . . . . . . . 140 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The eighteen months of study at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia which culminated i n t h i s t h e s i s would not have been po s s i b l e without the generous assistance of the Canadian Commonwealth Scholarship and Fellowship Committee, Ottawa, who are thanked at the outset. , Of s p e c i f i c persons, mention must f i r s t be made of my supervisor, Professor W.G-. Hardwick, who gave continued encouragement f o r a c t i v e research i n t o confirming some of h i s own i n t u i t i v e notions concerning housing s t y l e s and the p a t t e r n of r e s i d e n t i a l a c c r e t i o n i n Vancouver. His advice and continual assistance, based on a vast knowledge of the l o c a l scene, i s g r a t e f u l l y acknowledged,, I n a s s i s t i n g Professor K.&„ Denike i n teaching an undergraduate course, the w r i t e r ' s knowledge was broadened, and an opportunity appeared to t e s t some of the a p p l i c a t i o n s suggested i n the f i n a l chapter of t h i s t h e s i s ; Professor Denike also gave considerable assistance i n the formative stages of the study, and i n t h i s respect, Professor G-. Gates was also very h e l p f u l i n h i s w i l l i n g n e s s to discuss research problems. Mention must also be made of Professor £.. Leigh, f o r h i s c r i t i c a l comments and i n t e r e s t ; Professors Copley, Sandhu and Siemens, whose Cu l t u r a l Geography seminar provided an invaluable e a r l y forum; and Professor J.L„ Robinson f o r h i s h e l p f u l comments on e a r l i e r d r a f t s of the t h e s i s o Also Professor M.R.G. Conzen, U n i v e r s i t y of Newcastle upon Tyne, England, who was responsible f o r i n s t i l l i n g the v i t a l i n i t i a l i n t e r e s t i n urban b u i l d i n g types during the w r i t e r ' s undergraduate t r a i n i n g . Information on a c t u a l construction dates i n the study area was gathered from records i n the Assessment Department, Vancouver C i t y H a l l . The assistance given to the w r i t e r by Mr. P. George of the Planning Department i s g r a t e f u l l y acknowledged. Reproduction of a l l the i l l u s t r a t i o n s i n t h e i r present format was possible only with the k i n d assistance given by the Central Photographic ( x i ) U n it, U n i v e r s i t y o f - L e i c e s t e r , England, i n a l l o w i n g access to f a c i l i t i e s . Thanks are due p a r t i c u l a r l y to Henryk Kawalski, Ian Paterson and J e f f Baynes, f o r t h e i r t e c h n i c a l a i d and advice. No l i s t of acknowledgements i s complete without r e c o g n i t i o n of the r o l e of f e l l o w research students, who help provide a relaxed and s t i m u l a t i n g environment; thanks are due p a r t i c u l a r l y to J e r r y Turk, Arthur Nowell, Mari l y n Gates, Ken Rhenby and Steve Evans. I n a d d i t i o n , Marion Cooper and E i l e e n G i l l gave valuable assistance i n prparatory fieldwork and t e s t i n g the key 0 Last but not l e a s t , thanks are due to my w i f e , Meg, f o r her valuable moral and c l e r i c a l assistance, without which t h i s t h e s i s would never have been f i n i s h e d . . D.W.Holdsworth L e i c e s t e r , England September, 1971. ( x i i ) When Zarathustra was again on f i r m land he did not go o f f straight' away to h i s mountains and his cave, but made many journeys and asked many questions and enquired of this and that; so that he said jokingly of himself: 'Behold a r i v e r that flows back to i t s source through many meanderingsJ* For he wanted to learn what had been happening to men while he had been away: whether they had become bigger or smaller. And once ha saw a row of houses, and he marvelled and said: What do these houses mean? Truly, no great soul put them up as i t s imageI Did a s i l l y c h i l d perhaps take them out of i t s toy-box? I f only another c h i l d would put them back i n i t s boxl And these sitting-rooms and bedrooms: are men able to go i n and out of them? They seem to have been made for d o l l s ; or f o r dainty nibblers who perhaps l e t others nibble with them. And Zarathustra stopped and considered.. Kietzche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra, 1885. - 1 -CHAPTER L. VERNACULAR BUILDING- TYPES, 1.1 . Int r o d u c t i o n I n the search f o r a s i n g l e index which can be used as an i n d i c a t o r of c u l t u r e , the housing u n i t and the settlement landscape, r e f l e c t i n g so many facets of Man's l i f e s t y l e , appears very a t t r a c t i v e to the c u l t u r a l geographer. Problems a r i s e i n c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of t h i s basic u n i t , since some e f f o r t must be made to provide a consistent schema which can be used f o r comparative purposes both a r e a l l y and temporally. The basis f o r c a l i b r a t i o n can vary i n d e t a i l and scale from s t r u c t u r a l components and plan layout to the i n t r i c a t e decoration of doorways and windows. I n v a r i a b l y , a common 'vocabulary* i s desirable f o r such comparative purposes, and f o r t h i s , the works of a r c h i t e c t u r a l h i s t o r i a n s are consulted. Yet i t i s the b e l i e f of the w r i t e r that such sources are overly concerned with the r e l a t i v e l y few p r e s t i g i o u s structures of an area or h i s t o r i c p eriod, at the expense of the vast majority of unpretentious u n i t s 0 This view i s supported by Rapoport, whose work i s p o s s i b l y the only s u b s t a n t i a l attempt i n c u l t u r a l geography to attempt a d e t a i l e d a n a lysis of the house as a concrete expression of the i n t e r a c t i o n of c u l t u r a l s k i l l s , climate and construction materials; he begins by s t a t i n g A r c h i t e c t u r a l theory and h i s t o r y have t r a d i t i o n a l l y been concerned with the study of monuments. They have emphasised the work of the genius, the unusual, the r a r e . (Rapoport, 19&9» P«l) He goes on to claim that these (the monuments) are not the t o t a l volume of b u i l d i n g i n an area, and h i g h - s t y l e b u i l d i n g s should therefore be seen as part of a vernacular matrix - vernacular can be simply defined as f o l k , popular, or unpretentious architecture.^"* Rapoport sees the d e f i n i t i o n and analysis of vernacular form not so. much i n terms of type but rather of process how 'a house i s "designed" and b u i l t , with the very f a c t that i t i s not an a r c h i t e c t u r a l monument r e s u l t i n g i n " i n v i s i b l e " design from the outsiders' -2-viewpoint. • One of the most meaningful i l l u s t r a t i o n s of what i s understood by the term "vernacular" i s provided by Gowan?(l966)x who writes Anyone who has ever t r a v e l l e d remarks on the change i n what i s loosely c a l l e d 'scenery' going from one part of the country to another. You need no boundary markers to t e l l when you pass from Ontario into Quebec, or from * New Brunswick into Maine; i n some mysterious manner the countryside simply looks 'different'. But how, exactly? In geographical features there i s no great change; geologically, a l l this area i s a l i k e . A g r i c u l t u r a l patterns vary a l i t t l e more - different kind of trees and crops appear, and new shapes i n f i e l d and fences - but not dramatically. Where the r e a l l y decisive differences come i s i n the change of architectural landscape. Buildings, f a r more than r i v e r s or trees or climate, give the countryside i t s d i s t i n c t i v e 'flavour'» By buildings, I mean not the occasional outstanding work of architecture you might see but the vernacular - common, average, run-of-the-mill work: farmhouses, barns, stores, sheds, garages. Architectural masterpieces, besides being rare anywhere, are always untypical; by t h e i r very nature they represent something exceptional i n the way of taste, education, s k i l l or eccentricity. By d e f i n i t i o n they are never 'part of the scenery'; the 'scenery' that distinguishes one region from another i s created by everyday architecture - the simplest sort of building that has gone on for generations, with no great pretentions to Art, and i s hence unselfconsciously scaled at the lowest common denominator of taste. (Gowan'j 1966, p. 1+6-1+1) One can understand why Gowans did not include buildings ar part of the geographical landscape, as u n t i l recently these have not been regarded as a central theme i n geographical analysis. Where they have been examined, then the b u i l t environments under attention has often been r u r a l structures, or those associated with pre-industrial societies - consequently a quasi-2 anthropological approach was used* * In many respects, Rapoport follows t h i s route too, although i t i s no doubt the easiest and most sensible place to begin to attempt to relate vernacular forms and culture; i n pre-industrial societies, the role of environmental forees are stronger, and some comment on the r e l a t i v e -3-c o n t r i b u t i o n of c u l t u r a l s k i l l s and environmental determinants can be attempted. Consequently, i n such a preliminary examination of world housing types, there i s only spasmodic treatment of the a r t i f i a c t s of urban- i n d u s t r i a l s o c i e t y , e x p e c i a l l y i n a t a n t a l i s i n g l y b r i e f concluding s e c t i o n , (p.130-57) On the other hand, the work of the a r c h i t e c t u r a l h i s t o r i a n s , although expressing the sentiment of l o o k i n g at the f o l k a r c h i t e c t u r e of an area, r a r e l y manages to go beyond t h e i r usual pre-occupation w i t h the p r e s t i g i o u s 3 and the pretentious. A recent t e x t on how to study, record and c l a s s i f y vernacular a r c h i t e c t u r e ( B r u n s k i l l , 1970) would i n i t i a l l y seem to answer the above c r i t i c i s m , but t h i s too f a i l s to be aware of the true dimensions of the vernacular matrix; t h i s i s emphatically i l l u s t r a t e d i n B r u n s k i l l ' s passion f o r recording (almost f o r p o s t e r i t y , one f e e l s ) the d e t a i l of pre-l8th century r u r a l s t r uctures. Like Eapoport, the urban vernacular i s l e f t u n t i l the end, together with several pages on Vernacular a r c h i t e c t u r e i n North America, which turns out to be an analysis of the impact of English ideas on c e r t a i n areas and times; consequently, there i s an i n e v i t a b l e focus on the more elegant and r i c h e r b u i l d i n g s . Anyone i n t e r e s t e d i n urban c u l t u r a l geography i s thus f r u s t r a t e d by most of the e x i s t i n g l i t e r a t u r e , and there appears to be a need f o r more work on vernacular forms i n an urban context. This w i l l be i l l u s t r a t e d i n the f o l l o w i n g section, i n which the place of vernacular forms i n c u l t u r a l geography i s examined, and i n the section (p.7-20) discussing the relevant l i t e r a t u r e , both a r c h i t e c t u r a l and geographical. -4-1.2 General P o s i t i o n w i t h i n C u l t u r a l Geography Any assessment of the r o l e of a technique, data source, idea, e t c . w i t h i n a subsection of the d i s c i p l i n e must f i r s t be defined w i t h i n a more general frame of reference, namely the paradigm of geography as a whole. 4 As a r e s u l t of the current s h i f t s i n the methodological base of geography, with a greater emphasis on objective measurement and a n a l y s i s as a prelude to formulation of laws, theory construction and model b u i l d i n g , previous appoach.es are i n e v i t a b l y seen i n a d i f f e r e n t l i g h t . I n some cases, these predecessors might be declared redundant, or a l t e r n a t i v e l y recast i n s i m p l i f y i n g or u n i f y i n g concepts. The more t r a d i t i o n a l approach to c u l -t u r a l / h i s t o r i c a l geography^, which saw landscape as a palimpsest of previous a c t i v i t i e s , each l a y e r capable of being peeled away to reveal the diverse contributions of successive groups and c a p a b i l i t i e s , has diminished i n a t t r a c t i o n and reputation under t h i s paradigm s h i f t . However, such an ap-proach, e s p e c i a l l y attempts to use a r t i f a c t s as the key to the palimpsest, should be capable of meeting the current concern f o r p r e c i s i o n i n both measurement and a n a l y s i s ; c u l t u r a l geography by t r a d i t i o n has focussed on complex, interwoven values and phenomena which do not lend themselves e a s i l y to precise c l a s s i f i c a t i o n ; and although a surrogate measure or index i s often the nearest approximation p o s s i b l e , t h i s can be elegantly defined and 7 constructed. C e r t a i n l y , t h i s approach has a long h i s t o r y ; p o s s i b l y the most impressive section of c u l t u r a l geography as a whole has been i t s strong morphological - 5 -and material b i a s , of which the German taxonomies on settlement types Q provide the best example . Studies of the r u r a l landscape, settlement patterns and b u i l d i n g methods, by American geographers such as K n i f f e n (1936,1965), Mather (1963), Jackson (1953,1959,1961), Z e l i n s k y (1959), and Glassies (1970)? have served to e s t a b l i s h a s i m i l a r bias i n t o part of American geography. I n urban geography, however, the morphological and taxonomic t r a d i t i o n has not h»d s i m i l a r currenct, at l e a s t i n t a c k l i n g the American urban landscape i n any d e t a i l . K n i f f e n (1965) has provided the probable explanation of why settlement geography, which has occupied an a c t i v e and respected place i n European geography, has not found equally widespread acceptance i n America. He f e e l s that the major reason i s the b r e v i t y of the h i s t o r i c a l time-span, which makes the methods of h i s t o r i c a l r e c o n s t r u c t i o n l e s s a p p l i c a b l e , the common excuse being our settelement elements and patterns are so youthful as to be masked by ferment, mixture and makeshift to the extent that they are amorphous, that t h e i r study can lead to no s i g n i f i c a n t r e s u l t s ( K n i f f e n , 1965, p.549) Such an a t t i t u d e has lead to two types of study<> One, i n which maturity has replaced the 'youthful' as the focus of a t t e n t i o n . Thus patterns of 11 i n i t i a l occupance i n the seaboard colonies and the d i f f u s i o n of patterns and s t y l e s westwards with the f r o n t i e r have received a t t e n t i o n with some 12 success . On the other end of the scale there i s the atemporal scene, i n which f u n c t i o n i s of prime importance. I t i s i n t h i s area - e f f e c i e n t spacing of c i t i e s i n systems, f u n c t i o n a l structure of urban areas, etc. - that American urban geographers have made greatest impact; the opposing philosophies are w e l l i l l u s t r a t e d by the Conzen/Garris on debate i n the Lund I.G.U. Urban 1 3 Symposium, 1 961. And yet between the two extremes - the antiquarian'' 4 and the "spit-hot a r t i f a c t " (Lowenthal, 1962, p . 2 l ) there l i e s the vast majority of housing stock of the continent. Arguing the case f o r the examination of the urban landscape, Nelson (1963) speaks of c i t i e s as c l e a r r e f l e c t i o n s of - 6 -of the c u l t u r e , o f the people who b u i l t them, the v i s i b l e and dynamic expression of length of occupance, technological achievement, economic i n t e r e s t , s o c i a l value, p o l i t i c a l organisation, r e l i g i o u s i d e a l s , a r t i s t i c tastes and way of l i f e of a people. (Nelson, 1 9 6 3 , p. 7 ) He advances the c r i t i c i s m that most American c i t i e s have been i n v e s t i g a t e d as i n d i v i d u a l centres and from an economic or f u n c t i o n a l viewpoint which sheds l i t t l e l i g h t on more general, r e p e t i t i v e morphological features that might be c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , of those c i t i e s . He concludes that the analysis of these c i t i e s , r e f l e c t i n g many facets of the complex l i f e of the people who b u i l t and i n h a b i t them, "would seem to deserve a prominent place among the 'elements* of c u l t u r a l geography" (p.74) And yet what does Nelson study, a f t e r presenting such an impressive case? - the townscapes of Mexico, which o f f e r s u f f i c i e n t numbers of Mayan and Spanish c o l o n i a l structures to reduce the modern p e r i o d to minor proportions. Reviewing the 'state of the a r t ' i n Canadian h i s t o r i c a l geography, H a r r i s (1967) i s c l e a r l y aware of the lack of focus on the complexity of the immediate urban surroundings, p o i n t i n g out t h a t t -vernacular s t y l e s of the ordinary farm house, the barns, or the main s t r e e t s warrant geographical a t t e n t i o n as important contributions to the landscape and as r e f l e c t i o n s of time past. ( H a r r i s , 1967 , p. 238) But t h a t : -studies of the appearance of stre e t s and d i s t r i c t s , so revealing about a t t i t u d e s and ways of l i f e i n e a r l y Canadian c i t i e s , have received almost no s c h o l a r l y attention,, ( H a r r i s , 1967 , p . 2 4 0 ) -7-P o s s i b l y t h i s s i t u a t i o n i s due to the absence of r e l i a b l e information a v a i l a b l e on methods f o r d i s t i n g u i s h i n g the vernacular s t y l e s which H a r r i s mentions. 1 .3 Absence of u s e f u l a r c h i t e c t u r a l taxonomies Examination of a r c h i t e c t u r a l h i s t o r i e s concentrating on the 'greats' such as Richardson, S u l l i v a n , and Wright, would seem to bear out the above noted c r i t i c i s m s . Mumford, ( 1 9 5 9 ) , i& "t^e preface to the Second E d i t i o n of Roots of Contemporary American A r c h i t e c t u r e , began by w r i t i n g "When t h i s book was f i r s t published i n 1 9 5 2 , i t f i l l e d a gap that was a disgrace to American scholarship i n a r c h i t e c t u r a l h i s t o r y " ( p . v i i ) . I t was, i n p a r t , a r e v o l t against "academicism and h i s t o r i c i s m " which had u n t i l then explained American s t y l e s simply i n terms of European c u l t u r a l f o r c e s , but more importantly i t was an attempt to trace the i n t e l l e c t u a l germination that preceeded the emergence of indiginous modern forms; the purpose being to understand and incorporate i n t o a r c h i t e c t u r a l h i s t o r y the ideas of those who, had something to say about t h e i r basic b e l i e f s and purposes that powerfully supplemented, i f i t d i d not go beyond, what they had concretely expressed i n t h e i r b u i l d i n g s . (Mumford, 1 9 5 9 , p . v i i ) Yet although t h i s may have been a great improvement f o r a r c h i t e c t u r a l h i s t o r i a n s , by examining the contributions of more persons and also r e -ducing the importance of imported values, there i s s t i l l an emphasis on a r c h i t e c t s rather than on a r c h i t e c t u r e ; Mumford t e l l s the story of the concepts that created a new language of s t r u c t u r a l form through the writings of the men who most influenced American a r c h i t e c t u r e . Yet as a c o n t r i b u t i o n to an understanding of the roots of American arch i t e c t u r e i n the sense of t r u l y vernacular s t y l e s , as defined i n t h i s i n t r o d u c t i o n , the work i s of l e s s i n t e r e s t , although he does remind one that modern -8-architecture i s a continuation of a r c h i t e c t u r a l t r a d i t i o n , not a break with or r e j e c t i o n of them merely because they do not i m i t a t e the ancient modes:-When modern ar c h i t e c t u r e departs from the past, i t does so f o r good reasons, e i t h e r because the conditions of l i f e g enerally have changed, or because fr e s h t e c h n o l o g i c a l f a c i l i t i e s o f f e r f r e s h incentives f o r t h e i r imaginative use, or because new f e e l i n g s and values demand a f r e s h form and e s t h e t i c expression, or f o r a l l of these reasons together. (Mumford, 1959, p 0x) As such, Mumford's words are an appeal or p o i n t e r to the need f o r an understanding of f o l k culture© I t i s almost impossible to i s o l a t e any of the three f a c t o r s mentioned above - conditions of l i f e , t e c hnological ca-p a b i l i t y , and new values - as each a f f e c t s and causes the other; new ' f e e l i n g s ' devalued the important s o c i a l p o s i t i o n of European-based s t y l e s , which i n part had been perpetuated by the l i m i t a t i o n s of o l d construction techniques, themselves now replaced by the i n d u s t r i a l techniques of the new America. From the viewpoint of the c u l t u r a l geographer, searching f o r an understanding of the e v o l u t i o n of the c u l t u r a l landscape, information on material a r t i f a c t s i s an important step towards h i s knowledge of the complexities of that s o c i e t y . So, f o r him, a s u i t a b l e beginning might be an examination of the 'technological f a c i l i t i e s ' which contribute s t r u c t u r a l l y to the consequent vernacular s t y l e s ; the other two f a c t o r s -conditions of l i f e and new values - are i m p l i c i t l y r e f l e c t e d i n and by these new s t y l e s , and are i n e v i t a b l y included i n the examination,,1"' They w i l l be discussed i n greater d e t a i l i n the concluding chapter,, As a d e s c r i p t i o n of the general evolution of North American vernacular forms, i n housing, industry, r a i l r o a d s , e t c . - Kouwenhoeven (1948) i s an invaluable source, p a r t i c u l a r l y \n h i s t r a c i n g of the c r i t i c a l developments i n construction technology (e.g. mortice and tenon j o i n t s = - 9 -heavy ponderous frames, then the i n t r o d u c t i o n of machine-manufactured 16 n a i l s leads to' development of l i g h t e r and f a s t e r balloon-frame construction) . Unfortunately he does not give many i n s i g h t s i n t o the s t y l i s t i c v a r i a t i o n s of p a r t i c u l a r vernacular forms, but these can often be found i n various 1 7 regional a r c h i t e c t u r a l s t u d i e s . One'of the few 'low' s t y l e s c o n s i s t e n t l y mentioned i n a r c h i t e c t u r a l 18 h i s t o r i e s i s that of the bungalow, which gained n a t i o n a l p o p u l a r i t y with i t s d i f f u s i o n through the magazine at the beginning of t h i s century. Regional d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n introduced subtle v a r i a t i o n s to the s t y l e i n i t s adaption to s e t t i n g , climate or l i f e s t y l e , aaaiifest as the lo w - l y i n g p r a i r i e house of the Mid^West, shingled cottages with steep pitched roofs i n New England, and the white stucco houses with f l a t roofs i n Southern C a l i f o r n i a . Can one recognise a d i s t i n c t i v e sub-style of the bungalow i n Vancouver housing? Some knowledge of the o r i g i n a l s t y l e and i t s mode of transmission would seem a necessary p r e r e q u i s i t e of any statement concerning i t s presence or modi f i c a t i o n as a d i s t i n c t i v e c o n t r i b u t i o n to Vancouver housing stock. One of the few d e t a i l e d sources of information on the bungalow i s provided by Lynes (1954) i n h i s account of the people and pressures that have shaped American t a s t e over the l a s t 100 years, and h i s d e s c r i p t i o n of the r i s e of the bunga.low s t y l e house provides invaluable assistance:-The bungalow... and Mission f u r n i t u r e were, as Lewis Mumford has sa i d , "the f i r s t designs that put C a l i f o r n i a e s t h e t i c a l l y on the modern map", and l i k e the C a l i f o r n i a n ranch houses of today bungalows cropped up i n great numbers i n the country and suburbs, i n small towns and l a r g e , a l l over America. One of the most successful promoters and populisers was not a C a l i f o r n i a n but a Chicagoan named Henry L. Wilson, who c a l l e d himself "The Bungalow Man"., i n 1910 he produced a book c a l l e d The Bungalow Book, A Short Sketch of the E v o l u t i o n of the Bungalow from i t s P r i m i t i v e Crudeness to i t s Present State of A r t i s t i c Beauty and Cozy Convenience, I l l u s t r a t e d with Drawings of E x t e r i o r s , F l o o r Plans, I n t e r i o r s , and Cosy Corners of Bungalows which have Been B u i l t from O r i g i n a l Designs. I t cost a d o l l a r and i n -10-tw® aad a kalf years i t had g®ae iato five editioas. ... Ike bungalow , 0. shows few traces ©f anytkiag tkat Bight be called aa architectural iaflueace except the Swiss Chaleto Its two constaat features are wide overhanging eaves aad a porch usually supported by piers oade of beulders. The buagalow was originally a one stery building, square, with a® eatraace h a l l aad with exposed beaas i a the ceiling of the living reea. But i a the Bungalow Maa1s beek there are dormers i a the shallow roofs aad the rooms they served were erampedo A two-storey buagalow twenty-eight feet by forty-five e©st about #2000. (Lymes, 1954, p 3l88-9) Wilsea's beok i s stroagly reeemaeaded f@r i t s eloqueat detailed descriptioas ©f the various types of buagalews. Plates 1 ,2 & 3 are included as examples ©f his designs, plans aad texts,, It skould be poiated eut that the majority of h i s designs are of one-storey housing, but the strong similarity betweea tke desigas illustrated i a Plates 2 aad 3 &*d housiag presaat i a Vaaeouver lead t© their iaclusioa. Wilsoa's modificatioa ©f tke Orieatal iaflueaees and Spaaish celoaial style produces a style which feuad ready acceptaace i a tke aew feeliags aad values ©f these who were providiag tke demaad f@r housiag i a tke consolidation of settleaeat i n the Westo Lynes describes, i a the context ©f the "Age of Good Taste", the relative social status ©f Wiis®a*s Buagalow Book t© tkat @f G-ustav Stiekley's The Craftsmaa aagaziae, aad Mumford(l959, p.14-18) emphasises the importaace aad iaflueace ©f current aagaziaes, whether architectural ®r popular - Architectural Ee@®rd. Western Arehiteet. The Craftsmaa. Ladies Heme Jouraal. eta. - for tkeir role i n critieisiag and foraulatiag accepted 'vernacular taste' 0 The Canadian Homes and Gardens publicatiea Book of Houses 1930 performed the same fuactioa f o r a later penied, for example, through the normative tone of the texts aeeoa-paayiag the sketches and plans: Umtil receat years the suburban type of house kas met our needs i a nearly a l l Canadian c i t i e s 0 Conditions are rapidly ckaagiag, keweverj i n many eases i t i s a vuestioa No. 708 A " five-room bungalow 2 8 x 4 7 feet exclusive of screen porch, w i t h attic space for storage, or two bed-rooms may be finished off in the front and rear, leaving the central part for storage. The attic is accessible from the screen porch by a rather steep run of stairs. The l iv ing-room and dining-room are en-suite, being separated only by a pil lar and buttress opening, and have handsome fireplaces, a buffet, and a china closet wi th leaded glass doors, drawers, etc. T h e front bed-room can also be thrown into the same suite by running the s l iding doors into their pockets, g i v i n g about GOO square feet of floor area in practically one room for social emergencies. Th is bungalow can be built for $1,650' to $1,800—possibly somewhat less if built w i t h a strict regard to economy of construction and finish. Complete plans and specifications of this house, wi th all necessary de-tails, either as shown on this page or reversed, w i l l be furnished for $10.00. 1 13 PLATE 1: Wilson Bungalow Book, Design No.708,p.H}. -12 S0 0 / J ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ W % \ V -i" " la - -i N o . 195. Nothing is more offensive to good taste in architecture than too much "gingerbread" tr imming, but the artistic introduction of heavy roof brackets, flower boxes and overhanging shed-roofs greatly enhance the attractiveness of this beautiful and very popular home. A pleasing effect is produced by the irregular boulders in the e x p o s e d brick chimney. N o t e t h e convenient, r o o m y interior, the abundance of closets, the open fireplace, w i t h book shelves on each side, etc. In-stead of a conven-tional buffet, the dining room has a china closet each side- of window ledge. Th is house is 24 feet front by 41 feet deep, and with h a r d w o o d floors and beam ceilings in hall, dining and l iv ing rooms, has been built for $2,500.00. Plans and speci-fications. $10.00. 16 First floor plan. No. 195. Second floor plan. No. 195. PLATE 2: Wilson Bungalow Book, Design No. 195,p.l6. -13-No. 492. A careful inspect ion of these plans w i l l s h o w m a n y desirable and u n -usual features. E n t e r i n g the reception ha l l f r o m the cement-f loored p o r c h , through a handsome four- foot oak door, y o u are impressed at once w i t h the p leas ing and somewhat spacious ensemble that meets y o u r eyes. T h e stairs lead to a q u a r t e r - l a n d i n g about four feet above the floor, w i t h a s l ight ly pro jec t ing bay w i n d o w and w i n d o w - s e a t upon the r i g h t h a n d side, and a low chest-seat upon the left of the short r u n . T u r n i n g y o u r eyes towards the l i v i n g - r o o m , w i t h its gas fireplace and cozy-corner seat, its plaster-paneled dado and beamed c e i l i n g is before y o u . seen t h r o u g h the buttressed and square p i l l a red o p e n i n g separa t ing it f r o m the r o o m y o u are i n : — t h e t w o rooms ex tending ent i re ly across the f ront of the house, w i t h a fire-place at one end and a bay w i n d o w at the other. T h e s l i d i n g doors of the d i n i n g - r o o m are run back into the i r pockets , and t h r o u g h the broad opening,—eight feet in w i d t h . — y o u get a fine v i e w of end of the d i n i n g -room; ent irely open to the l ight t h r o u g h five w i n d o w s arranged in a p leas ing c u r v e ; and t h r o u g h a four- foot s l i d i n g d o o r w a y at the end of the handsome buffet, y o u look into the den, and see t w o b u i l t - i n bookcases w i t h leaded glass doors, f l a n k i n g a w r i t i n g desk ; and three s m a l l casement w i n d o w s above them. Y o u are struck at once w i t h the t h o u g h t — " W h a t a beaut i fu l arrange-ment of r o o m s ; — e s p e c i a l l y for the enter ta inment of a large c o m p a n y ! " T h e k i tchen is a m p l y p r o v i d e d w i t h cupboards , and a c o o l i n g closet. T h e back-stairs lead up f rom the k i t chen to the l a n d i n g , l e a v i n g a passage to the upstairs or front h a l l ; the cel lar stairs also lead f r o m the k i t c h e n to the cellar , the outside cel lar door opens off the l a n d i n g on the side of the house. T h i s house is 28x48, and w i l l cost about $3,500". See floor plan on next page. PLATE 3: Wilson Bungalow Book, Design No.492,p.62. -14-as to whether or nor a more so p h i s t i c a t e d and formal type w i l l not he bette r s u i t e d to our needs. I n the c i t y one does not have neighbours, even though they l i v e over, under or besides you» I t i s a case of each man f o r himselfo Deplorable, no doubt, but unless one i s quite b l i n d , a condition very apparent and therefore to be recognised and coped with when planning a house, (p.?) By i t s p a r t i c u l a r type of s o c i a l language and example, such magazines seem to perpetuate a p a r t i c u l a r type of s o c i a l distance, "accepted" t a s t e f u l l i f e s t y l e and r e s i d e n t i a l a r c h i t e c t u r e . Examination of s o c i a l magazines, e t c . has been used to considerable e f f e c t by those studying e l i t e groupings, possible the best example being the Metropolitan 400 ( M i l l s , 1956)o An examination of the current "Vancouver s o c i a l magazine Western Homes and i t s predecessor Vancouver L i f e would provide valuable information f o r a deeper understanding of the h i s t o r i c a l s o c i a l p o s i t i o n of Vancouver's 19 Shaughnessy and B r i t i s h Properties e l i t e e C e r t a i n l y , examination of the vogue architecture i n these magazines could be one way i n which to develop a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n on s t y l e s of e l i t e Vancouver a r c h i t e c t u r e . Of other l i t e r a t u r e , s p e c i f i c a l l y Canadian i n subject matter, but regardless of s o c i a l c l a s s , there appears to be a s p a r c i t y of u s e f u l t e x t s . A b e l l (1947) attempted a taxonomy of e a r l y rude dwellings and more recent expensive housing and b u i l d i n g s i n Canada. A s i m i l a r exercise was conducted by Gowan (1966) with more of an a r c h i t e c t s perspective, but neigher r e a l l y consider the type of housing that H a r r i s discusses above (p . 6 ) 0 For Eastern Canada, Macrae (1963) has w r i t t e n a d e t a i l e d w e l l - i l l u s t r a t e d account of the domestic arc h i t e c t u r e of Upper Canada, but t h i s i s of l i t t l e relevance to post-1886 Vancouver. One of the few works to examine domestic Vancouver housing i s by Weinreich (1968), but as an a r c h i t e c t he i s more concerned, with symbolism and c r i t i q u e than d e t a i l e d a n a l y s i s , as i s i l l u s t r a t e d by:--15-The bay windows and formal facade were reminiscent of the'houses of the c i t y of San F r a n c i s c o . They showed a concern f o r order, d e l i g h t and proportion which was overlooked i n l a t e r t r a c t housing (p.48). The a v a i l a b i l i t y and abundance of wood have prompted i t s extravagant use i n l a v i s h s t r u c t u r a l solutions and f a n c i f u l d e t a i l s . Two columns appeared when one was necessary, and gable overhangs were cut to a v a r i e t y of shapes, (p.52) There i s something of the sea i n many of the houses and bui l d i n g s s t i l l standing downtwon - i n the strength of t h e i r timbers, t h e i r roof supports l i k e bowsprits, t u r r e t s and balconies r e l a t i n g somehow to the ship's bridge and the v i s t a beyond. (p»53) The conclusion so f a r would be that there i s l i t t l e of immediate 20 use i n the a r c h i t e c t u r a l t e x t s . One text not mentioned so f a r i s a recent work by Whiffen (1969) on vernacular c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of American housing. I t might be confusing to introduce h i s ' l a b e l s ' at t h i s p o i n t , as even a casual i n s p e c t i o n i l l u s t r a t e s i t s d i s t r a c t i n g r o l e i n terms of any understanding of the Vancouver example. S t y l e s are described and l a b e l l e d , w i t h i n reasonably t i g h t time p e r i o d s , but these are s u f f i c i e n t l y out of phase with the p a r t i c u l a r h i s t o r i c a l e v o l u t i o n of Vancouver that one would conclude that Whiffen's t e x t does not negate the need f o r a study of the Vancouver s i t u a t i o n per s e . Other than adopting the rather general l a b e l s of Shingle S t y l e , Bungaloid, Modern e t c . , the descriptions are too general f o r the amount of d e t a i l needed i n t h i s study. I n a d d i t i o n , the descriptions 21 are too c l a s s i f i c a t o r y , not allowing f o r s t y l i s t i c t r a n s i t i o n s , modif-22 i c a t i o n s due to regional i s o l a t i o n and d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r a l demands. Consequently i t i s proposed to work i n d u c t i v e l y at f i r s t , attempting to i s o l a t e the c r i t i c a l facade elements i n the Vancouver housing stock, describe and group these elements, synthesising the r e s u l t s i n t o s t y l e s ; s t y l e s which at the same time r e f l e c t the Vancouver h i s t o r y - 1 6 -and also take due notice of the important contributions of Whiffen, Mumford, et a l * Therefore t h e i r l a b e l s w i l l not be discussed u n t i l facade element f l u c t u a t i o n s have been i d e n t i f i e d f o r Vancouver housing; they w i l l be reintroduced a f t e r a c l e a r e r p i c t u r e of facade element sub-types has been developed. * 1 « 4 Guide l i n e s from previous work This i s the advice off e r e d by Solomon ( 1 9 6 6 ) , i n h i s e x c e l l e n t a r t i c l e on procedural matters, thus:-... we must l e a r n to recognise the a r c h i t e c t u r a l elements and construction materials which i n combination comprise an authentic f a b r i c of p a r t i c u l a r s t y l e and period. They become, then, diagnostic agents i n the process of a n a l y s i s and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n 0 (Solomon, 1966,p . 255 ; and he emphasises the point that one must look at the subject matter, the house, i n more d e t a i l than j u s t the o v e r a l l s t y l e and concentrate i n -stead on i t s component parts; s i g n i f i c a n t a l t e r a t i o n s i n the basic charac-t e r i s t i c s of these components w i l l be r e a d i l y apparent i n the s t r u c t u r a l e n t i t y , l e a d i n g to the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the desired major groupings. P o s s i b l y the most elaborate example of t h i s procedure i s that provided by M c k e r t ( 1 9 6 7 ) , who found the f o l l o w i n g nine primary parts of a house to be important i n the diagnosis of the facade:-foundation structure e x t e r i o r covering roof chimney windows entrance 1 gerneral appearance a u x i l i a r y b u i l d i n g s Each of these nine e x t e r i o r features of a house has a number of v a r i a t i o n s , which are shown to be c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of c e r t a i n b u i l d i n g periods; selected examples are presented i n tabular form i n Table 1 . An explanation of the t y p i c a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n each of the b u i l d i n g eras i s given, thus describing the s a l i e n t features of the C l a s s i c a l R evival (183O-5O), -17-TABLE 1.—HOUSE CHARACTERISTICS BY ERAS 1830-50 1850-65 1865-80 1880-1900 1900-20 1920-30 1930—10 1940-60 Type Casement . Slide Double Hung Louvered Mullion Casement. Slide ....... Picture Shape Round Arched-Topsash Paladian, Horizontal Panel Size Small. s Large Medium Design 12/8 6/6 4/4 2/2 6/1 4/1 1/1. 2/2 Hori-" zontal Door Type Paneled Glazed French Flush Trim Glass Around . Pediment Glass Around Pediment S-S C a z ° Jo Porch Stoop Stoop with Roof -Veranda \ Piazza . Porch with Solid Rail _ Sunroom.. Stoop Screened-Porch Rear-Patio Style Low Cubic Tall Split-Level Greek Copies Villa Copies Detail Flat — Brackets . Cubic Victorian 0 Bungalow Copies Split- ., Level Functional Modern . Colonial Copies Ranch Fancy Plain (after E ickert , 196?) -18-ClaSsic-Gothic Transition (1850-65), Gothic Balloon (1865-80), Victo.riaa Giagerbread Castles (1880-1900), tke Eclectic Cubes (1900-20), Boxes aad Bungalows (1920-30), Nee-Coloaial (1930-40), aad tke 5 s t y l e period (1940-60)0 Note tkat oae single ckaracteristia of any eoapoaeat i a Table 1 rarely coaaaads tke tiae-period i n questioa eoapletelyj inevitably, there i s overlap ©f styles aad variations frea one time period into tke aext before the aew faskioa completely takes over. Another classifieatory study of value to this work i s that by Solomon aad Goodkaad (1965), who discovered tkat i n a study of Tasmaniaa urbaa housing, nearly a l l buildings could be plaeed i n five main architectural categories - Georgiaa, Gothic Revival, Queen Anne, Bungalow, aad Contemporary, Confirming tke observation above conceraiag overlapping eompoaeats, Solomon aad Goodkaad found tkat:-Tke aaia problem of classificatioa concerned decisions of placement as between two adjacent categories of the five above, rather that the appearance of fresh style characteristics indicative ©f categories previously unrepresented* (Soloaoa & Goodkaad, 1965, p<>ll6) aad as the priacipal components of their taxonomy they found tkat tke majority of buildings portrayed:-..« a sufficieat combination of distinctive features suck as plan, roof design aad structural materials to be uncompromisingly ideatified witk a particular period. (Soloaoa & Goedhaad, 1965, p<>ll6) (my eapkasis DWH) Brunskill (1970) used 10 dimensions for kis predominantly rural classi-fication i n Eaglaad although these express measuremeats ©a five major elemeats, - wall, roof, window, height aad plaa* - as ©aa be seea by examination of Plate 4. Also iaa England, Coazea (1958) used similar groupings i a presenting tke results of a detailed building type inventory for Whitby, aad s t i l l maintained nine years l a t e r 2 ^ tkat tke subject -2@-awaits exhaustive treatment for the geographic viewpoint. However, recent work (e.g. Ferster, 1 9 6 8 ; Openshaw, 1 9 6 9 , 1 9 7 1 ) involving the ealleetion ©f data on a large number of detailed facade elements, and the sophisti-cated grouping procedures which computer access allows, have begun to reduce the complexities ©f the British towmscape to more manageable proportions 0 ' The use of a priori groupings based on derivative architectural styles are diminishing i n importance as workers recognise the important influence ©f regional architectural history, diffusion and acceptance rates of pi certain styles, variations i n building materials and methods, etc. So there i s a move away from a priori groupings towards the approaches outlined by Solomon, Eickert and others working i n areas of more recent housing with considerable success. This approach is to isolate facade elements, and identify fluctuations of these over time, recognise c r i t i c a l combinations of these element subtypes, and then apply labels which incorporate the conclusions of architectural historians. It i s this latter strategy which will be adopted here and, as a f i r s t stage, the salient characteristics of Vancouver housing are described i n the following Chapter© Footnotes Architecturally, 'vernacular' has often been taken to mean contemporary designs related t© spontaneous indigenous demands, rather than a slavish perpetuation of accepted styles ©f the past© This interpretation of the word is traced particularly well by COLLINS, P., Changing Ideals i n Modem Architecture. 1750-1950. Montreal: McGill University Press, 1 9 6 7 , pp.122-3, 173-82© Also, this view of style reflecting and meeting the demands of the contemporary situatien rather than a historical inheritance (in both design and status terms) is central to the definition which KOUWENHOEVEN,7. A., used i n Made i n America. The Arts i n Modem Civilisation. Garden City: Doubleday, 1948; 'vernacular forms' are the product of a unique kind of folk art, created under conditions which, had never before existed© They represent the unselfconeious efforts of common people to ereate satisfactory patterns of their environment. In their purest form the patterns comprise the folk arts of the f i r s t people i n history who,, disinherited ©f a great cultural tradition, found themselves living under democratic institutions i n an expanding machine eeonomyo (p.15) Rapoport's sentiments do not conflict -with, those expressed above, as they are a l l essentially concerned to distinguish prestigious and status laden from the .latest expression of contemporary needs and feelings,, Neither i s the Rapoport view to be interpreted as being fundamentally different from a l l architectural historians. While there are a majority group of architectural historians particularly concerned with the aesthetic appreciation ©f buildings "worthy of interest", possibly best exemplified by Hitchcock i n America and Pevsner i n Britain, there i s an appreciable group of writers who are anxious to depart from such an approach, and state their ease accordingly, e„ g. Old fashioned history books concentrated on kings and presidents, affairs of court and state; they were brief on the everyday l i f e of the ordinary citizen. In the same way, conventional archi-tectural history i s top-heavy with descriptions of ceremonial buildings - churches, palaces, state capitols. Their design was judged against the standard of Old World prototypes, '©orreetaess of detail* was demaaded. Utilitarian buildings were hardly con-sidered t© be "architecture" at a l i o S© i n the tens of thousands of non-re sidential buildings by anonymous carpenter-builders are the least known examples of American Victorian design. They are also the best (MAASS,J.C., The Giagerbread Age. A. View of Victorian America. New York: Rhiaehart aad Go, Iac 0, 1957, p. 141) 2 By "quasi-anthropological", the approach adopted by such as Go Daryil FORDE, Habitat. Eeonomy and Society. Loadoa: Methuea, 1934, i s inferredo 3 This i s aot to overlook the important contribution of other arch-itectural foci, particularly those currently researching i a ecological aad eavironmeatal psychology oa the relationship between behavior and the built environment. See, for example, COATES, C. J. & MOFFETT, K.M., Response to Environment. Studeat Publications of the School of Design, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, N0C0, Vol. 18 1969j SOMMER, £. Personal Space: the Behavioral Basis of Design. Eagleweod C l i f f s , N. J.: Prentice Hall. 1969; MICHBLSON. W. H.. Man and His Urban Environment: k SociftLogieal Approach. Boa Mills, Ontario: Addison Wesley, 1970; EERIN, C, With Man i a Miad; An Interdisciplinary Prospectus for Environ-mental Desiga. Cambridge, Mass.; M.I.T. Press, 1970j Research aad Develo-pment Group, Miaisty of Housing, "Housiag: The Home i a i t s setting (progress report)", i a Architectural Journal. 11 Sept. 1968, pp.493-554j HALL,E., The Hidden Dimension. New York: Doubleday, 1967<> 4 This shift i s traced aad also advocated i a aumerous articles, of which the following are good examples:-HAGGETT, P. & CHORLEY, R.J., "Models, Paradigas and the New Geography", p.19-41 i s CHORLEY, R.J. AND HAGGETT,P., Models i a Geography. Loadoai Methuea, 1967; CHORLEY, R.J. & HAGGETT,P., Froatiers i a Geographical Teaching. Loadoa: Methuea, 1965j BURTON, I., "The Quantitative Revolution and Theoretical Geography", Canadian Geographer. T7I I ,4(1963)p , 151-62; CHAPMAN, J.D., "The status of geography", Canadian Geographer.X.3.(l966) f p 0 133-144; HARVEY,D. Explaaation i n Geography. London: Araold, 1969; &rKESELL,M.W., "%e Borderlands of Geography as a Social Science", pp 0227-248 i a Me SHERIF & C.W. SHERIF, (ed.) Iaterdiscipliaary Relationships i a the Social Soieaces. Chicago: Aldiae, 1969; TAAFFE. E. JJ. (ed„). GeographyBnglewoad C l i f f s . N.J.: Preatice-flall, 1970„ 5 For example, Hagerstrand's recasting of 'frontier' and'sequent ;. occupance' studies into the idea of diffusioa waves0 -22-b This approach i s l a b e l l e d as the 'Berkeley' school, i n r e c o g n i t i o n of the important impact of Carl Sauer i n e s t a b l i s h i n g t h i s theme of landscape change inhuman geography. See, e.g. SAUER, CO., "The Morphology of Landscape',' U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , P u b l i c a t i o n s i n G-eography. iCXX,2,1925, p.19-33; SAUER, CO., "Foreword to H i s t o r i c a l G-eography',1 A.A.A.G., Vol . 3 1 , 1941, p.1-24; J.LETGHLY (ed.) Land and L i f e : Selections from the w r i t i n g s of Carl Ortwin Sauer, Berkeley and Los Angeles: U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a Press, 1963. Examples of h i s influence include BfiOEK, J.O.M., The Santa Clara V a l l e y , C a l i f o r n i a : a study i n landscape change, Utrecht:A.0osthoech,1932; THOMAS, W.L. (ed.) Man's Role i n Changing the Face of the Earth, Chicago:University of Chicago Press,1956. I n the l o c a l area, SIEMENS, A.H.,(ed.) Lower Fraser V a l l e y : E v o l u t i o n of a C u l t u r a l Landscape, B.C. Geographical Research S e r i e s , No.9, Vancouver:Tantalus, 1968,is an example of t h i s approach. 7 For example, ZELINSKY, W., " C u l t u r a l V a r i a t i o n s i n Personal Name Patterns i n the Eastern United States',' A.A.A.G., 60,1970,743-769; as a prelude to h i s personal names a n a l y s i s , Z e l i n s k y discusses s i x important fac t o r s to be taken i n t o account i n the search f o r a s i n g l e c u l t u r a l metric. B r i e f l y , they are summarised as s e n s i t i v i t y , u b i q u i t y , d u r a b i l i t y , s i m p l i c i t l y , p u r i t y and a c c e s s i b i l i t y . He a l s o discusses the claims of r e l i g i o n , language, d i e t , settlements, costume, r e c r e a t i o n , to provide t h i s i d e a l metric, and r e j e c t s them a l l on at l e a s t one of the s i x grounds; however, he sees each of these as having an important r o l e as surrogate measures i n understanding the North American c u l t u r a l complexity. g A view expressed by M i k e s e l l , M.W. i n a Graduate Colloquium, Department of Geography, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, October 8, 1969» Such works would include: LUTGENS, R., (ed.), Erde und Weltwirtschaft, 5 v o l s , S t u t t g a r t , 1950-7, e s p e c i a l l y v o l . 5 , FELS,E., Der wirschaftende Mensch a l s G e s t a l t e r der Erde, 1954: B0BEK,H. & SCHHTHUSEN, J . , "Die Landschaft im l o g i s c e n System der Geographie',' Erdkunde .3.2/3. (Aug. 1 949). 11 2-20: CREUTZBURG,N.,"Wirtschaft und LandschaftVPet. M i t t . Erg.,209,1930,275-86. 9 1 For an extensive bibliography, see RICKERT, J.E., "House Facades of the Northeastern United States: a t o o l f o r geographical analysis 1,' A.A.A.G., Vol.57,1967,211-38. 10 A r e l a t e d c r i t i c i s m i s provided by Zelinsky, op. c i t . , p.746: The p e r i s h a b i l i t y of evidence or i t s wholesale r e v i s i o n by l a t e r a r t i s a n s , the impact of topography, s o i l and climate, some t r u l y revolutionary advances i n technology, the extreme drudgery and rare s k i l l s c a l l e d f o r i n f i e l d c o l l e c t i o n of data, morphological complexity, a rather lumpy s p a t i a l and temporal d i s t r i b u t i o n , and many i n t e r p r e t i v e p e r p l e x i t i e s aJJ. conjoin to render the settlememt landscape as something l e s s than i d e a l as an e f f i c i e n t key to the c e n t r a l nature of American c u l t u r e . 1 1 See, f o r example, TREWARTHA, G.T.,"Types of Rural Settlement i n Colonial America? Geographical Revievf. XiXVT, 1946,568-960 12 See, f o r example, KNIFFEN, F., "Folk Housing: Key to Diffusion;' A.A.A.G.,55.1965.5L9-77: GLASSIE, H., Pattern i n the M a t e r i a l Folk Culture of the Eastern United States. P h i l a d e l p h i a : U n i v e r s i t y of Pennsylvannia Press,1969. 13 See the 'Symposium Discussion on Urban Morphology', pp.462-469, i n NORBURG, L. (ed.) I.G.U. Urban Geography Symposium, Lund Studies i n Geography Series B, No.24, i 9 6 0 . -23-1 2 f C r i t i c i s m of approach i s not implied*, Antiquarianism here r e f e r s s o l e l y to the subject matter. ^ P o s s i b l y the best r e g i o n a l example of a study of these interwoven fac t o r s i s provided by BANHAK, R., Los Angeles. The A r c h i t e c t u r e of Pour Ecologies, London:Allen Lane Penguin Press, 1971. Bariham traces the impact of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n means and modes, r e t a i l patterns, l i f e s t y l e s and fantasies i n the architecture and human ecology of the Los Angeles area* A more c u t t i n g c r i t i c i s m of American technology and a t t i t u d e s to landscape i s found i n BLAKE, P., God's Own Junkyard:the planned d e t e r i o r a t i o n of America's Landscape, New York:Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1 964. 16 Also documented i n GEIDON, S., Mechanisation Takes Command, New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1948 0 17 See, f o r example, LEWIS, 0., Here Lived the C a l i f o r n i a n s , New York: Rinehart,1957: BANHAK, R., op. c i t . ; STEINBRUECK, U., S e a t t l e A r c h i t e c t u r e , 1850-1953, New York:Reinhold,1955° ^ According to WHIPEEN, M., American A r c h i t e c t u r e Since 1780, Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press, 1969, the word 'bungalow' i s a corruption of the Hindustani adjective 'bangla', which means "belonging to Bengal". By the end of the f i r s t quarter of the nineteenth century i t was being used by the B r i t i s h i n I n d i a to s i g n i f y a low house surrounded by a veranda (p.218) 19 See, f o r example, GIBSON, E., "The Impact of S o e i a l B e l i e f on Landscape Change: A Geographical Study of Vancouver", unpublished Ph 0D d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1971; COOPER, M., " R e s i d e n t i a l Segregation of E l i t e Groups i n Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia", unpublished M.A. thesis,- U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver,1971. 2 0 SCULLEY, V.J., The Shingle S t y l e , Yale:Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1955, would be of relevance f o r an understanding of the form and nature of the more prestigious of Vancouver's e a r l i e s t housing,, 21 See GEEIG-SMITH, P., Quantitative Plant Ecology, London:Butterworth (2nd E d i t i o n ) 1964, and also the discussion l a t e r i n t h i s t e x t , p.85-87. 22 Vancouver seems p a r t i c u l a r l y prone to t h i s ; see LASSERE, "Canada", i n J.RICHARDS, (ed.) New Buildings i n the Commonwealth, London: A r c h i t e c t u r a l P r e s s , 1 9 6 l , pp.65-7 «> 23 CONZEN, M.R.G., " H i s t o r i c a l Townscapes i n B r i t a i n : A Problem i n Applied Geography",pp 056-78 i n HOUSE, J.W.,Northern Geographical Essays, Newcastle upon Tyne : 0 r i e l , 1 9 6 6 , footnote 5o 2 2 f EENNELL, R.I. & OPENSHAW, S., "Fleldwork Perception i n the P e r i o d Dating of Urban M l d i n g s " , U n i v e r s i t y of Newcastle upon Tyne, Geographical Society Journal, Vol.19, 1971,pp.19-23» -24-CHAPTBR 2 DESCRIPTION OF VANCOUVER HOUSING- FACADE-ELEMENTS. . This chapter concentrates on a d e s c r i p t i o n and discussion of the facade elements to "be used i n the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , I n t u i t i v e style/age groupings are i m p l i c i t l y suggested during these d e s c r i p t i o n s , but a t e s t of t h e i r accuracy w i l l be l e f t u n t i l the presentation of fieldwork data i n the next chapter, ' Fieldwork i n and around the str e e t s of Vancouver r e s u l t e d i n the ac-cumulation and formulation of impressions of a wide v a r i e t y of housing s t y l e s , recorded i n photographs and f i e l d sketches. Approximate construction dates 1 were summarised from l o c a l h i s t o r y texts and photos , photographic records i n the Vancouver C i t y L i b r a r y archives, and back issues of Vancouver and Se a t t l e newspapers (e.g. P l a t e 5 ) . Old a r c h i t e c t u r a l and house-pattern books helped to e s t a b l i s h s t y l e s , materials and construction methods, par-t i c u l a r l y Wilson's Bungalow Book (1910). F i n a l l y , a c t u a l construction dates f o r i n d i v i d u a l houses were c o l l e c t e d i n the Assessment Department records, Vancouver C i t y H a l l , and these were extensively used to v e r i f y the impressions gained from more informal a n a l y s i s . Thus, dates mentioned below i n a s s o c i a -t i o n with changes i n s t y l e s of the components are derived from the a c t u a l construction data. 2.1 Plan Before discussing d e t a i l e d facade features, i t may be advantageous to look at the house as a u n i t , since there have been appreciable changes i n s i z e and i n t e r n a l plan over a period of time, regardless of the s o c i a l q u a l i t y of the housing. S t r u c t u r a l changes can provide a valuable c o n t r i b u t i o n to an under-standing of vernacular or f o l k a r t , housing designs being responses to a new s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n s , i n new ways of t r e a t i n g the i n t e r n a l and external spaces of a house (Carver,1962 ?p o102 Carver goes on to describe the way i n which changing l i f e s t y l e s , changing family composition and changing consumer preferences have a l l had important -25-1903—It Was a Very G o o d Year T H E S E A T T L E S U N D A Y T I M E S . FEa & 1901 » * # * * # * * * * # * * * * * * * * * * * * 1 THE KIND OF HOMES SEATTLE PEOPLE HAVE? I. BEEN BUILDING DURING THE PAST YEAR About Three Thousand Residences Have Been Built Since T h e Sunday Times M a d Are Examples Taken at Random. Its First Appearance—Mere and JtSemm S m i Ridurd S. Ertri*%«, Cspitol Hi!l W. D. Ho*nt, Spring »oJ Borrn A. H. 5«>txrg. C.piol II. This page, token from The Seattle Sunday Times dated Feb. 3. I 903; showed a number of new homes on Capitol Hill. Progress apparently has not flattened everything, for most of these nine homes are still in evidence, many of them maintained or restored to their original beauty. And , it Still is-See Page 29 THE SEATTLE TIMES Sunday, Oclobor 12. 1969 PLATE 5 -2fi-roles i n moulding the appearance and dimensions of Canadian housing i n the i post-war period. These three factors have, of course, had this importance over a considerably longer period, and have individually been the subject of a substantial amount of research. Since the work i n this thesis i s primarily concerned with visible, thus external, features of the residential unit, only brief discussion of factors influencing internal layout i s 3 attempted here. The average size of a dwelling has declined and yet at the same time i t has become far more compact© Turning f i r s t to changing lifestyles, a succinct description by Ford and Ford ( 1 9 4 0 ) describes some of the factors responsible for the changing mode of family l i f e which have im turn affected dwelling size:-Within the century, the home whieh had once been the seat of abundant arts and crafts lost these functions one by one. First sloughing off weaving, shoe and candlemaking, the urban family more recently has given up laundering, preserving and much of dressmaking and cooking for the purchase of mass-produced goods and services. Man's space needs within the home have thus been reduced to a fraction of their former proportions, with the resultant elimination of attics, sheds, storage cellars, work rooms, sewing rooms and laundry. Public provision of libraries, schools, music and recreation causes s t i l l further reductions of space needs for many homees;Easy access t© shops reduce the size of storage space - closets, pantries -and kitchens. Outside entertainments and the restlessness induced by the pressures of an industrial civilisation reduced the space needs for domestic social l i f e . The family also has declined i n size. There are fewer children and i t i s becoming less common for three generations to live under one roof (Ford and F o r t , 1 9 4 0 , p . 1 0 ) The Ta^t:*pMmtementi©he^ ^ the quote above, declining family size, i s the second of the three faetors under review, and is discussed at length by G-rebler, Blank and Winniek ( 1 9 5 6 , p p . 7 6 - 8 9 ) , based upon an analysis of United States population census and housing figures. They see a historical rise i n real income and change i n social attitudes towards the composition of the family occupying a dwelling unit as the most important reason for declining -household size, and thus a declining space need. Reasons connected with this -27-include: the lowering of the birthrate and the attendant drop in the number of people living at home; the decline in people's age at marriage and the increase in the proportion of the adult population that is married; the decline in death rates, with more and more persons surviving past the time when children leave home; and an increase in the proportion of older single persons who maintain households of their own rather than live with realatives<> In addition, changing lifestyles have resulted in the decline of resident domesti© servants, which would mean the disappearance of servants quarters in addition t© the disappearance of sewing rooms,pantries etc., as indicated by Ford and Ford above. Turning to housing costs, what are now considered to be large and expensive units were bulit during earlier periods when both labour and materials were cheaper than today. Also, the demands of living have changed, so that the domestic function of the house of today are hardly comparable wiifch those of fifty years ago, as poited out by Beyer ( 1 9 6 5 ) : -Almost one third of the cost of today's house is attributable to "necessities" in the form of mechanical eguijiiffieat^Jiueb ©f which was unheard of 5 0 years ago. This equipment includes such commonly accepted items as central heating, indoor plumbing, sewage disposal, automatic laundry facilities, dishwashers, electric wiring for lighting and appliances, and^  in some instances, air conditioning. It is small wonder then that the average house of today is smaller and more expensive than its predecessor, which, judged by today's standards, was merely an unequipped shell.(ay emphasis -DWH) (Beyer . 1 9 6 5.P . 1 2 7 ) These changes in the size and volume of the dwelling unit are evident even with a cursory glance at the housing stock of Vancouver,, Apart from a few structures dating from the first decade of this century, which are virtually 'pioneer' cottages in the then-forest'(e.g. Plate 6 ) , the housing stock shows a decline in size from the two-and-a-half storeyed large structures of the 1 8 9 0's and the early years of this century to the one-storey, two bedroom boxes of the early 1 9 4 0 ' s . The study area was -28--29-v i r t u a l l y completely i n f i l l e d by that time, so there are very few examples i of housing c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the 1950's (e.g. the s p l i t - l e v e l form of the t r a c t housing i n South Vancouver), or the two-storey house in c o r p o r a t i n g the carport found, f o r example, i n the Richmond developments of the 1960's o I n summary, we could say that there i s an a s s o c i a t i o n between s i z e (or volume) of the house and i t s p e riod of construction; the more recent the house i s , the smaller I t i s l i k e l y to be (at l e a s t u n t i l the end of the 1940's) as a r e s u l t of changing consumer preferences and f u n c t i o n a l demands w i t h i n the house* Examination of s i z e and p l a n , therefore, gives only extremely generalised c l a s s i f i c a t o r y powers i n any external examination, and i n order to narrow the periods more p r e c i s e l y , i t i s necessary to t u r n to a consideration of the s t y l i s t i c changes of s p e c i f i c facade elements. 2.2 Windows As already mentioned, the time span i n Vancouver's K i t s i l a n o i s r e l a t i v e l y short, and so rather than t r a c i n g the evo l u t i o n of window s t y l e s by a s s o c i a t i o n with improvements i n glass-pane technology and carpentry expertise from the e a r l y 19th century, as M c k e r t was able to do, the d i v i s i o n s noted here are more subtle changes w i t h i n roughly the same t e c h n i c a l a b i l i t i e s . Explanations f o r s t y l i s t i c v a r i a t i o n s would seem to be i n change of f a s h i o n rather than a lessening of t e c h n i c a l r e s t r a i n t s . This view i s r e i n f o r c e d by the f a c t that the type of window found In Vancouver's e a r l i e s t housing i s predominantly one-over-one pane sash ( F i g . l j l a ) . There was a move away from t h i s towards decorative a s t r i g a l s i n the upper pane i n some window s t y l e s of the f i r s t ten years of t h i s century ( F i g . l ; T b , l C j , l d ) . A movement from multi-pane to single-pane sash windows, however, could have been i n t e r p r e t e d as i l l u s t r a t i n g an improvement i n glassmaking a b i l i t y 0 -30-Type 2 Fig.l WINDOW STYLES Type 3 fype 4 Type 5 e - 3 1 -The f i r s t major v a r i a t i o n other than these decorative d e t a i l s i s to be seen i n the windows of the housing constructed during the 1912 real -es tate boom. The main features then were three panes of glass s i d e - b y -s ide , 'crowned* by a small pane, approximately one foot deep, running continuously along the top ( P i g » 1 ; 2 a ) . I t i s t h i s top one-foot pane, i n many cases decorative due to stained g lass , leaded d i v i d e s , e t c . , ( e . g . P l a t e 7 ) , which i s a major i d e n t i f y i n g feature of the majority of 1912-15 houses, regardless of s ize or s t y l e . I n some instances , the bottom sect ion may be one large pane rather than three, and also the top pane was divided i n t o two parts on occasions,, The window described above was that found i n the main f ront room, consequently the most ostentatious of the house, and t h i s L s ty le of window would not be found throughout the house; rather one would f i n d the simpler and no doubt cheaper sash window - a twelve-over-one was common ( P i g . 1 ; 2 b ) . Type 3 window s ty le presents problems, not so much i n d e s c r i p t i o n as i n i t s inherent weakness as a c l a s s i f i c a t o r y t o o l . I n e v i t a b l y , the purpose of the descriptions of t h i s chapter are an attempt to i d e n t i f y s p e c i f i c styles which could hopeful ly be applied to discrete t ime-periods; however, neither the s tyle mentioned above ( as i n P i g . 1 ; 2 b ) or t h i s new one,Type 3 , have complete "authority* over one s p e c i f i c per iod , and f u r t h e r , nei ther are confined to a single p e r i o d . Type 3 would be a sash window, e i ther double- , t r i p l e - , or quadruple-hung, with one c lear pane i n the lower h a l f and symetrical i r r e g u l a r i t y i n i t s upper pane subdivisions (K.g .1 ; 3 a , b , c ) . I t i s impossible to describe one set of upper pane subdivisions as being Type 2 windows because they are charac ter is t i c of housing of an e a r l i e r p e r i o d , and another set as Type 3 because of t h e i r known time-span, when i n fac t these patterns are a l l the same tyge of window s t y l e . ^ In terms of c l a s s i f i c a t o r y power, Type 3 windows consequently would appear rather weak i n d i c a t o r s , and this d i f f i c u l t y i s discussed i n the wider context of a l l - 3 2 -PLATE 7 : Example of t y p i c a l window of 1 9 1 2 housing,, -33-facade elemnts l a t e r i n t h i s chapter (p.52-54) . Type 3 i s seen as having several ac t u a l patterns, a l l which might be subsumed under the arkward l a b e l of "upper-pane symetrical i r r e g u l a r i t y " . I t i s predominantly associated with the housing of the e a r l y 1920*s, although as mentioned, t h i s statement i s l e s s confident than others due to the s t y l e ' s occurence i n e a r l i e r housing. , Towards the end of the 1920 's, there i s a new element, that of a wider, non-opening, c e n t r a l s e c t i o n of the window (a possible embryo of the modern pi c t u r e window?) with two smaller side windows providing the v e n t i l a t i o n ; these two side windows continue to have a single-pane lower h a l f and a m u l t i -pane upper sash ( P i g . l ; 4 a ) . A f u r t h e r feature of Type 4 windows i s that of a shallow arch at the top of the window, as i l l u s t r a t e d i n P i g . l ; 4 , and seems e s p e c i a l l y prevelant around 1928-30. I n the e a r l y 1930 1s, more decorated housing might indulge i n leaded windows, as i n P i g . l ; 4 b , to accompany other elements of a 'Mock Tudor* facade. Type 5 windows continue the trend towards l a r g e r panes of glass free from d i v i s i o n i n t o smaller areas by wooden a s t r i g a l s . One f a c t o r c o n t r i b u t i n g towards t h i s i l l u s i o n i s the i n t r o d u c t i o n of metal frames f o r windows, g i v i n g a f a r l i g h t e r e f f e c t . The patte r n i s s t i l l predominantly a non-opening ce n t r a l pane, with two smaller casement windows at the sides, as I n P i g . l ; 5 a , although w i t h i n t h i s general type, s t y l e s as i l l u s t r a t e d i n P i g . l ; 5 b , 5 c , are to be found. A window feature associated with t h i s s t y l e / p e r i o d i s a hexagonal-shaped entrance h a l l window, some 18" - 2 ' i n diameter; i t i s not u n i v e r s a l l y found i n housing of the e a r l y 1940 's, but i f i t i s present, then-there i s a very high p r o b a b i l i t y that the house was b u i l t between 1940-42, and as such the hexagonal window i s a usefu l confirmation of time-period.^ The f i n a l and most recent category, Type 6, i s simply a complete single-pane p i c t u r e window, (P i g . l ; 6 ) ; i n many cases, t h i s occupies a f a r greater proportion of the f r o n t a l area of the house, i n length and i n height, than previous window types. As a r e s u l t of renewal, a s i n g l e pane -34-window may often be found i n housing of an e a r l i e r period; t h i s can, however, be recognised as renewal, the single pane and aluminium frame going hand i n hand with other refurbishings while retaining the size of the o r i g i n a l window space. Consequently, the f a c t that i t i s not an ' i n s i t u ' window i s e a s i l y recognisable, ' The reservations about the absolute c l a s s i f i c a t o r y powers of window types mentioned throughout the above description leads to consideration of other facade elements, 2.3 Roof Styles Type 1 i s an amalgam of several styles of roof l i n e , i . e . of different contours, but of similar style i n that they are a l l members of a rather eclectic period i n architectural fashion, e.g. 'Queen Anne*, Gingerbread, V i c t o r i a n Gothic, Cubic, Greek Revival. The most extreme type would be that associated with the wealthy mansion-type house, with i t s long, low-pitched roof interrupted by a row of neat dormers ( P i g e 2 ; l a ) . More common would be the multi-gabled and/or turreted roof, as i n Pig.2;lb, which i s indicative of the Queen Anne s t y l e . A t h i r d component of t h i s f i r s t group would be the roof design associated with the style which Rickert labels as 'Cubic'; this i s essentially a hipped roof, interrupted by a hipped dormer window (see P i g . 2 ; l c ) . Fourthly, there i s the simple p l a i n gable (Fig.2;ld) associated with the rather p l a i n two-storey frame houses, and by time-period association, the single-storey equivalent found as the foof style of the pioneer cottages already referred to ( i l l u s t r a t e d i n Plate 6). Each of these roof designs could be allocated individual 'Type' numbers, but t h e i r l imited frequency i n the study area allows them to be subsumed under Type 1 f o r the purpose of this study. Typ e 2 , however, i s a f a r stronger roof style, having as i t s major characteristic well-pronounced eaves, overhanging some two feet or so, and invariably supported by large wooden brackets, of varying pattern and number, -36-(3ug . 2 ; 2 a ). Also, the roof surface is interrupted by dormer windows of considerable proportion, their purpose being to give added volume to the upstairs rooms, rather th an merely to give a l i t t l e extra light to a room, as is the case with smaller dormer widows. The size and proporti©n of these dormers is illustrated in Iag.2;2b,c,d 0 This style of roof is strongly associated with the two-storey housing of the 1912 real-estate boom. Type 3 is a simple plain-gable roof (Fig.2;3) with no dormer window interrupting the shallow pitch, but i t retains the overhanging eaves and brackets from the earlier Type 2 style in this predominantly single-storey housing. The roof styles of type 4 can easily be divided up into several distinct and discrete styles, but again pre-grouping has been carried out, and they are subsumed under a label of •Romanticism*. Roofs associated with g housing of the begining of the period could be described as ^snub-nosed", as in Fig . 2 j 4 a . Similar half-hipped gables are known to the writer from observing late Victorian and Edwardian housing in England. The precedents for this whimsy seem to be in the cult of the 'Picturesque', exemplified in the "cottage omee" with its genesis in a poetic idealisation of Mature... of the Middle Ages... and of Low Life...three well recognised aspects of Romanticism (Jordan,1967,p.55) This fashion was itself based on an originally very functional design, namely the slanting hole in the roof of thatched cottages having the fireplace located at the end wall (see Plate 8 ) . This would appear to be the precedents for this design, which was particularly fashionable around 1 9 2 8 - 3 0 . It also seems to be the first of a number of generally rustic-romantic styles of the 1930 rsj another roof style of the early 1930's has a high-peaked gable, perpendicular to the main roof line, which sweeps down on either side and is incorporated through dummy walls to suggest a triangular front perspective for the house (Pig.2;4b)..The label "Real-Estate Tudor" might be appropriate -37-PLATE 8 Sketches of thatched cottages showing truncated hip roof (after Woodforde,19&9) -38-especially with, the addition of false 'timber + wattle and daub' trimming to these gables in some of the more pretentious housing (together with the leaded Type 4b window mentioned previously). A third type of roof has steep thin cross gables (as in ]?ig.2;4e), or pixie-type turrets, which make it'fairy go&hiek'. Types 4b and 4c often have their roofing material shaped at the verges in an attempt to imitate a thatched roof, in keeping with the rustic-romantic image. Although these three styles are predominantly identifiable with their 'own' time-period - 1926-30;1931-35;1936-40 respectively - they can each be found in the other two sections of the period; consequently, they have been grouped simply under'Type 4, embracing the influence of frivolity and romanticism in the architecture of the period 1926-40. With the majority of houses built, the remaining roof style, Type 5, extending up to current construction on many cases, is predominantly a 9 hip-ped-roof style ; in a small square building, the silhouette is that of a shallow pyramid, Pig.2;5a, or in a more rectangular struetmre, hipped gables as in Pig.2;5b0 Over time, pronounced overhanging eaves have diminished, until they are relatively small in Type 5 roofs© 2.4 Entrance Perms Although concentrating on the actual door-surrounds and shelter, this . section includes reference to features whieh affect the appearance of the entire front perspective. In part, the distinctions may appear arbitrary, since one could subsume the first three types under a 'front-long porch and veranda' heading; differences in the strength and complexity of the structural members are the basis of the distinction made. Type 1 is a porch-veranda of a simple nature, of l i t t l e apparent strength in structure or design, which almost gives i t the appearance of an aftertho-agat, added without intergration to the structure of the house as a wholee A shallow, plain roof is supported by thin uprights,(Pig.3;1) and is associated maialy with the simple frame house of the earliest periods. On more - 4 - 0 -substantial hous'e, this simple veranda might extend around to the sides of the house. Of far greater impact, however, i s the Type 2 entrance, whieh has a substantial appearance due mainly to the incorporation of the extended roof-line is the porch cover ( F i g . 3 ; 2 a ) . A stronger support i s consequently needed, and wooden pillars on a stone base provide this. The stoae piers, which have a slight taper, are often the only non-wood construction material i n the entire ' structure (see Plate 9 ) . In more expensive housing the stonework may extend aeross the entire front,(Plate 1 0 ) , but i n lesser housing only the piers are stone, or alternatively a thin veneer of stone-facing, or narrow weatherboard over concrete. I f the definition of a Type 2 entrance were extended to include •:' those entrances which incorporate any overhang into a veranda, i t i s possible to include overhanging upper floors, as i n Fig.3J2 b . Ia terms of time-period association rather than s t y l i s t i c unity, a problem similar to that of Type 2 and Type 3 windows i s present with entrance forms of this period. The form i n question i s illustrated i n F i g . 3 ; 2 c j essentially i t i s a portico, with i t s own minature gable roof and the characteristics: of stone piers and wooden pillars already mentioned. In style and appearance, they would seem to f i t into the Type 2 category except for'the definition of overhanging structure and full-front veranda6 As an arbitrary ruling, this 'portico* will be classified as Type 2(c) i n two-storey housing, and as a Type 3(b) when found i n single-storey housingo There may i n fact be some ground <.> for legitimately including the portico-type entrance with the larger f u l l front as Type 2 entrances, since the portico could be an incomplete or partial version of that illustrated i n Fig.3 ; 2 a . This is suggested by Plate 1 1 , a situation where a Type 2(a) veraada was planned, due to the presence of the lonely p i l l a r on the l e f t which has not been linked up with the other two. The presence of a two-pier thin portico(Type 2(c)) rather than the three-pier f u l l fron$ might have been due to budgetting problems, a change i n roof style, PLATE 9 : Stone.pier remains - 2900 blook West 8 t h Ave 0 Other than concrete foundations, the only non-wood material i n the facade, dramatically i l l u s t r a t e d by s i t e a f t e r demolition of houses i n preperation f o r new Safeway supermarket at Broadway & Macdonald. PLATE 10: Extensive stone trim: 1711 Dunbar Street PLATE 11:Lonely stone p i e r - West 3rd Ave. - 4 2 -or not exercising the veranda option of the pattern book i n order to allow more direct sunlight into the main front room. Type 3 i s a porehway-veranda along the full-front of a single-storey house; rather than the sweeping lines of a large roof or the dimensions of an overhanging second floor, this veranda has less imposing lines, but the impression is s t i l l that of a solid deliberate porch due again to the gable roof being supported by piers and wooden pilla r s ( F i g . 3 ; 3 a ) . Stone piers are not as universal as they were i n the Type 2 porch, and i a many cases, a distiactive appearance i s given by the use of red clinker briek l a i d with irregular courses t© present a varied surface rather than a plain one (see Plate 1 2 ) . Adopting the same classification rules as i n Entrance 2(c), a portico-type entrance i a a single-storey house, illustrated i a 5 i g . 3 ; 3 h , would be included as a Type 3 entrance. Type 4 i a eatrance styles is a significant departure from the previous ones, marking the end of the entrance/shelter as a considerable element i n tii house appearances, Instead, the doorway has a minimum of protection i a terms of cover above or a sizeable approach(Pig,3}4a)j i n many cases i t takes the form of a slight cantilever from the ground up to a small hood (Fig . 3 ; 4 b), a minimal projection above the door (Fig , 3 ; 4 e ) , or no shelter at a l l . In s©me cases, especially i a very small houses, the eatrance hall may be external to the main line of the front wall, i a the positioa previously used for an open sitting porch area, as i n F i g . 3 , 4 d . The final type is a continuation of this 'retreat' from conspicuous porehways, and with no material extension out i a front of the line of the front wall, iastead one finds a recess, as in F i g . 3 ; 5 - an indented porehway. Before moving on to a consideration of other possible aids to the identification of a house's construction period, mention should be made of the problems of renewal or rennovation, as entrance forms are among the easiest featef^&to change. The space provided by the porch-veranda was used for sitting PLATE 12 ' D e t a i l to show i r r e g u l a r b r i c k courses used as p i e r material:2900 block W.5th Ave. - 4 4 -and viewing to a f a r greater extent i n ~che past than today (because of T.V. and other pastimes); t h i s space can now be more e f f i c i e n t l y used f o r indoor l i v i n g space. I t i s a r e l a t i v e l y simple matter to take out the o l d f r o n t room w a l l , board up the f r o n t side of the porch and put a new b i g window i n i t , then incorporate the former roof extension as part of the c e i l i n g . The end product might look rather incongruous i n the company of the other older features of the facade, but t h i s i s obviously of minor importance to an owner or l a n d l o r d who requires the extra space. The former porch i s often discernable through the a l t e r a t i o n s , as i n the example of P l a t e 13, although o b j e c t i v e l y one would have to record the entrances as Type 5» I n t u i t i v e l y , one can see by comparison with.the adjacent house that the o v e r a l l s t y l e i s s t i l l unchanged, and analysis i n the next chapter points to ways i n which these a l t e r a t i o n s need not a f f e c t any objective assignment ofa, p e r i o d type. 2.5 E x t e r i o r Cover M a t e r i a l The possible a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r cover material are:- shake, shingles, h o r i z o n t a l weatherboard ( t h i n i n width or about one foot broad), rough stucco, smooth stucco, asbestos or linoleum t i l e s ( l ooking l i k e shakes from a distance), and v e r t i c a l cedar planks. D i f f i c u l t i e s i n recording these materials i n a f i e l d notebook a r i s e because there are many possible combinations of m a t e r i a l s , or d i f f e r e n t proportions of two, on the same house e x t e r i o r ; e.g. the lower h a l f or t h i r d might be covered by t h i n h o r i z o n t a l boards,' and the upper h a l f or two t h i r d s dressed with s h i n g l e s . Further, stucco cover might be the o r i g i n a l cover of a b u i l d i n g or a new cover put on to replace shingles during some period of r e p a i r s ( l i k e w i s e with*asbestos t i l e s ) . However, i t i s possible to d i s t i n g u i s h two d i f f e r e n t varieties- of stucco; one has a rough stucco, dating back to the mid-1920's, which contains small pebbles, pieces of glass, etc., and the other i s a smooth surfaced stucco, f a r l i g h t e r i n colour, which has had a p o p u l a r i t y since the I PLATE 13: Examples of p a i r s of houses b u i l t i n the same year, with one house i n each case having undergone mod i f i c a t i o n to veranda„(upp^r plates i l l u s t r a t e 1912 housing, the lower two pla t e s 1922) -46-1950's when i t was introduced from C a l i f o r n i a n vogues (although f i r s t appearing about 1938 i n Vancouver). I t i s d i f f i c u l t to put precise boundaries on the spread of these cover materials without conducting d e t a i l e d research i n t o the problem, but as a general guide from observation, the chronological succession as o u t l i n e d i n Figo' 4 i s presented f o r use i n t h i s a n a l y s i s . The ease of replacement or re-covering would seem to preclude cover materials being used as other than a confirmatory device i n p a r t i c u l a r cases. 2.6 Consideration of other external facade elements Other facade elements which have not been examined, such as chimney appearance, the a c t u a l front door and a u x i l i a r y b u i l d i n g s , might also be looked a t , to add to the l i s t of features already i d e n t i f i e d with p a r t i c u l a r periods of housing construction. I n these cases, there i s one great weakness i n that they are a l l very e a s i l y changed or modernised; i n a d d i t i o n , such features cannot be put i n t o any s p e c i f i c set of categories f o r use i n e x p l i c i t f i e l d measurement, except on a binary scale (present or absent) 0 There are, however, several other features which would only be r e f e r r e d to a f t e r the four main elements described above have been weighted, but which could be incorporated as confirmatory evidence. One of the features would be the side bay-window of the 1912 and to some extent e a r l y 1920's housing, which was b u i l t to give valuable extra room ( e . g . see Plate 14, the f l o o r plan of the house i l l u s t r a t e d i n P l a t e 3, and also P l a t e 15 f o r a Vancouver example of the s t y l e ) . A bench seat i n the window bay would provide seating at the edge of the room, f r e e i n g other areas of the room from a s u p e r f l u i t y of f u r n i t u r e . Secondly, as part of the Romanticism of the 1930's housing mentioned i n terms of roof s t y l e above,(p.36), the extension of the cross-gable to the ground, with arches to allow access to the rear of the house (Plate 16) i s f a i r l y common; or i n a l e s s conspicuous way, the dummy extensions of the side FIGURE 4: Suggested chronological succession of facade cover materialso 1890 1900 1 910 1 920 1 930 1940 1950 1 960 1 970 1 1 1 • 1 « 1 1 t SHAKE SHINGLE THIN WEATHERBOARD ROUGH STUCCO BROAD WEATHERBOARD SMOOTH STUCCO ASBESTOS LINOLEUM i 1 CEDAR PALNKS ( V e r t i c a l ) Second Floor Plan. No. 492. PLATE 15: 1912 house, on corner of 2nd Ave. & Alma S t . , showing side bay-window. PLATE 14 F l o o r Plan of Wilson Design No.492, i l l u s t r a t e d i n P l a t e J , PLATE 17: Dummy extension of front w a l l , a s s i s t i n g t r i a n g u l a r front perspective (2689 West 6th Avenue) 0 -50-edges of the f r o n t walls to give a t r i a n g u l a r look to the f r o n t perspective, as i l l u s t r a t e d i n P l a t e 17. A t h i r d feature would involve information concerning minimum and maximum set-hack r e s t r i c t i o n s through time. Such f a c t s can be e a s i l y recorded i n fieldwork since set-backs are c l e a r l y v i s i b l e , (e.g.Plate 18), 10 and would be valuable f o r general dating, as the f o l l o w i n g extract i n d i c a t e s : -H i s t o r i c a l l y , zoning and b u i l d i n g regulations influenced the e c o l o g i c a l structure of Vancouver. P r i o r to 1929, Point G-rey and South Vancouver e x i s t e d as seperate m u n i c i p a l i t i e s 0 I n s t r i k i n g contrast to the c o n t r o l l e d development of Point Grey i s the development of the South Vancouver area, where " i n the s o - c a l l e d •boom' days, la n d speculation was r i f e and there i s probably no more s t r i k i n g example of the i l l s of uncontrolled and haphazard s u b - d i v i s i o n of l a n d on the continent than there i s here"(1950 P l a n ) . (Bell,1965,p.5). No mention has been made of apartment 'buildings, mainly due to t h e i r minimal c o n t r i b u t i o n to the chosen study area. However, i n roof l i n e , window and facade cover, these b u i l d i n g s can be accomodated l a r g e l y w i ^ a i n the categories described above; the obvious differences i n s i z e and plan i d e n t i f y the types of s t r u c t u r e . Very recent constructions can be dated p a r t i c u l a r l y by the large areas of p l a t e g l a s s , the f l a t roof, and indeed by the a c t u a l techniques used i n apartment b u i l d i n g (see P l a t e 19). The question of apartment construction as a d i s t i n c t i v e s t y l e element w i l l be discussed i n the summary of chapter 4. Before ending t h i s chapter, i t i s important to ask what i s the r e a l s i g n i f i c a n c e of the d e s c r i p t i o n of facade elements. Simply i n terms of a c l a s s i f i c a t o r y exercise, the procedure conformed to that advocated i n Chapter 1, 'that-'of i s o l a t i n g component f l u c t u a t i o n s rather than t h i n k i n g i n terms of o v e r a l l s t y l e s . And yet i t i s o v e r a l l s t y l e which i s often equated with vernacular a r c h i t e c t u r e , not 'Type 4c of element X',etc.. This point i s emphasised by the i n c l u s i o n , immediately above, of the c o n t r i b u t i o n of apartment buildings to the r e s i d e n t i a l landscape. Usually, apartments e x p l i c i t l y represent ( u n t i l conaominiums recently became another element of the housing maricet) the PLATE 18: D i f f e r e n t setbacks between 1908 ( l e f t ) and 1912 houses (3200 block West 2nd Aveenue). PLATE 19: Apartment at 6th Ave. & Alma St. under construction (1969) (Eight-storey h i g h - r i s e on f a r side of Alma St. b u i l t 1967) -52-product of a profi t - m o t i v a t e d process - of funding, b u i l d i n g and then renting a space i n a structure to other i n d i v i d u a l s or families;, on the other hand, detached s i n g l e - f a m i l y houses, regardless of s i z e , are often symbolic of p r i v a t e ownership and p r i v a t e choice, (and since i t i s s i n g l e -family housing which i s most often equated with vernacular a r c h i t e c t u r e , t h i s i n turn i s seen as representative of the i n d i v i d u a l * s r o l e w i t h i n that s o c i e t y ) 0 Yet are these two - apartments and s i n g l e - f a m i l y houses - a l l that d i f f e r e n t i n terms of t h e i r design processes? Although i t i s often stated that the home i s a man's c a s t l e , how many f i l t e r s does the house, a e s t h e t i c a l l y and f u n c t i o n a l l y , pass through before the i n d i v i d u a l occupies i t ? These f i l t e r s are suggested by posing several questions: to what extent do we choose or are we so l d a s t y l e ? ; to what extent does t h i s s t y l e r e f l e c t on the i n d i v i d u a l who bought i t or the person who b u i l t i t ? ; and f o r that matter, what are the r e l a t i v e contributions to s t y l e of the carpenter who b u i l t the house or the a r c h i t e c t who designed i t ? I t has already been shown that a s t y l e can be a Chicagoan design eminating from Los Angeles„ Thus should vernacular s t y l e be regarded as being a r e f l e c t i o n of the i n d i v i d u a l , or i s i t s value s o l e l y as; a surrogate index of society? I n terms of i n s i g h t s about the i n d i v i d u a l occupying a house, i t would appear i n i t i a l l y that the descriptions of t h i s chapter, focussing purely on external appearance, are i n s u f f i c i e n t ; there appears to be a need f o r a d d i t i o n a l information on t r i m , decoration, s i z e , e tc., i . e . s t a t u s - r e l a t e d features, which w i l l be discussed i n Chapter 5» I s vernacular a r c h i t e c t u r e therefore only relevant to analysis at the macro-spatial s c a l e , of how t o t a l s t y l e r e f l e c t s on society? The answer must be no, f o r i t has already been shown (see the reviews of Mumford and Kouwenhoeven i n Chapter l ) that the techniques and the d e t a i l are important pointers i n attempts to i d e n t i f y society and i t s l e v e l . Thus the d e t a i l , of s t y l e s and also of elements, can be - 5 3 -u s e f u l l y considered i n examination of the contributions to vernacular by the 12 13 carpenter and the a r c h i t e c t who e i t h e r perpetuate or innovate s t y l e s . Often the only a r c h i t e c t u r e (i.e.design) which i s progressive i s that r e l a t e d to the wealthy, where there are few cost constraints hindering experimentation with methods or materials. The end product of t h i s experimentation might f i l t e r down to cheaper housing, but only over a period of time; and thus b u i l d e r s w i l l tend to persevere with w e l l - t r i e d , proven and successful methods. The housing considered i n t h i s study i s not free from the above c o n s t r a i n t s , and was b u i l t i n a period when construction was c a r r i e d out by i n d i v i d u a l , small-scale contractors; how much more conservative they are l i k e l y to be, with a l i m i t e d range of plan a l t e r n a t i v e s f o r a s p e c i f i c amount of money avalable or a required s i z e of house. Consequently, t h i s would p o s s i b l y tend to perpetuate a s t y l e or a facade element. This has been seen i n t h i s chapter, with long time-spreads f o r c e r t a i n facade elements, and w i l l be c o n t i n u a l l y of concern i n the analysis of f i e l d data i n the next chapter 0 Carpentry expertise w i t h i n economic constraints should therefore be kept i n mind as one possible reason f o r extended usage of a s t y l e or element. The r e l a t i o n s h i p between carpentry and s t y l e suggests other questions, e.g.: why does someone choose a p a r t i c u l a r house or a p a r t i c u l a r design? -because i t has been seen before?, or i t r e f l e c t s n o s t a l g i a f o r a house l i v e d i n elsewhere?, or again i s i t the design and b u i l d i n g process rather than the eventual resident which i s responsible? Banham (1971,p.57-73) discusses the contributions of I r v i n g G i l l and Charles and Henry G-reene to modern archi t e c t u r e and to the l o c a l Los Angeles vernacular s t y l e of C a l i f o m i a n Bungalow; he considers the wealthy antecedents of the C a l i f o r n i a n Bingalow, which include the G-reene's G-amble house i n Pasedena. Here are found some possible answers to the questions just r a i s e d concerning carpentry and s t y l e : Direct confrontation with the ph y s i c a l f a c t s of the house i s more l i k e l y to remind v i s i t o r s of European wooden architecture of a sophisticated peasant type - Alpine i n the forms of the roofs and ext e r i o r porches, Scandinavian i n much of the v i s i b l e stucture, -54-or even Russian, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the splendid but r a r e l y i l l u s t r a t e d play-room i n the upper part of the roof, with i t s low exposed trusses and i t s pannellea w a l l s . I n other words, and i r r e s p e c t i v e of the background and t r a i n i n g of the a r c h i t e c t s , what they and t h e i r craftsmen were r e a l l y assembling here was a poetic and romantic summary of the k i n d of wood-building t r a d i t i o n s that Europeans had bx-ought to the U.S. from t h e i r home lands and had then d i v e r s i f i e d and r e f i n e d on the long trek West. (Banham,'i 971 ,p.72) Thus i t would seem that -&he c u l t u r a l background, of the decision-maker,and fehe c u l t u r a l background of the other contributors to housing appearance, i s an important s e c t i o n of any consideration of vernacular a r c h i t e c t u r e 0 This study i s -primarily concerned with c l a s s i f y i n g and dating the s t r u c t u r e s , and has i n e v i t a b l y been concerned with d e s c r i p t i o n i n t h i s chapter. Based upon the d e f i n i t i o n s and delineations of t h i s chapter, fieldwork was c a r r i e d out i n ffest K i t s i l a n o , and the a n a l y s i s of the data i n the next chapter w i l l attempt to provide the necessary objective weightings of each of the v a r i a b l e s , e s s e n t i a l i f they are to be used as a r a p i d assessment of housing age and • s t y l e as part of l a t e r fieldwork,, The more basic questions of the underlying s i g n i f i c a n c e of these v a r i a t i o n s w i l l be taken up again i n the f i n a l chapter. Footnotes For an extensive bibliography, see GREER., K.M., "Vancouver:a bibliography", unpublished Master of L i b r a r i a n s h i p d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver <> A somewhat unacademic d e s c r i p t i o n of Vancouver's growth i s provided by MORLET, A.* Vancouverifrom Milltown to Metropolis< Vancouver:Mitchell P r e s s , 1 9 6 l 2 Seattle shares with Vancouver the same r e l a t i v e i s o l a t i o n v i s - a - v i s the r e s t of the continent, and i t would seem reasonable to seek these a d d i t i o n a l sourcesjsee p a r t i c u l a r l y STEINBRUECK,V. Sea t t l e Architecture,1850 - 1953. New York: Reinhold, 1953> ( e s p e c i a l l y p . 1 0 ) . 3 F o r a f u l l e r a n a l y s i s , see:- GREBLER,L., BLANK, D.H. & WINNICK,L., C a p i t a l Formation i n R e s i d e n t i a l Real Estate, Princeton:Princeton U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1 9 5 6 , ( e s p e c i a l l y Chapter V "Population Growth - A\basic f a c t o r , p . 7 6 - 8 9 , and also i n Chapter VII"Changes i n the P h y s i c a l C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the Dwelling Unity p . 1 1 3 - 2 3 ) ; BEYER, G, Housing and Society .'New York:MacMillan , 1 9 6 5 , ( e s p e c i a l l y Chapter 1 , " H i s t o r y of American Housing", and Chapter 8 "Housing Design",p.880-312, which concentrates on current spacepeeds and how these are met i n the i n t e r n a l plan of a house); BEMIS, A.B. & BURCHARD, J . The Evolving House. V o l . 1 , The Hi s t o r y of the Home. Cambridge,Mass.: M.I.T. Press, 1 9 3 3 » h See, a l s o , BLANK. D.M., The Volume of Residential, Construction. 1 8 8 9 - 1 9 5 0 . National Bureau of Economic Research, Technical Paper 9, 1 9 5 4 o -54b-~* For a d e s c r i p t i o n of these postwar s t y l e s and plans i n terms of changing family Composition and consequent design needs, see CARVER, H., C i t i e s i n the Suburbs, Toronto:University of Toronto Press,1962, p.101-4« c The only possible d i s t i n c t i o n might be i n the thickness or thinness of the a s t r i g a l s i n the upper sashes, the t h i c k e r ones ofcen associated with the e a r l i e r (1912) housing. This may be a f u n c t i o n of e i t h e r the q u a l i t y and c a p a b i l i t i e s of carpentry, or the f a c t that the older housing may have been painted more times during the period between then and now, the thickness being'due to the several layers of paint or paint on part of the g l a s s 0 ^ I am g r a t e f u l to Professor W.G-. Hardwick f o r i n i t i a l l y suggesting the value of t h i s hall-window i n t h i s confirmatory r o l e . Q More co r r e c t l y , ' h a l f - h i p p e d ' - see P l a t e 4 , p . 1 9 , c e l l C4. However, since the houses of t h i s roof type predominantly face at right-angles to the road, t h i s feature presents an appearance which lends i t s e l f somewhat to the*snub-nised' l a b e l . g Although f a r shallower than the hipped-roof of Type 1c . 1 0 For example, i n 1928, the f i r s t zoning by-law (2516) to s p e c i f y a t h i r t y - f i v e foot set-back from the s t r e e t 0 11 For f u r t h e r information and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n on the impact of zoning plans i n Vancouver, see HARDWICK, W.G-., "The Changing Structure of Downtown: A Pu b l i c P o l i c y Context',' C.A.G-. paper, Winnipeg,1970; HARDWICK, W.G.,"Regional P o l i t i c a l and Administrative Developments i n the Vancouver Region',' C.A.G.. paper, S t . Catherine s,1971• 12 A t h i r d important 'actor', the r e a l t o r , w i l l be mentioned i n Chapter 5, p.146. 13 Whether or not they perpetuate or innovate i s often a f u n c t i o n of the income status of the c l i e n t . An i n v e s t i g a t i o n and c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the design process i n terms of income c a p a b i l i t i e s of the c l i e n t has been c a r r i e d out by KENNEDY, R.W., The House and the A r t of i t s Design, New York: Reinhold,1966, who asked which s o c i a l c l a s s , which k i n d of b u i l d e r and which . k i n d of dwelling i s most prone to a r c h i t e c t u r a l expression? B r i e f l y , he i d e n t i f i e d three main groups: ( l ) Dwelling Units b u i l t by P u b l i c Housers under government sponsership and subsidy, very much constrained by minimum and maximum 'standards' and costs, (2) Homes,built by Home B u i l d e r s , are mass-produced f o r the middle-class, designed,built and s o l d by speculative b u i l d e r s , Here the constraints are economic, i n terms of costing, and c u l t u r a l , i n the deep conservatism of what the 'Home'means and represents; (3) Houses, b u i l t by an income group which can a f f o r d them, through an a r c h i t e c t , to i n d i v i d u a l s p e c i f i c a t i o n s and according to i n d i v i d u a l t a s t e s . _55-CHAPTER. 3. TIME PERIOD AND FACADE-ELEMENT ASSOCIATIONS 3.1 .Introduction Intuitively, i t was thought that the variations i n window subtype would account for the differences i n period of construction, and that as confirmation, a similar variation i n the roof style and entrance form would be found i n the majority of cases. Closer examination showed that this did not always hold true; a particular type of roof or porch style may contradict the date suggested by window style alonej and vice-versa a window style or entrance would oppose a certain roof style which had until then been confidently associated with a discrete time period. It became obviou3, therefore, that i t was impossible to distinguish discrete time periods with singular combinations of the three facade elements, e.g. window 2 , roof 2 and entrance 2; 3,3,3 etc, (which necessarily assume that each element subtype occur only over a very limited uniform time span) 0 Consequently, i t was necessary to work out the percentage occurrence of particular combinations of features with respect to certain time periods, and also the strength of the subtypes' resolution by examining their occurrence over time. For this purpose, detailed information was needed, rather than an accumulated 'eyeball* assessment obtained by walking around the streets. The eharacteristics of the facade elements described i n the previous chapter were translated into sketches and each assigned a specific label, so that the master f i e l d sheet (Fig. 5) gave the four facade elements by which a house was to be categorised; accordingly, there were six subdivisions of Window ( X I ) , five for Roof ( X 2 ) and Entrance (X3) and six for Facade material (X4J. Having collected information on the actual construction year of every house within am area bounded by Alma Street on the west, English -56-- 5 7 -Bay on the north, Trafalgar Street on the egst and. 12th Avenue on the south, the houses were arranged i n chronological order, and assigned a code number from 1 to 2 3 2 2 ; from a stratification which reflected the relative frequency of occurrence i n the study area, 100 houses were selected by using random number tables. * These houses were then observed by the author, using Fig. 5 as the master guide, and recordings were made on a f i e l d data sheet as followst-Fig. 5 aExample of f i e l d recording format: House M©,1 Street Window(Xl) R©of(X2) J Intranee(X3) j Cover ( X 4 ) ( 1 ) 3696 j Point Grey Road 1 2 1 3 4 1 6 4 0 j Alma Road 2 i 2 ! 2 6 ! 2604 ! West 1 0 t h Ave. 5 j 2 | 2 6 In observation 1 of Mg. 5 a , illustrated i n Plate 2 0 , the window styles are plain sash ( l ) , the roof has a dormer interruption and brackets supporting an overhang (thus type 2 ) , the porch, although now f i l l e d i n to provide a larger entrance h a l l , i s distinctly Type 3 (as i n Fig. 3 : 3*0, and the facade, with narrow weatherboard at the bottom, is smooth stucco (done 1953 over shingle). The fact that the house is recorded as being built i n 1915 illustrates and introduces the focus of this chapter; namely how does one predict a date from the various features of facade? The descriptions i n the previous chapter hinted at a close time-association of window, roof and entrance characteristics i n their subtype number; but i n the case (No.l above) every one is different. The questions to ask aret which of the facade elements i s most reliable as a classificatory device, and what sort of combinations of facade sub-elements would appear to be the best mix for our purposes? Working intuitively, window styles were thought to be of major importance, the other features being merely confirmatory i n nature, and that i f there was not — 5 8 -PLATE 20: 3696 Point G-rey Roado -59-uniformity i n mix, then windows would be the strongest of the features. 3.2 Accuracy of sub-types f o r p r e d i c t i n g the ac t u a l year of construction The f e e l i n g s expressed above (that windows would be s u f f i c i e n t evidence) were tested by running the data (see Appendix A) through a multiple regression program, which would o b j e c t i v e l y i n d i c a t e the r e l a t i v e vreightings of the 4 v a r i a b l e s ; the r e s u l t i n g equation would thus be one which could be used with data from other area - and by s u b s t i t u t i n g the relevant variable-values i n the equation, the correct date of construction f o r that house would be i n d i c a t e d . However, the r e s u l t s y i e l d e d the f o l l o w i n g : -Y= -10.825 + 1.1973^ + 5.9882X2 + 2.58921^ + 1 .1226X ...(l) (Standard error Y = 6.0125) •Where Y - year of construction X1 = window x 2 = roof X 3 = entrance / \ = facade This was a rather s u p r i s i n g r e s u l t as the weighting of the window s t y l e was low, but t h i s can p o s s i b l y be explained by the f a c t that the sub-s t y l e s of each v a r i a b l e were f a i t h f u l l y recorded despite the presence of v i s i b l e renewal. Thus i n a house which i n the other two categories pointed c o r r e c t l y to a 1912 house, the presence of a large-paned, aluminium-framed window (Type 6), t y p i c a l of the l a s t f i v e years, i s responsible f o r a lower importance to windows over the whole 100 houses than would be otherwise expected. The c o r r e l a t i o n matrix, Table H a , however, does i n d i c a t e the stong l i n k s between the three major c l a s s i f i c a t o r y v a r i a b l e s . I n order to see what the r e s u l t s would be i f the 1912 housing had not been renovated i n terms of t h e i r window s t y l e s , the regression was repeated, but with the seven houses which show a new -60-TABLE Ua CORRELATION MATRIX FROM ACTUAL FIELD DATA REGRESSION X4 Y X1 X2 X3 Y 1.0000 XI 0.6606 1.0000 X2 0.8624 0.6437 1.0000 X3 0.7715 0.5692 0.7736 1.0000 X4 0.4117 0.2335 0.3509 0.2864 1.0000 TABLE lib CORRELATION MATRIX FROM MODIFIED FIELD DATA REGRESSION X4 Y XI X2 X3 Y 1.0000 XI 0.9135 1.0000 X2 0.8624 0.8589 1.0000 X3 0.7715 0.7627 0.7736 1.0000 X4 0.4117 0.3133 0.3509 0.2864 -61-window (Type 6) recently inserted recorded as having the window style associated i n a l l the other 1912 instances (Type 2) the matrix, Table 2b, confirms the intuitive belief that change in window style i s the highest correlate with changing construction period, and also that X^  , Xg , and X^ are highly intercorrelated. X^ is associated with year of construction to a lesser but s t i l l significant extent. The findings confinm the caution advised i n the previous chapter, since the cover material would be the f i r s t feature on a house exterior, before window or porch, to be altered; the observer i s not always observing the original cover materialo The equation of the original regression (1) i s a very useful indicator for classificatory purposes, however, as the roof style i s obviously the most resistant to alteration; even i f a house has an extensive "Type 2" porch f i l l e d i n to provide extra room with modern windows and an external cover of cedar boards or smooth stucco, the roof style w i l l remain the same, and this could s t i l l point to the correct construction period, Returning to the example of Plate 20, which was recorded as:-1, 2, 3» 4 , i f we now substitute into equation 1, the following values would result:-Y = -10.825 + (1.1973 x 1) + (5.9882 x 2) + (2.5892 x 3) + (1.1226 x 4) = -10.825 + 1.1973 + 11.9764 + 7.7676 + 4.4904 = -10.825 + 25.4317 = 14.6 which i n nearest whole numbers i s 15, the actual year of construction of the house i n question being 1915 . As a further example, the 'ideal* 1912 house (as i n Wilson's Bungalow look) - 2 ,2 ,2 ,2 , - would give:-Y = -10.825 + 2.3946 + 11.9764 + 5.1784 + 2.2452 = -10.825 + 21.7946 = 10.9696 = c . l l -62-The high degree of accuracy i a these two instances does not provide a convincing case far the use of the results of a multiple regression program alone, as there are a multiplicity of combinations of variables, other that the combinations of the desired ideal styles. These variations have had to be incorporated into the analysis^: and with a S . E . = 6o0125, only a moderate f i t is achieved,, Examination of the calculations lis t e d i n Appendix B w i l l illustrate the wide divergences of some expected values from the actual age. Thus, a spread of 12 years out of a total 70, (.1900-70), suggests that i s ineffective jjhjea?eft5re) to attempt to predict actual age by such an approach as that described above. In fact, one could ask whether the measurement of building age i n years is the most meaningful approach i n relation to attributes which themselves are discrete (can a continuous dependent variable justifiably be predicted from discrete independent variables.) It would appear to be more logical, and indeed acceptable, to be able to predict a house's building age to a particular class ( or period group ) rather than the exact date, and this should also be more efficient i n terms of i t s potential for research work. 3.3 Meed for independent time^periods Which time elasses are to be used? The construction of specific groups would be very difficult i f an inductive approach was adopted which related to the particular frequency of variables i n this data set of one hundred contiguous blocks over a particular period of time,, Apart from being unable to generalise outside these ©ne hundred blocks, problems would arise due to the different amounts of overlap of each of the sub-styles i n each of the different facade elements; there are no discrete groupings possible except on a level of generality which would be of l i t t l e use. Consequently, some objective period-grouping needs to be imposed on the data, and for the periods to have any u t i l i t y for research - 6 3 -i n t o s p a t i a l patterns of former times there would have to be a reasonable correspondence between a r c h i t e c t u r a l time groupings and those of economic conditions, b u i l d i n g a c t i v i t y , e t o 0 I f , f o r example, a s t y l e was i n vogue from 1 8 8 2 - 1 9 0 0 , but a trade or b u i l d i n g cycle ran from I875-I892 and 1 8 9 2 -1 9 0 8 , then there would be no r e a d i l y v i s i b l e manifestation of these b u i l d i n g c y c l e s . So the data should be examined i n the l i g h t of such a s e r i e s of cyc l e s , and i t s a p p l i c a b i l i t y to these periods judged accordingly. Blank ( 1 9 5 4 ) , among others, has described and analysed the b u i l d i n g cycles of the U.S0, but i t would seem b e t t e r to use f i g u r e s which r e l a t e d c l o s e r to events i n the region i n question, and so the records of the C i t y of Vancouver housing were used. The r e l a t i v e frequency of housing s t a r t s f o r each year i n the K i t s i l a n o study area (see Appendix C, and Mg , 6 ) suggests the f o l l o w i n g ; -- an i n t e r m i t t e n t c y c l e up to 1 9 1 1 - 1 9 1 1 - 1 9 1 7 , with the r e a l boom i n 1 9 1 2 - 1 9 1 7 - 1 9 2 4 - 1 9 2 4 - 1 9 3 3 , Due to the small volume of housing-starts a f t e r t h i s time, i t i s d i f f i c u l t to define f u r t h e r b u i l d i n g cycles with any confidence. Consequently, other values were superimposed on the same graph to see i f they r e f l e c t e d the cycles suspected from the K i t s i l a n o f i g u r e s alone. The eloseness of the C i t y of Vancouver "Value of B u i l d i n g Permits" slope from 1 9 2 9 - 1 9 3 3 confirms the l a s t K i t s i l a n o p e r i o d noted above, and fur t h e r i t would seem that there are recognisable b u i l d i n g cycles from 1 9 3 3 - 4 4 , 1 9 4 4 - 5 1 , 1 9 5 1 - 6 1 , 1 9 6 l - 7 0 o Confirmation of these trends was sought by c l a c u l a t i o n of 3-year moving means Q? i g . 7 ) , which supports the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n above except f o r the e a r l i e s t periods. The moving-mean graph suggests a pre - 1 9 0 8 period, and then the f i r s t major b u i l d i n g p eriod extending from 1 9 0 9 -1 9 1 7 . This w i l l be accepted f o r the purposes of t h i s a n a l y s i s , but a t -65-a future date, i f the study were extended to the whole c i t y , i t would he important to e s t a b l i s h the nature and magnitude of the b u i l d i n g cycles of the e a r l y years of Vancouver's h i s t o r y , and confirm or r e j e c t the up-to-1908 grouping used here. The periods mentioned would appear to be acceptable i n the absence of any hard-and-fast 'Pevsner-type' a r c h i t e c t u r a l p eriod l i m i t s , and even i f future work suggests time l a b e l s f o r d i s t i n c t North American vernacular b u i l d i n g s t y l e s , then the r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n of Vancouver, with i t s own c u l t u r a l f l a v o u r , and the d i f f e r e n t rates of d i f f u s i o n of s t y l e s , means that an indigenous taxonomy i s acceptable, at l e a s t as a s t a r t i n g p o int. 3.4 C l a s s i f i c a t i o n by period-groups The period groupings to be used are: I pre-1908 I I 1909-1917 I I I 1918-1923 IV 1924-1933 v 1934-1944 VI 1945-1951 VII 1952-1970 (rather than 52-60, 61-70, since there are very few i n t h i s period f o r the present study 0) The fieldwork data can now be presented i n the l i g h t of these l i m i t s , as i n F i g . 8. Immediately, i t i s evident that every sub-style of each facade element 'trespasses' over the borders at both ends of the period grouping l i m i t s , and the incidence of each sub-type i n d i f f e r e n t p eriod groups i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n Table I I I . C a l c u l a t i o n of chi-square values, to te s t the a s s o c i a t i o n between sub-type frequency and time periods, y i e l d e d the f o l l o w i n g values Window Roof Entrance Cover M a t e r i a l x 2 df P 149.4 30 <0.1 159.3 24 <0.1 94.0 24 <0.1 59.0 30 <0ol -66-Figure 8 : 'Sos-lo^aia-type' presentation of randon sample data H O U S E -mum 1 2 3 4 5 6 " ROOF 1 2 3 4 5 EHTitANCE 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 01 3 6 8 1 CL X X X X 00 0 2 2 o 4 2 i V 1 X X X X 0 5 0 3 2941*711 X X X X 0 8 08 0 4 19403Y X X X X 0 5 2781FG- X X X X 1 0 0 6 2 6 2 2 H 1 X X X X 1 0 07 X X X X 1 0 08 2745"-V3 X X X X 1 0 0 9 2 7 3 5 ^ 3 X X X X 1 0 1 0 1 9 0 2 3 T X X X X 1 0 11 3 0 3 67T8 X X X X 1 0 1 2 355&PG- X X X X 1 0 1 3 3 1 4 ^ 1 X X X X 1 0 14 3011.73 X X X X 1 0 1 5 2 9 9 7 7 2 X X X X 1 2 1 6 2 9 1 5 B T X X X X 1 2 1 7 2829".'/6 X X X X 1 2 18 3522W3 X X X X 1 2 1 9 3 6 4 ^ 5 X X X X 1 2 20 2 0 4 3 C O X X X X 1 2 21 2 1 3 2 B L X X X X 1 2 2 2 3 3 1 7 ^ 3 X X X X •12 2 3 3 3 3 7 - 3 X X X X 1 2 2 4 1 6 4 1 D U X X X X 1 2 2 5 3 6 3 ? < V 2 X X X X 1 2 2 6 1 7 2 4 D U X X X X 1 2 2 7 3 2 5 6 ^ 1 X X X X 1 2 28 3 5 4 2 W 1 X X X X 1 2 2 9 3 5 1 7 - 7 2 X X X X 1 2 3 0 3 1 3 O W I X X X X 1 2 31 2740W1O X X X X 1 2 3 2 3 5 5 6 * 7 7 X X X X 1 2 3 3 266772 X X X X 1 2 34 2 8 3 1 P G X X X X 1 2 3 5 2940 .76 X X X X 1 2 3 6 1 6 4 0 J . L X X X X 1 2 3 7 3 1 2 1 W 6 X X X X 1 3 3 8 3 1 2 5 . 7 6 X X X X 1 3 3 9 3 4 4 9 * 0 X X X X 1 3 4 0 3436*^2 X X X X 1 4 4 1 3 6 6 3 ^ 2 \ X X X X 14 4 2 2 S 6 & 7 3 ; X X X X 1 4 43 3 3 4 7 ^ 6 X X X X 1 4 4 4 3 6 9 6 P G X X X X 1 5 45 3642W11 X X X X 1 5 4 6 3 2 0 3 S T 3 X X X X 18 4 7 1803MC X X X X 2 0 4 8 X X X X 2 0 4 9 3 2 9 J » T 4 X X X X 2 0 50 3 6 5 5 . - 5 X X X X 2 0 5 1 3 2 5 5 7 5 X X X X 2 0 5 2 3 3 1 1 . 0 X X X X 2 0 53 2 9 7 ^ 5 X X X X 2 1 54 2 9 6 ^ 5 X x - X X 2 1 5 5 3 4 0 & 7 2 X X J t x 21 5 6 3126176 X X X X 21 5 7 3009-.78 X X X X 22 58 3 5 7 4 1 7 2 X X X X 22 5 9 3 1 3 7 7 1 1 X X X X 22 6 0 3 1 9 5 7 1 1 X X X X 22 61 5 6 0 5 * 1 1 X X X X 22 62 2 1 8 1 W A X X X X 2 4 6 3 2 1 2 0 D U X X X X 2 5 6 4 3 6 8 O P G - X X X X 2 5 6 5 3 6 7 2 W I X X X X 2 5 6 6 2 4 3 5 T U X X X X 2 5 26 6 7 2 7 4 * 7 2 6 8 3 5 9 1 ' 7 1 0 X X X X X X X X 2 7 6 9 348178 X X X X 2 7 7 0 3 4 9 1 T O X X X X 2 7 7 1 3 2 7 9 ^ 8 X X X X 2 7 7 2 2 2 2 V . 7 A X X X X 2 7 7 3 337572 X X X X 2 8 7 4 3 2 7 0 . : 5 X X X X 28 7 5 3 6 5 ^ 1 1 X X X X 28 7 6 3625-711 X X X X 28 77 2334W11 X X X X 3 0 7 8 2326.711 X X X X 3 0 79 3 6 4 3 ' 7 3 X X X X 3 1 80 356>')i78 X X X X T5~ 81 3 0 9 5 K T X >- X v 3 5 82 2 M 5 P & X y X 8 3 3 3 1 0 - 7 8 X X X X 4 0 8 4 3 0 6 5 F & X X X X 4 0 85 2 9 9 4 P G X X X X 40 86 3 5 0 9 7 1 8 7 3 6 4 ^ 3 X X X X 4 1 X X X X 4 1 8 8 3341 X X X X 41 8 9 3446PG- X X X X 'l1 9 0 3 0 5 7 7 2 x X X X 4 1 91 3 6 2 1 . 7 2 X X X X 4 2 9 2 3 4 4 3 - ' 3 X X X 4 3 9 3 3 4 6 7 7 1 0 X X X X 4 4 9 4 2724PG- X i.e 9 5 ? 7 l 6 » 3 X X X 4 6 9 6 3 6 4 9 - 1 X X X 4 7 97 3548W7 X X X X ; . P 9 8 3 5 6 1 7 / 1 1 X X X X 53 9 9 3 0 0 5 0 X X X X 5 5 1 0 - . ' 3 ? 5 1 P & X X X X 6 3 I TABLE III INCIDENCE OF FACADE ELEMENT SUBTYPES B Y T I M E P E R I O D S V WINDOW (X1) R00F(X2) ENTRANCE(X3) COVER M/ tfERIALC i. T 5 — _ _ _ _ — — . <4) 6 1 2 ! 3 5 6 i 2 3 t 5 1 2 3 k 5 i 2 I 4 r— 3 1 1 3 4 ! ! ! j 4 ; n 6 29 ', 1 1 4 5 32 3 1 : 6 29 2 3 ! — [ 24 6 ; 3 — i — 5 i 41 in 2 6 1 2 5 2 2 11 5 3 2 10 4 I 7 'j 2 ! 5 | 1 _ 1 16 IV • 1 8 6 1 2 11 — 1 4 13 1 ! 1 ; 1 0 5 I —J— 1 _ 1 18 j 5 J -100 j-... V 4 8 1 9 4 9 4 •i 1 I 8 ; 3 VI 5 1 4 4 1 3 1 1 vn j i 1 2 3 3 L 2 1 10 32 15 11 18 U 8 31 19 24 12 7 32 18 3? 8 4 36| 13 j 29 j 9 9 -68-i n d i c a t i n g a very s i g n i f i c a n t a s s o c i a t i o n between sub-type occurrences i 2 i n a l l four facade elements and the time-periods imposed on the d a t a 0 What t h i s shows i s that the data i n Table I I I v i r t u a l l y speaks f o r i t s e l f . I t does not point out c r i t i c a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , instead merely confirming the usefulness of the time-periods borrowed from examination o f ' b u i l d i n g cycles; a l s o , there i s confirmation of the f i n d i n g s of the multiple regression program, namely that the roof-type v a r i a t i o n s are the strongest clues to approximate age, and that cover material i s f a r more u n r e l i a b l e than the other two elements examined. 3.5 Resolution of element sub-types f o r dating purposes. In an attempt to gain greater c l a r i t y as to the r e l a t i v e importance of p a r t i c u l a r sub-types i n s p e c i f i c periods, the incidence of sub-types was c a l c u l a t e d i n two ways. F i r s t , as a proportion of a l l other element sub-types found w i t h i n that period band (Table TV), which i n d i c a t e s whether X^(a) was more important than X^(b) , ( c ) , (d), ( e ) , i n time-period t ( i . e . 'horizontal* spread i n Table I I I ) . The shaded c e l l denotes the strongest character w i t h i n that facade-element f o r each time-period, and a t t e n t i o n i s drawn to the occurrence of Type 6 windows i n periods I I & I I I 0 From the descriptions i n the previous chapter and also the field-work observations, these occurrences are d e f i n i t e evidence of renewal. I t seems legit i m a t e therefore to a l l o c a t e these observations to t h e i r 'expected* time-periods ( f o r the purpose of the o v e r a l l study) and the r e v i s e d tables f o r Window would then read as i n Table IVa<, Examination of Table IV confirms the view that the element sub-types are associated with p a r t i c u l a r time-periods, hence the strength of diagonal f o r each element t a b l e . There are several deviations away from the diagonal however, p a r t i c u l a r l y Window sub-type 3 and 4 i n time IV, Entrance type 4 i n time I (possibly r e f l e c t i n g the observations of the "pioneer cottages" mentioned already, whose entrance i s minimal or non-existant), and the TABLE IV PROPORTION OF ELEMENT SUBTYPES IN SPECIFIC TIME PERIODS WINDOW (XI) R00F|X2) ENTRANCE (X3) COVER M A T E R I A L S ) 1 2 3 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 u 5 i 2 3 i. 5 6 I 1.0 .75 .25 .25 .75 1.0 I .15 .71 .02 i .02 10 .12 .78 .07 .15 .71 .10 .04 .08 .59 .15 .09 .09 in .12 .38 .07 .12 .31 .12 .69 .19 .12 .63 .25 .44 .13 .31 .06 .06 .06 .44 .33 .06 .13 .11 .28 •6,1 .06 22 11 .69 .31 .05 .05 .56 M .28 .06 i .31 .62 .07 .69 31 .62 .24 .07 2T 1.0 .20 .80 .80 .20 1.0 .60 .20 .20 .33 .66 1.0 .66 .34 W3 N00W 1 2 3 5 6 I to n .15 .81 .02 .02 IV .12 .69 I .07 .12 DE .44 .33 .06 .13 V .31 .62 .07 ! vi 1.0 vn .34 £6 TABLE t a AS A B O V E , B U T " R E P L A C I N G " RENEWAL W I N D O W S -70-importance of Entrance type 1+ f o r times IV, V, & VI. This shows up the need f o r the frequencies to he cal c u l a t e d i n another form as w e l l , to es t a b l i s h which period or periods the sub-types represent best. Consequently, the incidence of sub-types was c a l c u l a t e d ' v e r t i c a l l y ' , i . e . sub-type occurrence over time, Table V, i n which the proportion of element X>T(a) i n t i s c a l c u l a t e d r e l a t i v e to X,T(a) i n t n t t j>Tv n r) n + 1, n + 2, n + 3, etc. This table i s therefore the closest i n d i c a t i o n of the time-class-i f i c a t o r y strength of element sub-types. (The r e - a l l o c a t i o n of Type 6 windows to the e a r l i e r time period has again been c a r r i e d out, and the c a l c u l a t i o n s are presented i n Table Va; c a l c u l a t i o n s based on f i e l d recording, of the Type 6 occurrences a c t u a l l y i n time I I & I I I , have been included i n the main t a b l e ) . Again the diagonal i s evident, although i n varying strengths; time Il/Type 2 i s very strong f o r a l l four elements, but f o r many of the other time/sub-type considerations, there i s l e s s strength of con-centrat i o n than Table IV i l l u s t r a t e d . , What should be the c u t - o f f point i n deciding the use of a sub-type as a c l a s s i f i c a t o r y u n i t ? The presentation of the data i n F i g . 8 does suggest an approach analogous to scalogram a n a l y s i s , presented i n i t i a l l y by G-uttman (1945), and taken up at length by Edwards (1957, p.172-200). However, the purpose here i s not to miniTni.se e r r o r by most e f f e c t i v e l o c a t i o n of the c u t t i n g points; the strategy has been to impose c u t t i n g points already, using b u i l d i n g cycle l i m i t s o On the other hand, the second r u l e used i n the l o c a t i o n of cut t i n g points could be used, namely that "no category should have more error i n i t than non-error" (G-uttman, 1947, p . 2 6 l ) 0 Under t h i s r u l e , then the expected a s s o c i a t i o n between time I and sub-type 1 i s no longer true f o r any of the facade elements; t h i s may we l l r e f l e c t the reservations noted on Page 65 concerning the accuracy TABLE V PROPORTION OF SPECIFIC ELEMENT SUBTYPES THROUGH TIME -WINDOW 1 ,i 4 5 I .40 I .60 .91 .05 .05 IE .07 .55 .09 .11 17 .03 .40 55 .05 .40' Y .36 .45 .20 H .28 KL .05 .40 TABLE 5a AS ABOVE,BIT REPLACING" RENEWAL WINDOWS i Wl 2 NDO 3 K1) 5 6 i 2 ROO 3 F(X2] i t 1 i :NTR i ANCI :(X3) i CO VER MATERIAL (X4) I .40 38 .01 j I 14 L k .09 5 1 i .11 3 4 5 6 n .60 .91 .07 .08 .40 .09 .05 .11 .29 .36 .62 .87 .06 11 .58 .13 .09 .87 31 D6 .22 56 .06 .11 .75 .67 .19 .15 .21 .17 .33 .11 .56 .11 IV V .03 .52 .55 .36 .05 A5 .14 .08 .06 .31 .46 .38 .33 .03 .22 37 .26 .50 .25 .03 .77 .08 .17 .27 .33 .11 .11 VI .28 .03 33 .11 .12 .11 .11 .11 w .05 14 .25 .38 .07 .11 - 7 2 -of the f i r s t time period i 0 e . up to 1908, 1908-17o More probable, the housing of 1910 vintage could represent the l a t t e r end of an e a r l i e r s t y l e rather than be the forerunner of the s t y l e s of 1912 boom housing. A l s o , an amalgamation between time V & VI f o r Window Type 5, and time IV & V f o r Type 4 rtoof and Type 4 entrance has t o be c a r r i e d out before the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s could be accepted on these grounds. With these modifica-t i o n s , chi-square t e s t s of a s s o c i a t i o n between the time-periods and the most frequent sub-types, as i n Table VI, show s i g n i f i c a n t associations at the ifo p r o b a b i l i t y l e v e l . 3.6 Combinations of facade element sub-types The previous s e c t i o n presented information showing to what extent any sub-type i s representative of one time period, and consequently how co n f i d e n t l y i t can be used as a c l a s s i f i c a t o r y device. However, the question of which of the various facade elements should be taken (since a l l have s i g n i f i c a n t accuracy) needs c l a r i f i c a t i o n i n order to avoid d i f f e r e n t c r i t e r i a being used at whim 0 One aspect of the data which has not yet been examined i s the time-period allegiances of s p e c i f i c combinations of element sub-types. I n Table V, values of 0.91 f o r c e l l (II,2) i n facade elements X^ and X^ should not be taken to imply that every time (2) occurs, then Xj(2) occurs. Such a s i t u a t i o n over the three main elements would be very de s i r a b l e , i . e . a perfect scalogram, but i n p r a c t i c e t h i s r a r e l y happens; inspection of the associations i n Figure 8 suggests a strong recurring pattern, although the frequency figures of Tables I I I , IV, & V have shown t h i s not e n t i r e l y the case. Table VII indicates the frequency of the- combinations found w i t h i n the sample, and again the clearest case i s that of the t members: -2,2,2 the ' i d e a l ' p i c t u r e i n terms of the descriptions of the previous chapter, comprise 56^ of the occurrences of that time period; 2,2,2, together with the window renewals 6,2,2, account f o r 63^ and the com--73-TABLE VI MOST FREQUENT SUBTYPES (GROUPED BY NON-ERROR>ERROR RULE) IN SPECIFIC TIME PERIODS WINE OW TIME \ MOST FREQUENT PERIOD \ SUBTYPE OCCURRENCES IN TIME PERIOD OCCURRENCES IN OTHER PERIODS T r j U L I OCCURRENCES J M L 6 10 j 1:2 33 3 36 111:3 11 9 20 IV: Z, 6 5 11 V. VI: 5 13 5 18 2 3 5 TOTAL 69 31 100 ROOF M 3 5 8 1:2 32 5 37 ffl:3 11 8 19 IV,V : k 20 k 2k VI.W :5 7 5 12 TOTAL 78 22 100 ENTRAh CE M 1 6 7 n :2 29 3 32 Eh 3 10 8 18 22 13 35 VI,W:5 1* k * 8 TOTAL 71 29 100 X = 19.35 df= 5 •p = <0.5>0.1 X1- 17.68 df= 4 P = <0.5>0.1 X = 21.74 df = i. p = <0.1 TABLE VD INCIDENCE OF THREE-ELEMENT COMBINATIONS BY TIME PERIODS 111 211 214 114 121 221 122 222 322 622 522 223 324 624 232 233 333 633 434 634 234 533 334 244 343 444 544 644 543 545 554 454 254 555 655 I 3 1 7 E 3 1 1 1 1 2 23 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 41 IE 1 1 1 5 3 1 1 1 1 1 16! IV 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 6 1 18 V « 3 3 1 2 1 1 2 — • VI 1 3 1 VI 1 2 31 3 1 1 3 2 1 2 24 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 5 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 9 4 1 1 3 4 1 1 4 2 100 KEY C o m b i n a t i o n s are in o rde r x y z where x= window s t y l e y= roo f z= ent rance --75-b i n a t i o n - any window, 2,2 - accounts f o r S i m i l a r i l y , any window type 3,3, accounts f o r % % of the c e l l s , with the remainder being single occurrences; and i n Time IV, 35% of the observations are -any window, 4,4. This l a s t category also accounts f o r 53fo of Time V, to be expected since the two time periods had to be combined t a give a majority of non-errors. 3.7 A p p l i c a b i l i t y to non-sample housing Before a summary of the various aspects of the key i s attempted, the "non-error" sub-type groups and three-element combinations i s o l a t e d above are applied to a d i f f e r e n t data s e t . Not randomly selected, these observations were made of 4 e n t i r e blocks w i t h i n the study area. The data i s presented i n ,scalogram , form i n P i g . 9, and expressed as c e l l frequencies i n Table V I I I . As before, the frequencies c a l c u l a t e d h o r i z o n t a l l y , Table IX, show that a p a r t i c u l a r time-period i s not uniquely represented by a single sub-type of an element; e.g. Windows 3 & 4 i n time IV, entrance 3 & 4 in- time I I I . I f the frequencies are c a l c u l a t e d v e r t i c a l l y , Table X, immediately i t can be seen that Window Type 3 extends appreciably over periods I I I and IV; s i m i l a r i l y Roof type 3 and Entrance type 3 between times I I to IV. More importantly, introducing the time-period/sub-type categories decided upon i n the previous a n a l y s i s , the e r r o r term f o r t h i s data set can be measured. The relevant s t a t i s t i c s are itemised i n Table X I , where i n e v i t a b l y error frequencies exceed those 'expected' i n : -Window 111,3 (IV being the most 'popular') Roof 111,3 (with the spread ei t h e r side, i n time I I and IV c o l l e c t i v e l y accounting f o r more than the expected period); and Entrance 111,3 (again time IV being i n the majority.) So whereas i n the random sample, these period/element sub-type X (3) categories were i n the s l i g h t majority, with the non-random sample they I VO C M C M C M C M C M C M C M C M C v J C M C M 0 4 ^ C M C V ' C M C M C ^ X X X X K X X X X X X X X X X X X X XX X X X X X i x x x x X X X XX X X X X XX X X X Ml X X X X X X X j x x x x X X X X X X X X X X X XX X X X x| X M X X X X X X X XX X X X X X X 4 CM CM C t v O V O V O V O V O O C M C M C M C M C M C M C M - «A CM v o OA N - c\! CJ\ t-A t _d-vo v o i ^ v o ^ o vo v o v o vo r~-' o v o VT \ r A K M M OJ v- K \ ^ IA n n T-i*3_ _ _ . _ , - - ,- - - - CM o \o VO VO vo v o VO VO vo vol OA ir\ fA c\j 65 £5 Ev) 65 vo 65 r - c^<o b o i vo tc £ EM B ~ J ' I f l M ) - t »A ^ U " \ ' C C K ^ t ^ C V J T- K"\ OJ VC1 ^ ^ i ^ W T i n ^ - C M <L, Cv K-» i-A f~i r>~\ CM CM CM CMf - C l !"A LT\VO t"- Ct) OA O i X X XX XX X X X X XX XX XX x x x x x x x x! XX X X X X NX X X X X XX x x x x x x i X X X x cS 65 to Id £ b <o 5 \ cr. tr\ 'N\ f c ^ > vo O <X> CO VO V- O 0 OA OA Ir, MM*-- OA h-vo o r^ - r~- ~T co co 1 o OA o. NA T- co CM O mCc co -d" -4 C vo v c vO O VO O ON 0\ ON OA O y O O < A r A M N'\ ^  S - M A f A eg CM CM CM MA CM i - CM ti~- UA VO IS*- CO OA G T- CM f-A -d ; IAVO r -< |S| --J- -rf-vo vo vo vo M> vo \o vo vo vo vo w r^ - r~- r— i— r^ - r^ - r- r~ co OA OA to G\G\O\ v-C s ] C J C M C M C M O J C V ! C M C v l C v ! O J C ^ X X X X X X M K X X M X X X X X X X X X X X X K X K X X X X X X H K X f X M X H X M X X X X X X X X X M X N X X X X X X X X X X X M M M X X X ' X M X X X X X M K X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X MX XXM X X X X X X X X M x x x X X X XX X x x x x x X X X XX X X X X X X X X X X X VO r- l - VO VO VO VC x- v N - ^ O V 3 \ £ ) \ O V D U ) V D v o VO VO VO v- i - CM VO VO t-te t - t-- _ >~ .- ^ _ CMVOVD b Co, tiS tnvo trS&N<c owo r ^ c v K N ^ o ^ Q - d - L r , - - . , . ^ „ „ - — 4 0 0 4 4 ^ v l ) O O Q 0 0 0 0 ^ 4 4 ^ ^ ^ W ) L . 5 0 C ^ O O O O O O O O O o ^ ^ C C ^ • -d- VC v l A ^ f n ^ t A C V I CM MA S c5 CrS6>SS En<5 Co, £3 oS _ . _, . , . ._ UAVO VO >A ~f ^ CM ^ 5^ CMVO UA -d" CM ^ ^ I > I ^ C S O A C O V O T- VO VD VO VO VO VO vB m in m OA m B Cr\ ^ b A ! CM CM CM CM f A f A i A r A r A t A t A ' ^ i ^ f ^ i ' A W CM CM CM Q r <M 4 UAVO r - C O OA Q v CM ro, -d" ITvVO CO OA O - i - CM MA -d" UAVD r - C O OA Q -r- CM HA - ± _d- JSITMOI in m m m m m tf\vo vo vo vo vo vovovovovo r ^ r " - ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ cococcco X K K X X X M X XXX: X X X X X < ^ ^ r ^ , ao J - 0> 3- \D \ D _I3 X X X K; M X I XX X Xi X X X X X X x x X C vo VO vo vo vo vo O N v - ± VD CM CO 0 vo v o 3- vO o M CM CM N-\ CM N% l A -77-TABLE vm INCIDENCE OF FACADE ELEMENT SUBTYPES BY TIME PERIODS (NON RANDOM SAMPLE) WINOO W 0 (1) R DOF( •X2) c E 1 NTR 9 ANCE 3 -(X3] 4 5 C OVE 2 * tot 3 i AL( 5 <4) 6 n i 2 2 18 3 3 t 1 5 2 6 4 i 2 2 21 3 7 k 3 I 1 z 19 5 5 3 19 1 4 2 1 30 i 2 1 7 3 4 4 11 1 1 3 6 8 6 4 3 4 17 17 1 4 16 10 1 4 8 27 1 11 25 1 5 23 4 2 1 36 I 1 3 3 1 2 4 1 4 2 2 2 3 7 VI.VO 1 4 2 7 3 4 2 4 1 7 5 23 28 14 13 14 2 26 26 30 12 1 22 23 45 6 6 30 32 18 5 6 97 TABLE K PROPORTION OF ELEMENT SUBTYPES IN SPECIFIC TIME PERIODS (NON RANDOM SAMPLE) WINDOW (XI) R00F(X2) E N T R A N C E D ) COVER M A T E R I A L S ) 1 I 2 I 3 I t I 5 | 6 1 1 2 1 3 I L | 5 1 | 2 | 3 | l | 5 1 | 2 | 3 | l | 5 | 6 n .06 .60 .10 .04 .06 .14 .07 .70 .23 .04 .64 .16 .16 .10 .64 .03 .13 .07 .03 in .12 .05 .41 .18 .24 .24 .65 .06 .05 18 .35 .47 .35 .23 19 .23 u .03 .11 .44 28 .03 11 .22 .75 .03 .31 .69 .03 .14 .64 .11 .05 .03 Y .14 .43 .43 14 .29 .57 .14 .57 .29 .29 .29 .42 .12 .66 .22 10 .43 .57 .30 .57 13 TABLE X PROPORTION OF SPECIFIC ELEMENT SUBTYPES THROUGH TIME (NON RANDOM SAMPLE) WINDOW (X1) (R00F(X2) E N T R A N C E D ) COVER M A T E R I A L S ) i 2 3 t 5 6 i 2 3 i. 5 i 2 3 i 5 2 3 L 5 e n .40 .78 .10 .07 .16 .29 1.0 .80 .27 1.0 .86 .22 11 .50 .63 .03 .22 .40 .17 i .40 .04 25 .23 .29 .16 .42 .03 .08 .14 .26 .18 .20 .13 .17 .56 LY .20 .18 .57 71 .08 .29 .31 .90 .08 .48 55 .17 .17 .72 .22 .40 .17 Y .04 .22 .23 .04 .07 .30 .04 .09 .33 .33 .06 .17 w .04 .30 13 .54 .07 .64 .06 .22 20 -78-TABLE XI TEST OF MOST FREQUENT SUBTYPES/TIME PERIOD CATEGORIES FOR NON RANDOM SAMPLE DATA WINDOW TIME \MOST FREQIOTJ PERIOD \ SUBTYPES OCCURRENCES OCCURRENCES TOTAL IN. TI ME PER10BIN OTHER PERIODS OCCURREIICES j 1 = 1 . . . . . | _ j 0 ! 5 I 5 I 1: 2 22 5 i 27 I I: 1 3 11 21 32 IV: 4 10 | 4 14 V.YI: 5 7 I 6 13 VD= 6 1 5 6 TOTAL 51 46 97 ROOF I 1 .0 1 2 1 2 1 II 2 21 5 26 I 3 11 15 26 IV. V 4 29 1 30 VI,W • 5 7 6 13 TOTAL 68 29 97 ENTRANCE r :1 0 1 1 I :2 19 3 I 22 • 1 = 3 6 17 23 IV.V : 4 29 16 45 vi.vn : 5 4 2 6 TOTAL 58 39 -97 2 0 . 8 2 df = 5 p =<0.1 X s 27.43 d< = I* p = <0.1 6.1 df = 4 P =<10 -79-are i n the minority - p a r t i c u l a r i l y Windown and Entrance Type 3, which have a greater r e l a t i o n to time IV housing than i n t u i t i v e l y expected. This suggests that e i t h e r the Type 3 sub-types f o r a l l elements are ones which are celebrated over a long time span, or that the non-random blocks are a t y p i c a l of the o v e r a l l population. As a v i s u a l measure of the s i m i -l a r i t y or otherwise of the sub-type/time period occurrences i n both sample sets, the proportions of each sub-type occurring i n the expected time p e r i o d were c a l c u l a t e d and p l o t t e d , as i n P i g . 10. Maintaining i t s dependabiltiy i s the 11,2 c e l l i n a l l three elements, which are concentrated close to the diagonal and very close to the upper end. At the other end of the sc a l e , 1,1 i s i n e v i t a b l y d i s t r i b u t e d v e r t i c a l l y up the y axis due to the absence of houses i n t h i s time period w i t h i n the 4-tlock non-random observations. I l l , 3 of a l l elements are close together, although lower down the slope than hoped f o r , and biased i n the d i r e c t i o n of the random sample a x i s . The spread of the Type k sub-types i s l e s s concentrated than the others:, but the high ' r e p r o d u c i b i l i t y * of the Roof component i s the redeeming feature; Window Types 5 & 6 were almalgamated i n order to represent the youngest elements uniformly 0 To complete the same examination stages as were c a r r i e d out on the f i r s t data set, the r e l a t i v e frequencies of combinations of element sub-types i n any period were summed, and presented i n Table XIIo The major discrepancies are i n the time IV occurrence of the 3>3,3 combination (hitherto confidently associated with time I I I ) . Also f o r comparison between data sets, the a s s o c i a t i o n of s p e c i f i c element permutations with a p a r t i c u l a r time period have been ca l c u l a t e d , and areshown i n Table XIII. What conclusions can be drawn from these s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t forms of data d e s c r i p t i o n and analysis? The i n t e n t i o n has been.- to attempt to i s o l a t e c r i t i c a l elements, sub-types and combinations of sub-types which w i l l i n d i c a t e a p a r t i c u l a r house's period of construction i n a r e l a t i v e l y -80-FIGURE 10 ASSOCIATION BETWEEN RANDOM & NON RANDOM SAMPLE SETS IY OCCURRENCE OF EXPECTED TIME PERIOD/ ELEMENT SUBTYPE CATEGORIES 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.6 1.0 NON-RANDOM SAMPLE • WINDOW • ROOF • ENTRANCE TABLE 501 INCIDENCE OF THREE ELEMENT COMBINATIONS BY TIME PERIOD (NONRANDOM SAMPLE) 214 122 222 622 522 223 324 322 624 424 233 333 633 533 433 634 534 334 434 344 444 644 244 143 4 (.3 545 154 454 354 554 555 454 555J ! r 1 1 1 14 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 |29l N 1 1 1 t 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 2 1 1 -4— 17 IV 2 3 1 1 1 3 9 8 3 2 1 1 1 — I — !36 V 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17 ' 1 2 2 2J7 1 1 2 14 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 5 7 1 2 1 4 2 4 3 8 3 2 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 3 1 2 (97 -82-TABLE XIII COMPARISON OF SAMPLE SETS BY ELEMENT COMBINATIONS IN SPECIFIC TIME PERIODS r i t j ELEMENT SUBTYPE COMBINATIONS T~OF PERIOD OBSERVATIONS ACCOUNTED FOR j RANDOM SAMPLE * NON RANDOM SAMPLE J 2,2,2 56 . 4 n-| ; 6or2,2,2 63 55 j a.2,2 71 61 | _ _ _« I _ _ i JL • a,2,a 76 70 l 4 3,3,3 31 18 1 in 6or3 J 3^  3 50 I 2u 1 56 35 j a,3,a 61 65 j a,3,3 11 17 rv 33 22 1 a,k,L 55 61 r a A a ! 69 75 V | 55 I 0 * KEY Combinations aro in order x ) 2 whore x= window stylo )= roof z = entrance •• a(x)= any. window subtype a(2) = any_ entranco subtype - 8 3 -accurate form0 The analysis now turns to consideration of particular groupings of elements into styles based upon the results of the analysis above. Footnotes Since every house i n the study area was post-1900, the Y values could conveniently be two figures, the 1 9 . . being understood. Difficulties w i l l arise i n a fuller study which includes observations of pre-1900 housing. By using age of house (to retain two numbers), care would have to be taken to warn readers to add 'n* years on to the actual year the research was donej although an 1890 house would be 82 years old i n 1972, a reader of the work i n say 1975 would have to take this passage of time into account. ^It i s widely held that a l l the expected frequencies should be greater than 5 for a chi-square test to be reliable. The relaxed assumptionsg suggested by C0SHMN,W.&., "Some methods of strengthening the common X tests',1 Biometrioa. Vol.10,(1934),417-51, (allowing a minimum expectation of 1, i f one c e l l out of five, two cells out of ten,etc. are below the rule of 5) are not f u l f i l l e d however. Therefore, with a small sample size and small marginal frequencies, the method for dealing with such contingency tables described by MAXV7ELL,A.E., Analysing Qualitative Data.London:Methuen.1961.p.38-44 were adopted to doublecheck the results reported above. The relevant c r i t i c a l ratio, CE. = tfc~(y?$ , (where E(X ) is the exact mean and V(X ) is the exact variance) was calculated and treated as a normal deviate with mean of zero and standard deviation of unity. Values of 16.47, 20.63, and 11.36 for window, roof and entrance respectively are therefore extremely significant (p<0.0l), and cover material (C.R. =2.13) i s significant at the 5% level. ^This figure would have undoubtably been higher were i t not for the inclusion of combination 1,1,1 and variations of this - these would ideally be i n the f i r s t group, but for reasons discussed i n the next chapter are i n time IIo -84-CHAPIKR. 4 . CLASSIFICATION Off VEBHA.CULAB. STYLES APPLICABLE TO VANCOUVER HOUSING-4.1 What type of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n ? One c r i t i c i s m of the analysis above could be that examination of the two 'scalogram-type 1 data presentations might suggest c e r t a i n categories or c u t t i n g points which minimise the e r r o r term more e f f e c t i v e l y than the c u t t i n g points already imposed. However, some degree of con-sistency i s e s s e n t i a l , f o r although one might see groupings, e.g., f o r X ( A ) l = 1910-20 there might also be, f o r X ( B ) l = 1910-15 2 = 1921-24 2 = 1916-22 3 = 1925-31 3 = 1923-28 4 = 1929-36 i n which case, where i s the cross-checking (which _is provided by the approach adopted i n the previous chapter)? The use of c u t t i n g points external to the data i t s e l f , leading to deuctive g e n e r a l i s a t i o n s , with measurable confidence l e v e l s , would seem more desirable than an inductive c l a s s i f i c a t i o n which has l i t t l e across-the-board d u p l i c i t y and confirmatory power. Another point needing discussion i s that although the s t y l e books and a r c h i t e c t u r a l h i s t o r i e s might i n d i c a t e a c e r t a i n 2,2,2j 3,3,3 e t c . schema which might represent the " c l a s s i c " examples of p a r t i c u l a r s t y l e s , there i s a need f o r awareness of the divergences from these i d e a l s . Table X I I I was one way of showing t h i s , with r e s o l u t i o n increasing as the i d e a l combinations T/ere modified -f i r s t by a slackening of the window type s p e c i f i c a t i o n s , and then of both the window and entrance s t y l e s - thus a r r i v i n g at the measure of accuracy r e f e r r e d to i n Tables VI and I X 0 The i n t e n t i o n of the a n a l y s i s , f o l l o w i n g Solomon, e t c , has been to y i e l d general s t y l e s from the more d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n s . I n i t i a l l y , the data c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were observations of a possible 22 sub-types of 4 elements, over 70 years which were c l a s s i f i e d i n t o -85-7 periods. One could point to the position reached hy the end of the last chapter - 3 element sub-type combinations over 4 time periods - and conclude that the progressive 'concessions* made i n order to isolate valid classificatory rules have removed any value of the exercise. In that case, i t might be appropriate to refer back to the study con-ducted by Riekert on the housing of the H 0E 0 United States, who was pleased to find that his key could be used successfully to allocate the construction period, within one period type error, i n 95fo of the cases. The scale of focus i n the Vancouver study i s by intention more detailed, and i t seemed useful to begin at least at a complex level with a multitude of sub-elements„ Hopefully these appear as changes on a uni-dimensional scale, and through a simple grouping procedure, an attempt i s made te reach a classificatory strength of useful and wor-kable proportions. It i s essential to admit and acknowledge that overlap does occur, that errors are inevitable, and then ask what level of error is acceptable. In traditional grouping procedures , proceeding from many to few regions or classes, there is a progressive gain i n generality and a progressive loss i n definitions (Fig. 11) The underlying intention is summarised as attempting to minimise within-group variance and to maxi-mise between group variance, working inductively towards the best set of groups to describe effectively the universe. If, however, the groups had been isolated at the outset (through the building cycle data), then the classification exercise i s working i n the opposite direction; the process seems to one of amalgamation to increase the resolution of the key, by decreasing the error term i n order to improve the classificatory power. A small error term achieved at the expense of too broad class boundaries and deliminators may be of minimal value, with a much finer (narrower) distinction required, but i t may be well to state and Complete d e t a i l CD o (0 cr H O » CO H-P p, CD cf-{0 F -H i o S<5 Complete g e n e r a l i t y -98-- 8 7 -illustrate ike different levels of grouping possible. I f i t emerges that the four facade elements and a l l their sub-types cannot usefully describe reasonable discrete groupings along the time-dimension because of wide fluctuations, haziness, and overlap of styles, then this should be accepted as valid conclusion, despite the low immediate payoff involved i n upholding a null hypothesis» Alternatively, the presentation of specific descriptions, with attached probability labels, provides at least an informed base for future work and cues of increasing the resolution of the key, rather than intuitive notions to which are attached greater credibility and r e l i a b i l i t y than objective analysis would suggest, Greig-Smith ( 1 9 6 4 , p , 1 5 8 - 2 0 9 ) , i n discussing techniques of summarising and ordering information i n plant ecology, distinguishes two different approaches. Fi r s t l y classification, involving arranging information into classes whose members have a number of common charac-teristics which set them apart from members of other classes. There i s an implication of discontinuity i n composition, not only between concrete units i n the f i e l d , but also between abstract classes into which a l l vegetation may be place. Ordination.on the other hand, stems from the concept of vegetation as a continumj consequently i t implies continuous variation i n composition and any discontinuity i n the f i e l d corresponds to discontinuity i n the determining factors. So i n the case of the housing, along a continuum of year-by-year housing stock, the determining factors of element categorisation would be responsible for the discontinuities i n the observations. The danger of classification i s that the, techniques involved may result i n an overemphasis of discontinuities, ignoring the reality of stylistic transitions and thus diminishing the credibility and u t i l i t y of the exercise. Ordination, however, will expose any discontinuities - 8 8 -i n composition as an integral part of the exercise while at the same time maintaining the concept of continuum^, 4 . 2 Resurrection of architectural labels Consequently, reiterating the statement made earlier i n this chapter, i t is essential to acknowledge that combinations other than 2,2 ,2; 3 , 3 , 3 @tc. exist, and not insist on a classificatory (rigid) approach--. These ideal combinations can act as the firm foundation, however, and i f one progresses from these i t i s possible to build towards vernacular labels i n several ways0 Already, following Fig. 1 2 a , we have several amalgamations, i n which as a f i r s t step, renewal windows ( 6 ) are added to 2 , 2 , 2 ; then any windows, 2 , 2 - and fi n a l l y any window or any porch with a Type 2 roofo Similarily, we have grouped various combinations of Type 3 / time III characteristics, as i n Pig. 1 2 b . In both cases, there is less error but equally less specification as one moves to the larger groupings It can be seen that some of the a,2,a could be 3 , 2 , 3 and that some of the a,3,a could well be 2 , 3 , 2 ; thus there i s the problem of how to distinguish or incorporate the two overall groupings which i n fact are part of one larger uniform unite Whiffen (1969) i n describing the characteristics of the bungalow-style house, noted that Wilson used nine different types of bungalow in his book and so he suggests the overall label BUNGALOID to describe these variations. Thus i t would be possible to combine the groups i n F i g 0 1 2 a , which could best be described under the label SWISS CHALET, and Fig,. 12b possibly aa BUNGALOW PB.0FER, to give a grouping of houses called Bungaloid, Fig. 1 2 c , most frequent i n the Kitsilano district of Vancouver i n the period 1 9 0 8 - 2 4 . Whiffen saw the zenith of the Bungalow-style as being between - 8 9 -2,2,2 6,2,2 a,2,2 a,2,a FIG-. 1 2a 3,3,3-6 ,3 ,3 " a,3,3" a, 3, a -FIG-. 1 2b 2,2,2 6,2,2 3n a,2,2-a,2,a-3,3,3 3,3—1 ,3,3—H—, a,3,3-a,3,a-SWISS CHALET BUNGALOW PB.OPERI BUNGALOID FIG-. 1 2e FIGURE 12: Grouping of Type 2 and Type 3 element c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s under BUNGALOID l a b e l - 9 0 -1900 and 1920 but i t s presence i n Vancouver reflects a somewhat different popularity; this may well be due to diffusion rates across the pol i t i c a l and/or cultural boundary, justifying the sentiment stated at the end of the f i r s t chapter of not being able to accept dates and styles for the Vancouver case by using American architectural histories 0 The two distinct styles occupy relatively unique time periods; the sizable two to two-and-a-half storey Swiss Ghalet house is identified 2 largely with the 1912 boom$ whereas the smaller, single-storey "Bungalow Proper" did not reach general Vancouver popularity until the period 1 9 2 0 - 2 4 , as i s well illustrated by Plate 2 1 . This style does occur i n the 1912 boom however, as observations No. 9 - 1 3 , 2 2 , 2 6 i n P i g o 9 illustrate, and by this general label bungaloid i t i s now possible to circumvent the problems caused by the overlap of element sub-types into different time periods, which has hindered preceding classification* This overlap is schematically illustrated i n Pig. 1 2 d , which accords the bulk of each of the two building peaks to one of the two styles individually, but at the same time acknowledges the presence of both i n the other time, especially i n the case of the Bungalow Proper. These can now be seen as the forerunners of the general change to smaller houses i n the early 1 9 2 0 's, with the larger house not being built after 1918 to 1 9 2 0 . The ways i n which these two styles merge and transform leads to the question of how to incorporate these st y l i s t i c transitions within the general classification: by defined intermediate classes or by regarding them as unavoidable random fluctuations? The easiest way of describing these is to use Wilson's own expression for these houses - "the house that i t is not a bungalow though built along bungalow lines" (Whiffen, 1970, p.221). Thus the house illustrated PLATE 21: 2?0Q block West 5 t h Avenue ( a l l 1920-1) 92-i n Plate 22, basieally an A-frame with dormer windows on the sides, can be seen as an intermediate case, found i n 1912 alongside forerunner bungalow^proper,, (Plate 23), and also i n smaller versions of the Swiss Chalet at the 1920 end of i t s popularity. Returning to the linkage tree, focussing on the Type 4 and time IV combinations, the procedure can be repeated, this time working from a less sound base. Again, the a,4,a could well be 3,4,3 and the dilemna of how to group i s well illustrated by the houses shown i n Plate 24. Here there Is a perceptible transition from one style to the other, even though the roof shape of the l e f t hand house belies i t s true age, and the middle of the three, although of a later date i n a l l four elements has essentially the same plan as the 1922 Bungalow Proper on the right. As a result of this and other cases of gradual change, should one group the Type 4 with the houses already embraced by the Bungaloid ideal as i n Pig. 13? Aa alternative argument could point to the frequencies of particular sub-types i n the various tables and descriptions of the last section and suggest that the data characteristics, rather than "in situ" inspection, show a greater complimentarity with the Type 5/time V groupings (i.e. the fact that time periods IV & V had to be grouped to provide a greater number of non-errors than errors i n each element and that the a,4,4, combination accounted for 56$ of the observed combinations i n time V.) This would therefore suggest that another generalised grouping should be made which combines the Type 4 and 5 element sub-type styles. There is a certain reticence by the writer to attach labels to both of these 'styles' i n the abscence of respectable architectural history labels. However, the descriptions of roof styles i n Type 4, distinguishing snub-nosed, tudor-triamgle cross gables, and gothick did suggest a "picturesque" influence, and so could be labelled as showing COTTA&E-LIKE characteristics. If, i n addition, the rather small houses PLATE 2 3 : A-Erame 1912 ( l e f t ) and forerunner 1 9 1 2 Bungalow Proper ( r i g h t ) - 9 4 -PLATE 24: T r a n s i t i o n from Bungalow Proper to ? : examples from 3300 block West 2nd Avenue -95-SWISS CHALET BUNGALOW PROPER TYPE 4 ELEMENTS FIGURE 13o Possible extension to incorporate housing of l a t e 1920's? SWISS CHALET BUNGALOW PROPER BUNGALOID COTTAGE-LIKE BOXES BIJOU FIGURE 14. Main categories of study area housing. Shingle s t y l e G-reek Revival Cubic e tc. SWISS CHALET -TWO STOREY BUNGALOW PROPER• COTTAGE BOXES SINGLE STOREY FIGURE 15. Possible' d i v i s i o n i n t o two and single s t o r i e d s t r u c t u r e s , acknowledging connections with e a r l i e r housing,, -96-characterised by pyramidal roof, l i t t l e or no entrance ( -the 4,5*5; 5,5,4 etc. combinations) could be labelled rather uncomplimentarily as BOXES, then i t is possible to group the two under a larger t i t l e , whieh might effectively be called BIJOU. This latter label allows the inclusion of many houses not explicitly covered by the precise element allegiances of.the previous chapter, but which are definitely of such a genus, as the presence of hipped roofs and dummy side-wall extensions i n the houses of Plate 25 suggests. Solomon and &©odhand (1965) working i n Tasmania, found only a single style, 'Contemporary' after the 'Bungalow' period, "Mainly box-like and low roofed, the facade broden only by a small, central oantilevered poroh®. (p.19) Tke enlarged tree branches out as represented i n Fig. 14 which represents the most effective summary of the data gathered i n the Kitsilano study area, consisting mainly of housing built within the period 1910-1945• However, i f someone were to apply these conclusxons to areas of the ©ity other than West Kitsilano, would they achieve satisfactory results? 4»3 Extension and modification of the general grouping Considering the descriptions of general architectural styles, both high and vernacular, i t would appear that some modification would have t© be made i n the linkages of Fig. 14 i f earlier houses were studied. The position of the 1,1,1 combinations i s rather weak as the analysis ©f the previous chapter suggested. Certainly, within the 1912 stock, there is evidence ©f styles attributed by Bickert and others to earlier time-periods. Thus ©ne has to explain or at least incorporate the presence of Cubic, Queen Anne and Greek Revival housing. Plate 26 both illustrates the problem and also provides possible explanation. Cubic housing, with the square dormer in the hipped roof giving i t a distinctive style, (Plate 26a), and also the plain gable of the 'terraced' housing of the MacDonald Street and Stephens Street area (Plate 26b) are seen 3506 & 3512 West 10th Avenue: 1928 3505 & 3509 West 11th Avenue: 194-1 PLATE 25: I l l u s t r a t i o n s showing overlap" of facade-element categories to unite time IV and time V housingo PLATE 26: Examples of s t y l e s found w i t h i n K i t s i l a n o study area (upper p l a t e s ) , and views of West End housing, which suggests e a r l i e r c u l t u r a l age f o r the s t y l e s . -99-to be part of an earlier fashion (see Plate 26o,d showing West End housing). So, despite their 1912 historical age, they are of an earlier period i n terms of cultural age0 Consequently, i t would seem reasonable 3 to view the Kitsilano presence of these styles as the relics ©f an earlier construction period which would be used for the cheaper housing of- a later boom, since i t s 'dated' appearance would only satisfy the demands of a partieular class of people. Returning to Ihiffen again, the one other rather vernacular style to which he gives reasonable attention i s labelled the Western Stiok Style, whose characteristics include:-. o . t a l l proportions with high steep roofs, frequently of complex plan and irregular silhouette; the eaves are of con-siderable projections and are supported by large brackets; often there is exposed framing i n the gable-end of a roof• Verandas are extensive, their roofs being carried i n posts with diagonal braces. (Whiffen, 19&9, p0109) This description would help to place the styles mentioned above, by identifying a transitional area between the Shingte Style proper (Sculley, 1955) and the Swiss Ghalet type bungalow of the 1910's0 The period i n question i s very much that of the formative years of the city, with rapid fluctuations caused by many inputs from new arrivals, and so i t seems hardly surprising that several architectural styles should be simultaneously i n vogue, even i f they would be described as quite distinct entities i n more conventional architectural schema. Accordingly, i n addition to Cubic and Greek Revival, mention must be made of §ueen Anne, Eastlake and Gingerbread, not to forget other types of Gothic Revival styles prevalent i n a very eclectic period:- "Towers, turrets, battlements, gingerbread work, monkey-puzzle trees, clipped hollies, and Chinese houseboys sprouted a l l over the West End." (Morley, 1969, p. 119) -100-Whiffen describes Queen Anne as having ... irregularity of plan and massing, and variety of colour and texture ... roofs are high and multiple, their ridges meeting at right angles; the round or polyagonal turret is a feature of the later phase. (Whiffen, 1969, p . H 5 ) and Plate 27 illustrates some good examples i n the Vancouver context. Also, those houses with whieh we are familiar due to their fascinating fretwork detail i n brackets, angles, etc., and usually interpreted as Gingerbread^ are also known as Eastlake. Whiffen provides the description of how the English Victorian architect and interior designer Charles L. Eastlake who inadvertently and unintentionally lent his name to the style using carving, fretwork, et©., as a result of the huge success©f his books in America in the l880's. Characteristically, ... most Eastlake buildings would be classified as Stick Style ©r Queen Anne i f they were not transmogrified by a distinctive type of ornament. This ornament i s largely the product of the chisel, the gouge, and the lathe (and thus fundamentally different from the two-dimensional gingerbread of the scroll saw. (Whiffen, 1969, p.123) Both Eastlake and Gingerbread can be seen in West End housing, and the example shown i n Plate 28 is located i n Eairview 0 Consideration of a l l these styles, which do find expression i n the 1912 stock, suggest that the Swiss Chalet type - although obviously connected with the Bungalow Proper through i t s very promotion i n Wilson's book, etc. - is at the same time a continuation of some of the styles prevelant i n the last quarter of the 19th century. As such, i t might be necessary to modify the 'tree' to recognise this; one could identify tw© major groupings, as i n Fig. 15, i n which there i s a significant break around 1920 between the two- or more- storey structures of the Shingle and Stick Styles and the smaller Bungalow, Cottage and Bijou plans of a later date. At the other end of the time-period covered ±n the Kitsilano analysis, the b i j o u - s t y l e housing would merge, i n the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , with the s p l i t --102' PLATE 28: 1301 West 7 th Avenue: Eastlake/Gingerbread -103-l e v e l and ranch houses of South Vancouver i n the l a t e 1950*s, the low form of most recent new housing (e.g. Plates 29 and 37c), and the compact nature of the replacement housing now appearing i n the Point Grey Area (Plate 30). I n a d d i t i o n , mention would have to be made of structures such as the l a r g e r swellings (incorporating carports) t y p i c a l of much suburban expansion i n Richmond, and the low slung, angular, glass and wood houses 5 of the Britxsh- Properties development. i l t h o u g h i n d i v i d u a l houses continue to show the t r a d i t i o n a l differences i n f i n e r d e t a i l , there appears to have been a trend towards uniformity and standardisation of design, which would seem to r e f l e c t the i n c r e a s i n g amount of speculative b u i l d i n g p r a c t i s e d on a l a r g e r (areal) scale by i n d i v i d u a l property developers. This would be i n contrast to the f a r smaller scale of operation i n the f i r s t t h i r t y years of the century; there may have been only a few patterns used even then, but the f a c t that one r a r e l y sees an e n t i r e s t r e e t b u i l t i n the same s t y l e at one time (other than P l a t e 21) at l e a s t gives the impression of small scale operation. Often the t h i r d and f o u r t h house i n a series on a s t r e e t would be b u i l t a f t e r the f i r s t two had been s o l d , etc., and the street would remain u n f i l l e d f o r several years i f the p l o t l a s t b u i l t on was a long time being s o l d , and also i f the housing market changed. So, i n a d d i t i o n to the smallness of i n d i v i d u a l contractors' oper-a t i o n s , accounting f o r the v a r i e d nature of the r e s i d e n t i a l streetscape, there i s the f a c t o r of consumer preference and the market mechanism. Currently, with the change of r e s i d e n t i a l consumer preference t o rented accomodation rather than the s i n g l e family residence (at l e a s t i n the Inner C i t y ) , any c l a s s i f i c a t i o n would have to include the c o n t r i b u t i o n of apartment buildings-. H i s t o r i c a l l y , they .seem to have been just l a r g e r versions of the current designs, e.g„ as i n P l a t e 31, but also purpose-designed, as suggested i n P l a t e 32<, Three-storey walk-up apartments -104-PLATE 29: Low form of 1950's housing: 3561 Y/.11th(l953), l e f t , ( a n d a 1912 Swiss Chalet type on r i g h t ) . PLATE 30: Second generation housing: 2855 W.11th Avenue, l e f t , ( a n d a e a r l y 1940's box on right),, -106-appeared r e l a t i v e l y e a r l y i n the West End^ but would not have been i n demand 7 i n the K i t s i l a n o area, then a p e r i p h e r a l l o c a t i o n . The 1946-47 CMC p u b l i c housing on Fourth Avenue (Plate 33) and Broadway, e a s i l y recognised by the window types and facade- cover, was overtaken by an in c r e a s i n g amount of pr i v a t e apartment b u i l d i n g i n the 1960*s which has transformed considerable Q areas of East K i t s i l a n o 0 The tree diagram of F i g . 16 now i s extended to cover the majority of the main s t y l e s , with speculative i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s attached to both ends of the c e n t r a l groups. Argument over the stages of grouping - should Swiss Chalet be i n with Shingle and.Stick, even though i t i s also Bungaloid?; should Cottage go with Bungalow rather than Boxes?; Boxes with S p l i t - l e v e l ? , e t c - are p o s s i b l e , and f u r t h e r research could p o s s i b l y focus on which are the most meaningful groups 0 From the viewpoint of family s i z e or volume of enclosed space (as a measure of p o t e n t i a l conversion capacity f o r s u i t e s , rented rooms, e t c ) then Swiss Chalet might be more e f f e c t i v e l y included with the e a r l i e r housing,, This i s a point to be taken up l a t e r , (p 0 126), but at t h i s stage, a summary tree grouping and d e s c r i p t i o n i s provided, as i n P l a t e 34, which concludes the main part of the a n a l y s i s 0 To some extent, t h i s typology requires a c e r t a i n amount of a r c h i t e c t u r a l 'eye' on the part of the reader, as the s e v e r i t y of facade sub-element c e l l s and combinations of these needs mod i f i c a t i o n by a l a y e r of g e n e r a l i t y and s u b j e c t i v i t y i n order f o r i t to be of any widespread use. R e c a l l i n g the review of current computer techniques f o r c l a s s i f y i n g facade elements, (p . 2 0 ) , the present consensus i s that i t i s desirable to c l a s s i f y a f t e r the data has been c o l l e c t e d , with no on-the-spot c a t e g o r i s a t i o n or attachment of l a b e l s 0 Yet there are many instances, p a r t i c u l a r l y f i e l d excursions as part of the teaching process, when i t i s not r e a l l y u s e f u l to record a,y,z, and then walk on; to be able to make an on-the-spot decision as to a house's occurrence i n time period t , or say that the example i s i n d i c a t i v e of s t y l e P, may w e l l be inoee -107-Eastlake Gingerbread Transition Transition Greek Revival Gothic Revival Queen Anne SWISS CHALET Transition —I BUNGALOW PROPER Snub-nosed Gable "Tudor Triangles" C O T T A G E LIKE BOXES SHINGLE STYLE BUNGALOID BIJOU LONG, LOW RANCH SPLIT-LEVEL 1 TWO STOREY CARPORT CMHC PUBLIC HOUSING THREE-STOREY WALK-UP HIGH-RISES APARTMENTS FIGURE 16. Suggested linkage tree for the spectrum of Vancouver vernacular forms N.B.not a photo version of Fig,l6$ previous photos showed Queen Anne, Cubic, and variants of Swiss Chalet and Bungalow Proper. Readers should also r e f e r to Figs.1-3, which placed the element sketches i n a s t y l e context. PLATE 34: Examples of vernacular s t y l e s i l l u s t r a t e d i n Fig.16 a) Swiss Chalet: complex dormer; overhanging porch supported with stone p i e r s ; type 2 windows; side bay-window. b) Bungalow Proper: portico-type porch;plain gable; side bay-w, c) "Snub-nosed": very good examples of 1928-30 s t y l e . d) r . Late 'cottage 1: steeper r o o f j c r o s s gable;curved window arches;small porch; c.1938. 1. Box: hipped roof; Type 5 windows; indented porch. - 1 0 9 -important. So i f the exercise does need some subjective f e e l f o r the observation',, at l e a s t one has already acknowledged the l e v e l of accuracy attached to the category, and that there i s the knowledge that behind the general p i c t u r e there i s a series of amalgamations which account f o r the e s s e n t i a l s t y l e and i t s modifications. 4 ' . 4 Areas f o r improvement Further work w i l l h o pefully i s o l a t e f i n e r d i v i s i o n s . Returning to the example of the p o s s i b l e need to d i s t i n g u i s h 1912-boom housing from the l a t e r 1 9 2 0 ' s accretions, the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n at present i s unable to d i s t i n g u i s h a 1 9 1 2 Bungalow Proper from the core of i t s class somewhere i n the e a r l y 1 9 2 0 ' s ; even i f a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of element sub-types had c o r r e c t l y i d e n t i f i e d a Type 2 1 9 1 2 window, then the rules of the c l a s i f c a t i o n would have to include i t i n time I I I due to the other two element c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ( 2 , 3 , 3 ) . There i s no advantage to be gained by slackening the r u l e , s t a t i n g that a Type 2 window overrules a Type 3 roof, as the reverse observation can be f6und i n 1 9 2 2 housing, i . e . a Type 2 window amd Type 3 roof and entrance. Obviously other delineators would be welcome. One possible source could come through d e t a i l e d examination of by-law s p e c i f i c a t i o n s ; e.g. there appears to be evidence that the water f a l l - p i p e was ••. external u n t i l a 1 9 1 7 by-law, a f t e r which time i t was e i t h e r incorporated i n t o the w a l l or was external. Recording of d e t a i l s such as t h i s , and measurement of other features such as chimney, door, external b u i l d i n g s , (mentioned i n passing, p . 4 6 ) could provide f a r t h e r grounds f o r d e l i n e a t i o n . " : . A f t e r t h i s , non-external elements might be the only way to increase r e s o l u t i o n , but t h i s would depend on the amount of information needed and the purpose of the work. Already there appears to be a redundancy of information, and there are enough problems i n t r y i n g to weight each of the four elements used here by the .-• appropriate amount. I t can be seen that the renewal features shown e a r l i e r i n P l a t e 1 3 would not -110-hinder a correct c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , due e s p e c i a l l y to the way i n which the roof s t y l e remains constant,* and even i n cases l i k e P l a t e 35, the two storeys do not detract from the hipped roof, hexagonal hall-window and metal-frame Type 5 window, and the stucco cover, a l l which would date the house c o r r e c t l y as being e a r l y 1940's vintage. As a f i n a l note, mention should be made of the c l a r i t y of the d e s c r i p t i o n of Chapter 2 and of the master f i e l d guide. Within the ac t u a l descriptions of sub-types i n Chapter 2 , there were several a r b i t r a r y a l l o c a t i o n s of sub-types i n t o d i f f e r e n t periods; e.g. the entrance Type 2 and 3 with p o r t i c o being a f u n c t i o n of the number of f l o o r s i n the house, and the s i m i l a r i t y of Type 3 window s t y l e s with some of those found i n 1912 housing. Are the a r b i t r a r y statements too confusing f o r the key to be used by fieldworkers? Obviously, i t depends i n part on the extent to which the study has to be accurate - again, i s i t an on-the-spot d e c i s i o n as part of another purpose, or i s the d e t a i l e d record necessary? I f i t i s the former;^ then one can res o r t to a s s o c i a t i o n along the l i n e s of " i s n ' t e xactly one, but b u i l t along s i m i l a r l i n e s " . I n the l a t t e r case, i t i s important to know which sections of the key are somewhat ambiguous. 9 The key was p i l o t e d by f i v e persons ; agreement was encouragingly high, and only seven misinterpretations out of one hundred observations were recorded,, These were, as expected, i n the t r a n s i t i o n from a shallow p l a i n gable of the Bungalow Proper to a f a r steeper gable of some of the Type 4 roofing, and there, one could only resort to the general 'vernacular' s t y l e - Bungalow Proper or Cottage? cS i m i l a r i l y , the t r a n s i t i o n from an e x p l i c i t , d e f i n i t e and strong entrance to a more p a r t i a l cover (e.g. the house i n the foreground of the f r o n t i s p i e c e photograph, p . x i i ) i s d i f f i c u l t to judge, e s p e c i a l l y i f the supports are s l i g h t ; considerable time was spent i n debate over t h i s p o i n t 0 More widespread use of the key would po s s i b l y suggest ways i n which the -111-PLATE 35: 3581 West 11th Avenue 1940 two-storey house. -112-categories could be made more e x p l i c i t . The analysis next considers some of the ways i n which t h i s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , developed to a s a t i s f a c t o r y l e v e l , can be used i n geographical research. Footnotes. 1 See, f o r example, HAGGETT, P..Location Analysis i n Human Geography, London:Arnold,1965,p.254-58; GRIG&, D.B.,"Regions, models and c l a s s e s " , i n CHORLEY, R.J. & HAGGETT, P.,(op. c i t . ) , 1 9 6 7 ; HARVEY, D.,1$6$,op. cit.,p.326-49-2 I n a d d i t i o n to the f a c t that family s i z e was l a r g e r then than now, and there was a greater number of resident domestic servants, a f u r t h e r reason f o r the great p o p u l a r i t y of the l a r g e s t plans i n the Wilson (and other) pattern books could have been the r e l a t i v e shortage of a v a i l a b l e housing or cleared subdivisions, which might have encouraged the continuance of f a m i l y kinships among new s e t t l e r s , e.g. the married c h i l d r e n l i v i n g under the same roof. The same conditions might not have been prevelant by the e a r l y 1920's, thus a s h i f t to smaller designs. ^ I t i s important to see that s t y l e s are not absolute. Like a l l f ashion, be i t h a i r s t y l e , clothes, f u r n i t u r e or house design, the s t y l e continues to be subscribed to long a f t e r the passing of the main p o p u l a r i t y , often supplying the needs of a lower section of the community. S i m i l a r i t y , there are forerunners to s t y l e s ; the appearance of the Bungalow Proper i n 1912 could be seen as the vanguard of i t s l a t e r p o p u l a r i t y i n the 1920's (N.B. although t h i s i s not imply that the houses a c t u a l l y b u i l t i n K i t s i l a n o i n 1912 were ~ innovators, and i t s l a t e r p o p u l a r i t y there and other parts of the c i t y was a r e s u l t of people mimicking these forerunners). ^ oee, f o r example, MAASS,J., (1957), op. c i t . , f o r a good description,, 5 CARVER, H., C i t i e s i n the Suburbs, Toronto:University of Toronto Press, 1962, contains f i v e photos of the changing family house since 1946; these can be found between pages 96 and 97• Mention has already been made,(p.55), of the way these houses, and t h e i r i n t e r n a l plans, express the changing s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n of the family u n i t and t h e i r housing demands. ^ For a f u l l e r account of the h i s t o r y of the West End i n terms of changing r e s i d e n t i a l preferences and types of dwelling, see McAFEE, R.A., "Residence on the Margin of the Central Business D i s t r i c t " , unpublished M.A. t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vaneouver,1967. Apartment development here i s also discussed i n GAYLER, H.J.,"Private r e s i d e n t i a l development i n the inner c i t y . The West End of Vancouver,Canada", Journal of the Town Planning I n s t i t u t e , Vol.57,1,1971, p.15-20. ^ O r i g i n a l l y financed and operated by Housing Enterprises, a consortium of L i f e Insurance companies, and l a t e r taken over by the Federal Government Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation. I am g r a t e f u l to Mr.&.R.Glover, Regional Mortgage Manager, London L i f e Insurance Co. f o r p o i n t i n g t h i s f a c t out. g The study of apartment appearance i s of course worthy of seperate study, there now being so many d i f f e r e n t v a r i e t i e s present i n the Vancouver landscape. I n a d d i t i o n to the ones already mentioned above, i n there capacity as members of the study area, there are numerous other d i v i s i o n s , ranging from the neo-Classical of the Tatlow Park and U n i v e r s i t y Boulevard v a r i e t y , -113-through the three-storey walk ups to the m u l t i - s t o r i e d h i g h - r i s e s . Construction .techniques (climbing crane, p r e f a b r i c a t e d parts,etc.) are one dimension f o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n ; by-laws provide another, e.g. through the varying regulations on balcony s i z e ; t h i r d l y the d e t a i l such as balconies, windows, p a t i o s , entrance h a l l s and or ornamental fountains w i l l lend themselves to c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i n the coming years. 9 These included three graduate students i n the G-eography Department, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia; one person with a B.A. Honours Geography degree; and one non-geographer, who had completed two years of undergraduate co'urses at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia. -114-CHAPTER 5. POSSIBLE UTILITY OF THE CLASSIFICATION FOB. TESTING- VARIOUS URBAN MODELS Having i d e n t i f i e d vernacular s t y l e s which themselves can he e a s i l y i d e n t i f i e d i n the urban landscape, i t remains to be suggested how they can have u t i l i t y f o r both research and teaching i n urban geography. I t i s proposed that three types of urban structure models are examined here; i n ad d i t i o n , a more i n t a n g i b l e but equally important c o n t r i b u t i o n i n terms of broader educational and c u l t u r a l value i s suggested. 5.1 R e s i d e n t i a l P a t t e r n and Transportation Technology I t i s appropriate to s t a r t by r e f e r r i n g back to the most recent major c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , that by R i c k e r t , who j u s t i f i e d h i s approach by claiming that dating and mapping by period, of construction was e s s e n t i a l f o r f u r t h e r studies of occupancy patterns of s p e c i f i c time periods, or a succession of time periods i n one p a r t i c u l a r place. He contended that fieldwork could q u i c k l y block i n sectors belonging t o one p a t i c u l a r time p e r i o d , sinoe there would be a degree of a r c h i t e c t u a l uniformity w i t h i n such sectors. He d i d not exemplify m s points xn vne a r t i c l e , but tiiese intentxons were con-v i n c i n g l y supprted when Adams (1970) used R i c k e r t ' s key to help substantiate the v a l i d i t y of h i s model of r e s i d e n t i a l structure i n midwestern c i t i e s 0 Adams proposed a model which i d e n t i f i e d the influence of four s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t transport eras - the walking/horsecar era, the e l e c t r i c s t r e e t -car era, the r e c r e a t i o n a l auto era, and the freeway auto era - and t h i s was v e r i f i e d by reference to the Minneapolis landscape, where regions of di f f e r e n t a r c h i t e c t u r a l s t y l e s r e f l e c t e d the distance constraints placed upon l o c a t i o n due to transportation technology. This sort of model i s not s t r i c t l y transferable to the Vancouver s i t u a t i o n , where the growth was f a r more sporadic. Instead of c l e a r l y dem-arcated b e l t s which r e f l e c t the maximum u t i l i s a t i o n of space w i t h i n a s p e c i f i c distance from the centre i n any time period, there i s only p a r t i a l i n f i l l o The rate of construction was slower, and before s a t u r a t i o n or climax, i s -Un-reached, a lessening of the distance constraint due to the addition of new transportation mode enabled housing to be built further out from the centre than would have otherwise been possible* The lots not built on i n one time-period (with one dominant transportation mode) were obviously built upon in time, but with these sites offering a different relative location vis-a-vis downtown, and would therefore be occupied as a result of meeting a different type of consumer demand. Consequently, an examination of the i n f i l l process should take into account not only of the differing transportation technologies but also the different social status connotations implied by a specific location with respect to downtown in several time-periods. However, i f i t is possible to disregard social status temporarily to concentrate on just one aspect, that of the pattern of residential i n f i l l from a virgin area to one almost entirely built-up, then there are several interesting findings 0 Using the actual construction data from the classi-fication exercise, the series of maps which comprise Pig. 17 were assembled, showing the pattern before and after the 1912 boom, the coverage at the end of the Bungaloid style and finally the areal pattern during the depression. To attempt to make some order out of a rather chaotic pattern, i t is nece-ssary to see the study area within the context of the whole city. Until 1907 the Pourth Avenue streetline terminated at Trafalgar St, and consequently the earliest housing in the area is on the high ground of Stephens and Trafalgar Streets, Pirst and Second Avenues, contiguous to the incorporated area of the city at that time. With the extension of the streetcar line to Alma in 1909 the (study; area was opened up. The zone between Pourth Avenue and English Bay was settled f i r s t , although seemingly keeping away from Pourth A y enue and the actual sea-frontage. This is rather surprising, as currently, the sites on the seaward side of Point Grey Eoad are possibly the most desirable locations for single family dwelling i n Point Grey, because of their unrivalled view of the city, the North FIGURE 17 KITSILANO STUDY AREA PATTERN OF RESDENTIAL ACCRETION & LOT 1NFIIL 1900-1911 r - it i i in J n n E D S us L i r a i -II -II II 31 B B F i g l O 1900-1912 • ran • i n • •!<•• mil • I I I II I S J •r l U l > . & j a « LI3LL1IVJ L X I M LT ] r x n nt~i n r n - L _ U L J J J i I ••III i r ILJ I i l l M R •TI • JL i i r 1 j i r I i i II . i i . , \ i i i n : . _ I L J _ 1 L 1 : " - x ' ~ -1 _ l _ I II II i : 1900-1923 1900-1932 1114.— m o r a IB IB! ULBU IHu^ M « C t - U M B ^ " ^ •H11BI 1 I i 1 I ' L L - 1 ' II ' a"_'] Tir I N r m r ^ n r^n crri r — i i r i [fit I U l 11 11 • T11- I L J U LfcLJ " J LLU . £ B Uft B B US H I B f S VBB IS! S E fin u. i s, pa] a '.a i-'.c. : es..1 ss m r " S t ! l H ! I TII sffi i s B E s SB ITS m aa as f £ ! ! 5 & ! I S B B B S B ^ S -117-Shore mountains and the maritime a c t i v i t i e s of the Bay and I n l e t 0 Yet these l o t s were not b u i l t on extensively u n t i l the 1930's, as the l a s t map of Pig.17 2 showso I t has been suggested that t h i s could have been due to the greater number of fogs prevelant i n e a r l i e r days, and perhaps the rumoured a s s o c i a t i o n of fog and damp with consumption acted as a constraint to settlement. Another possible explanation i s that these waterfront l o t s were owned and h e l d f o r speculative purposes; examination of a c t u a l l o t ownership patterns would be i n t e r e s t i n g . Thus the r e l a t i v e l y few houses marked as being b u i l t may have been i n f a c t the structures i n the middle of f a r l a r g e r ' t e r r i t o r y ' on e i t h e r side, and at one l e v e l of occupance, the area would thus be already w e l l developed 3 at an e a r l i e r date, the housing coming l a t e r . The maps also show that the blocks adjacent to the two s t r e e t c a r transport routes are free from r e s i d e n t i a l i n f i l l , p a r t l y due to zoning i n f l u e n c e s , but also r e f l e c t i n g a desire to l i v e a c e r t a i n distance away from the s t r e e t c a r line ^ " The perspective drawing, F i g a 18, based on f i g u r e s representing the mean age of housing on each block (low ' a l t i t u d e ' representing older housing) emphasises the l a t e i n f i l l of the two routeways, amd also the r e l a t i v e l y l a t e development of the s i t e s adjacent to Point Grey Road. S i m i l a r i t y , the standard deviations from the mean-age was c a l c u l a t e d f o r each block (low deviation shown by low a l t i t u d e ) and the surface i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n P i g . 19. Between them, Figures 18 and 19 give a u s e f u l summary of the data of the maps i n F i g . 17. Several zones can be i d e n t i f i e d : areas of both high mean age and low deviation from that mean would i n d i c a t e that nearly a l l the houses on those blocks were b u i l t w i t h i n a few years of each other; low age and low deviation show areas b u i l t quite recently; and intermediate areas which have a high deviation are consequently i d e n t i f i a b l e as those experiencing i n f i l l over a considerable number of years. With these l a s t mentioned area, one i n t e r e s t i n g question to pose would be whether or not there i s consistency i n type of house, or do the 1912 Swiss Chalet houses of reasonable appearance now have p l a i n e r and poorer next-door neighbours? Obviously i t i s impossible to describe -118-FIGURE 1 8 : K i t s i l a n o Study Area: Mean Construction Year by block l e v e l - perspective s u r f a c e 0 i P^R-EFIGURE 19 : K i t s i l a n o Study Area: Standard Deviation by block l e v e l - perspective surface. -119-simply by reso r t to age and s t y l e l a b e l alone. Another v a r i a b l e has to be introduced - that of the r e l a t i v e q u a l i t y and status of the house. 5.2. Housing Q u a l i t y and S o c i a l Distance Interpreters have always been ready to attach symbolic meaning to a p a r t i c u l a r a r t i f a c t , and a r c h i t e c t u r a l h i s t o r i a n s are p a r t i c u l a r l y good examples. Unfortunately they tend to work at the macro-scale, entwining a r c h i t e c t u r a l s t y l e s with a s o c i a l and economic h i s t o r y of the nation, as the fol l o w i n g quote from Tunnard and Reed suggests:-How c l o s e l y the development of our c i t i e s and towns r e f l e c t our people and h i s t o r y ! The snug houses and small, neat town plans of the Colonies were a d i r e c t r e f l e c t i o n of the Protestant mercantile s o c i e t y before 1720, when a change i n taste and new-made wealth brought a greater luxury and extravagance to the scene. The white Greek Revival v i l l a s and Romantic gardens of a l a t e r period r e f l e c t the i n d i v i d u a l i s m and l a i s s e z -f a i r e p o l i t i c s of t h e i r generation, while the post C i v i l War mansard houses and r e s i d e n t i a l avenues were born of an age seeking fashion and closer connection with European c u l t u r e , (Tunnard and Reed, 1955, p.4) Although these deterministic opinions may have h e l d at one time, the extremely subjective i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s approach, that of c o l l i g a t i o n (Walsh,1953) i n which an a r t i f a c t i s explained by context with a c l u s t e r of events of that time, i s u n s a t i s f a c t o r y now. Neither do these types of generalisations have any a p p l i c a b i l i t y at the scale of the sub-urban area, or even block-by-block f l u c t u a t i o n s . However, there i s tremendous p o t e n t i a l i n the use of housing s t y l e s as an i n d i c a t o r of c u l t u r a l achievement or c u l t u r a l p o s i t i o n . Jordan (1966) i n h i s e x c e l l e n t book on V i c t o r i a n a r c h i t e c t u r e , recognises that structures other than churches, railway s t a t i o n s , etc. need d e t a i l e d a t t e n t i o n . The Story of the house i s the story of i n d i v i d u a l men: not i n i s o l a t i o n from the main theme of l i f e , but expressing t h e i r p r i v a t e reactions to that same theme i n terms of ar c h i t e c t u r e . The house, l i k e the books on the shelves and the pictu r e s on the w a l l , i s an outward and v i s i b l e statement about i t s owner - but that owner, i n some sense or other, -120-i s a l s o a c h i l d of h i s time. The house, therefore, though p r i v a t e i s , no l e s s than other b u i l d i n g s , a s o c i a l phenomena ... perhaps more than any. (Jordan, 1966,p.206) I n a s i t u a t i o n where the o r i g i n a l owner i s no longer present, i t i s impossible to attempt a d i r e c t character p r o f i l e through questionaire techniques, nor are h i s books, p i c t u r e s e t c . available,. A l l we have to go om i s the house i t s e l f , and so we ... must depend on p h y s i c a l remains of past behavioral namifestations as the evidence of that behavior, and what these i n d i c a t e d about the i d e a t i o n a l state i n general of the actors producing the behavior. (Berkhofer, 19^9, p. 12) Consequently, there seems a need f o r a c o r r e l a t i o n between a) housing s t y l e s per se and l i f e s t y l e , and b) q u a l i t y of t r i m , f i n i s h , s i z e w i t h i n a s i n g l e s t y l e and s o c i a l l i f e s t y l e or position,. There may be a d i f f e r -ence i n i n i t i a l occupants* place i n s o c i e t y i n the examples of 1912 housing i l l u s t r a t e d i n P l a t e 36» How can these differences be recorded. and measured, to replace the dangerous generalisations made by symbolic i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s ? One p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n could be to r e f e r to the annual d i r e c t o r i e s f o r the year i n which the house was b u i l t and record the occupation of the f i r s t occupant, A c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of occupations along the l i n e s of that used by Wolforth (1967) could be used, and then these groupings c o r r e l a t e d with some ind i c e s of q u a l i t y e i t h e r i n the house as an e n t i t y , or d e t a i l e d facade t r i m e.g. stone, b r i c k or wood a p i e r s f o r p i l l a r s , i n t r i e a c y of bracket designs, e t c . I f such a c o r r e -l a t i o n (occupation/quality of housed y i e l d e d dis t i n g u i s h a b l e c l a s s e s , then measures of status of the area at d i f f e r e n t periods of time could be assessed and mapped. Opinion d i f f e r s as to whether housing alone can be used as a surrogate measure of s o c i a l s t a t u s , and c e r t a i n l y i t i s daaagerous to attempt s o c i a l area analysis of current occupance by reference to 8 j u s t outward appearance. I f , however, the objective i s h i s t o r i c a l - 1 2 2 -socidl, area a n a l y s i s , then there i s c e r t a i n l y a case f o r housing types to he used. 23iis d i s t i n c t i o n , that "the v a l i d i t y of house types as a va r i a b l e depends on whether an area i s being studied as i t i s or as i t was when b u i l t " , i s brought out by Johnstone ( 1 9 6 9,p . 2 l ) i n h i s study of Melbourne townscape. He b u i l d s h i s analysis upon the assumption "that Housing types r e f l e c t the status of the residents f o r whom they were con-structed" (,p.2l), and uses an a r c h i t e c t u a l c l a s s i f i c a t i o n containing 4 0 variables of plan and b u i l d i n g materials to explore the v a l i d i t y of a model of urban morphology i n whieh townscape elements r e f l e c t s o c i a l zones and-sectors. I t can be l e g i t i m a t e l y expected that the patterns suggested i n theories of se c t o r a l (Hoyt, 1939) and co n c e n t r i c - r i n g (Burgess, 1924) growth w i l l be manifest i n the urban landscape; that the e l i t e housing of that p e r i o d w i l l be on the periphery of d i s t a l to the b u i l t - u p area, and the lower status mousing w i l l be nearer the centre. Johnston attempts to examine Melbourne i n t h i s l i g h t , adding a f u r t h e r dimension i n which there i s a 'mimiek* of both st y l e s and b u i l d i n g materials by the lower c l a s s , which w i l l be seen i n housing b u i l t 2 or 3 years a f t e r the appearance of a p a r t i c u l a r form i n the be t t e r housing. He uses in d i c e s of townscape homogeneity, based upon the degree to which s i n g l e b u i l d i n g types dominate the f a b r i c of d i s t r i c t s , to t e s t a model of townscape development based upon a process o f d i f f u s i o n , both s p a t i a l l y and s o c i a l l y . I n the Vancouver case, s o c i a l d i f f u s i o n i s d i f f i c u l t to tr a c e , although as mentioned on page 99 there i s evidence of e a r l i e r s t y l e s used f o r some K i t s i l a n o housing i n the 1912-14 period; to what extent t h i s i s deliberate mimicking i s hard to t e l l - the reasons already conjectured are more l i k e l y ( l i m i t e d carpentry expertise and contruction c o s t s ) . Otherwise, there appears to be simultaneous use of the same s t y l e , e x p e c i a l l y the 1912 Swiss Chalet type, with status and wealth i n f l u e n c i n g the - 1 2 3 -amount of i c i n g on b a s i c a l l y the same cake (as i n P l a t e 36)0 As f o r the pattern of a c c r e t i o n and i n f i l l , r e f l e c t i n g the various optimum l o c a t i o n s i n the c i t y at d i f f e r e n t times, the diagramatie representation i n F i g . 20 might be of value. I n each subsequent time period, the tendency was to b u i l d outward from the centre, maximising the p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f f e r e d by the dominant mode of tra n s p o r t a t i o n of that time, while at the same time there would be a c e r t a i n amount of i n f i l l i n g i n the inner vacant l o t s by persons p o s s i b l y not able to a f f o r d a more p e r i p h e r a l l o c a t i o n 0 Thus the model would have Class B housing of period t+1 alongside housing of Class A b u i l t i n time t when the l o c a t i o n was p e r i p h e r a l , and at a l a t e r date, t+ 2 , there could be f i n a l i n f i l l by the a r r i v a l of Class 6 housing i n what would be by then an inner c i t y location,, A l s o , i t would be p o s s i b l e to focus on a s i n g l e s o c i a l status w i t h i n t h i s mix, and attempt to i s o l a t e those areas of the c i t y which could be used to examine the a p p l i c a b i l i t y of the major theories of urban s p a t i a l structure i n the Vancouver contexts P o s s i b l y the best known study i n t h i s area of research i s that c a r r i e d out on the Boston suburbs of Roxbury, West Eoxbury and Dorchester by Warner (1962) i n which the moulding of d i s t i n c t s o c i a l areas i s described by reference to the s t r u c t u r a l pa-ttteims which were determined by the streetcars as they advanced out from the city,. Successive waves of upper, middle and lower class migrants s e t t l e d i n homogeneous neighbourhoods which were d i f f e r e n t i a t e d l a r g e l y by economic f a c t o r s , and there was also a very strong degree of conformity of a r c h i t e c t u r a l s t y l e despite the absence of any zoning laws. Warner explains t h i s 'natural' grouping as a consequence of a uniformity of behavior among i n d i v i d u a l decision makers; a consensus of a t t i t u d e caused each man to b u i l d houses much l i k e those of h i s neighbours and to locate i n a neighbourhood or st r e e t popular with f a m i l i e s of income s i m i l a r to FIG-USE 20 ODEt OE RESIDENTIAL ACCRETION AND INFILL BASED ON TRANSPORTATION CONSTRAINTS THROUGH TIME Distance from c i t y centre Relative proportion of new and i n f i l l housing i n s o c i a l classes A, B & C, at various distances from c i t y c e n t r e 0 A A -I H A B C ^ | :-« 1 A t^ A A A - T + --ft t k-L i m i t of "built-up area and transport c a p a b i l i t y • C i t y Centre -1 25-to h i s own. Earner's hook i s a model approach to the study of the h i s t o r i c pattern of the house-building process i n suburbs: h i s points are w e l l i l l u s t r a t e d by photographs of the d i f f e r e n t housing types which give a good i n d i c a t i o n of the s o c i a l connotations associated with the a r c h i t e c t u r a l s t y l e . Both the patterning of the ac t u a l process, and the i n s i g h t s i n t o the c u l t u r a l landscape given by the s t y l e s , make t h i s approach one which i s l e g i t i m a t e l y the i n t e r e s t of the c u l t u r a l geographer as much as the economic h i s t o r i a n . Returning to Vancouver, the perceptions of those who were of s i m i l a r •class',and who were not,are r e f l e c t e d i n the s p l i t l o c a t i o n of the e l i t e between the West End and Shaughnessy, as Morley i n d i c a t e s : -The new swing-span h i g h - l e v e l G r a n v i l l e Street Bridge was open, automobiles were common, and the 'nobs' were b u i l d i n g immense houses on Shaughnessy Heights, r e c e n t l y opened by the CPR under r e s t r i c t i o n s embodied i n an act of L e g i s l a t u r e , which were expected to render i t exclusive f o r a l l time to come. The new ^ M i l l i o n a i r e s Row" was the c r e a t i o n of the automobile and the p l e n t i f u l , cheap domestic labour which i n 25 years' time had vanished. Nevertheless, the fiv e - y e a r or six-year "old-timers"' of the West End, already being elbowed by encroaching apartment houses, turned up t h e i r noses at the "new r i c h " on the GPR Heaven". (Morley, 1961, p.127-8) This process was to continue, a t h i r d area appearing i n the 1930's with the a d d i t i o n of B r i t i s h Properties as a desirable area f o r the ' e l i t e s ' . Notice that Morley mentions the opening of the G r a n v i l l e 9 Bridge and the apparent u b i q u i t y of automobiles f o r one group. This i s not the place to summarise the evolution of Vancouver's transportation network from the days of the Fairview B e l t s t r e e t c a r l i n e to i t s present street pattern, but i t can be seen that the d i f f e r e n t i a l ownership of automobiles would allow c e r t a i n s o c i a l groups freedom from streetcars and consequently present them with a wider l o c a t i o n a l choice. The patterning of s o c i a l areas as i n F i g e 20 could be l a r g e l y explained i n terms of t h i s transportation d i f f e r e n t i a l , and examination of r e a l -126-estate advertisements through time would be an invaluable exercise i n ' 1 $ t r a c i n g the c r i t e r i a used to s e l l p a r t i c u l a r housing to p a r t i c u l a r groups. 5.3 S t r u c t u r a l Modifications and Urban C u l t u r a l Ecology A consistent theme i n the l a s t two sections has been that of the r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n of a p a r t i c u l a r s i t e as a f u n c t i o n of the t r a n s p o r t a t i o n p o s s i b i l i t i e s In terms of proximity to the downtown core. Over time i t has been seen that a marginal s i t e at the turn of the century can be an inner c i t y l o c a t i o n today. I n some respects, proximity to downtown can have p o s i t i v e u t i l i t y , e s p e c i a l l y considering congestion and journey-to-work. i n many cases however, such l o c a t i o n s are no longer seen desirable f o r s i n g l e -family residences, e i t h e r by the owner who sees r i s i n g land costs and i s a t t r a c t e d by the o f f e r s of apartment b u i l d e r s , or by the planning and p o l i t i c a l bodies, who value the inner c i t y areas f o r conversion to high-density accomodation to r e l i e v e some of the problems of housing shortage. Thus the problem (p o106j of where to d i v i d e the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n - a f t e r the end of two-storey housing at c.1920? - has relevance i n terms of a possible attempt to delineate the 'reservoir* f o r conversions. M c k e r t saw h i s house type analysis c o n t r i b u t i n g s i m i l a r l y i n being able to p r e d i c t s t r u c t u r a l and p h y s i c a l obsolescence according to b u i l d i n g eras, and also p r e d i c t i n g f u n c t i o n a l obsolescence patterns where the land use i s l i k e l y to change. 12 The attractiveness of a p a r t i c u l a r s i t e f o r speculative purposes might w e l l include consideration of the q u a l i t y (both s t y l i s t i c a l l y and p h y s i c a l l y ) of the property. S t y l i s t i c q u a l i t y c e r t a i n l y seems to have been a f a c t o r i n the r e v i v a l of c e r t a i n areas of K i t s i l a n o during the l a a t ten years. Examination of s t r e e t d i r e c t o r i e s over a period of years makes i t possible to chart the s o c i a l h i s t o r y of a p a r t i c u l a r house, block, or sub-area (see Fig.21), and t h i s could be used to answer the question r a i s e d on p.117. I f Class B housing joins Class A housing of a previous time-period, i s the resident of the Class A FIGURE 22 HYPOTHETICAL NEIGHBOURHOOD OCCUPATION/TIME-PERIOD MATRIX 1900-1908 1909-1917 1918-1923 1924-1933 1934-1944 1945-1970 A +++++++++++ « • * « * +++++++++++ T + +-T++ + + + + + •H-+++++++++ * * 3 i < v * -. B • • • « • • « mm • • * O • • • • • s,..Vs;< ~ " • • • • • • • • • • • X X X X X X X X xxxxxxxxxx C #•„- ^ v ^ V - ^ « « 0 « 0 e • ft 3,s V ^ 0 e * • * » X X X X X X X X X X X ;acx D maintains ' p o s i t i o n ' This example suggests a r e v i t a l i s a t i o n and reversion to o r i g i n a l s t a t u s , , e.g. Point Grey Road;others could be a gradual d e c l i n e , • Summary tables would give percentages f o r groupd of st r e e t - b l o c k s , but here the i n t e n t i o n i s to show how the s o c i a l c l a s s of occupants of i n d i v i d u a l houses, '<,' or •*' or '+* or '©' or ' or 'x 1, can vary over time. -128-housing s t i l l l i k e l y to be of the o r i g i n a l s o c i a l group, or would he be a ' 13 resident of a type comparable to that of the new Class B, t + 27 • Only an examination of the d i r e c t o r i e s could give the answer to t h i s , but i n general, one might expect an area to have a decline i n fortunes with the passage of time and the expansion of the c i t y . Taking t h i s g e n e r a l i s a t i o n to be the case f o r the purposes of t h i s d i s c u s s i o n , one would then expect the occupants of the e x i s t i n g housing to be sympathetic to the nev? a r r i v a l s i n terms of s o c i a l c l a s s , but mere v i s u a l i n s p e c t i o n i s not adequate proof, unless the status/housing q u a l i t y r e l a t i o n s h i p had already been i d e n t i f i e d by recourse to the d i r e c t o r i e s . P l a t e 37 i l l u s t r a t e s several examples of l a t e i n f i l l i n g , and such occurrences would be the focus of t h i s l i n e of research. C e r t a i n l y the downward trend can be reversed, and the example i n P l a t e 37c d i f f e r s from the other two i n that i t i s a high status house, and also complements the appearance of the adjacent house. Factors responsible f o r the r e v e r s a l of a neighbourhood's fortunes would include a r e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . of the area's advantages, a change i n the c i t y ' s major occupation groups, or a r e v i v a l of i n t e r e s t i n a p a r t i c u l a r s t y l e . I n the K i t s i l a n o case, the changing a t t i t u d e towards environment le a d i n g t o an increased weighting of r e c r e a t i o n and scenic value as a v a r i a b l e i n r e s i d e n t i a l choice, the i n t r o d u c t i o n of the prestigious E r i k s o n towhhouses, and the proximity to downtown have a l l helped to r e - e s t a b l i s h the p o s i t i o n of Point G-rey Road. The persistence and even recuperative powers of c e r t a i n areas i n the face of adverse trends are examined by F i r e y (1945) i n h i s study of the c o n t r i b u t i o n of sentiment and symbolism i n creating the p a r t i c u l a r mix of s t y l e s and groups i n the Boston urban landscape, and the persistance of Shaughnessy, despite i t s c o n t i g u i t y to the low-status areas of Fairview, provide a ready example i n Vancouver 0 A revaluing of l o c a t i o n i s seen i n many areas of the inner c i t y , but s t r u c t u r a l obsolescence or mediocrity of design means that the p a r t i c u l a r house often f a l l s v i c t i m to the speculative apartment builder* houses which -1 2<>-PLATE 37: Examples of delayed i n f i l l i n g of vacant l o t s -13 9 -are both large and s t r u c t u r a l l y sound are often the only ones to be r e t a i n e d , t h e i r i n t e r n a l plan making them a t t r a c t i v e f o r conversion to p r i v a t e h o s p i t a l s , r e s t homes, et c . , as the examples i n P l a t e 38 suggest. I n another sense, a?ra.reness of s t y l e , or sub-elements of the facade contributions to a p a r t i c u l a r s t y l e , can l e a d to some i n t e r e s t i n g p o i n t s , one being that of s t r u c t u r a l m o d i f i c a t i o n . I t might be p o s s i b l e to gain some i n s i g h t s i n t o the e v o l u t i o n of an area, from s i n g l e - f a m i l y to m u l t i p l e -family occupance, by examining the outward i n d i c a t i o n s of conversion. The example i l l u s t r a t e d i n P l a t e 3 9 ,(p.1 3 2 ) shows a window of 1928-32 vintage i n the basement of a 1912 house; notice also the Type 5 window i n the upper f l o o r of the 1912 A-frame house i l l u s t r a t e d i n P l a t e 23 (p . 9 3 ) « Awareness of the p o p u l a r i t y of p a r t i c u l a r construction techniques and r e f u r b i s h i n g s t y l e s of p a r t i c u l a r periods would enable such a t r a n s i t i o n to be charted. i n a s i m i l a r v e i n , s t r u c t u r a l conversion can often represent the outward mod i f i c a t i o n of a house ( d e l i b e r a t l e y or subconciously) the p e r s o n a l i t y of a p a r t i c u l a r s o c i a l community. The most noticeable examples are the b u i l d i n g s along Pender Street i n Chinatown; w i t h i n the area studied f o r t h i s work, the presence of a Greek immigrant community, already manifest i n the s p e c i a l i t y stores along Broadway, can also be i d e n t i f i e d i n the housing stock« The ultimate expression of t h i s i s the s t r u c t u r a l a l t e r a t i o n s being c a r r i e d out on a house i n Stephens Street, P l a t e 4 0 a , where the porch-veranda has been removed (see adjacent houses i n P l a t e 40b) and i s being replaced by f l u t e d columns and a Grecian-type doorway i n an attempt to re-create the C l a s s i c a l l i n e s of a Greek temple. This modification i s repeated i n the next block, see Plate 4 0 c . Eapoport ^196"9,p.80) discusses the c u l t u r a l importance of a t t i t u d e s to t e r r i t o r y , see Fig. 2 2 , and the general lack of fences i n the north American suburb often means that those areas of the c i t y which have been decorated > -132-PLAl'E 39 Type 4 window i n basement of 1912 bouse 3348 West 1st Avenue. PRWATC SEMI-PO&UC boHAiM 1 PRvVATE T H H A » K J ' ! I - - - - J 0 W i t e > S T A T E S FIGURE 22: Approximate Location of "thresholds" i n three cultures (Rapoport,1969,p.80) - 1 3 5 -or demarcated with wooden rences {see, f o r example P l a t e 2 1 , p.91J or neat p r i v e t hedges surrounding the l o t are l i k e l y to he those of strong ethnic concentration. Consequently, we can record modifications to the l o t and . lawn i n a d d i t i o n to those of the actual house, and come up with some 15 statements on the type of occupant. A focus on these l o t - r e l a t e d elements in,the suburban landscape""^ can be used xo some success as a teaching device, i n which the product of Census information, e i t h e r by v i s u a l i n s p e c t i o n of -tables or by f a c t o r a n a l y s i s , suggest sub-areas of s o c i a l type which can i then be confirmed by f i e l d examinationo. Students found a comforting a s s o c i a t i o n between high f a c t o r scores on v a r i a b l e s such as Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic r e l i g i o n , low number of years i n Canada, low l e v e l o f schooling, e tc., and the type of suburban landscape described above; s i m i l s r i l y areas with high scores on u n i v e r s i t y education, upper income bracxet, etc. found some outward manifestation of these t r a i t s i n the nature of renewal or modifications to property (e, g. the Point U-rey Road housing). Focus on the v i s u a l aspects of the landscape, both the o r i g i n a l structure and l o t , can be used in.conjunction with more abstract i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s of the nature of a p a r t i c u l a r area which s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s might y i e l d . 5*4 Awareness of Environment This l a s t point leads to a consideration of the housing key as having a general educational value. Through such comparisons of f a c t and landscape, i t might be possible to awaken a greater degree of awareness i n students of t h e i r everyday urban environment. I n a s o c i a l climate c u r r e n t l y very eoneerned with the q u a l i t y of the environment, the possible c o n t r i b u t i o n to personal i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with an area should not be overlooked, and the unpretentious mass of the c i t y ' s housing i s an important element i n t h i s . I n a book of sketches and notes by Kuthan and Stainsby ( 1 9 6 2 ) , the most t e l l i n g sketches, i n the writer's opinion, were not those of English Bay, Stanley Park, Chinatown or any of the other 'famous-the-world-over' views, but drawings such as those i n Plate A 1 - the mediocre, everyday housing of the c i t y . The c l a s s i f i c a t i o n -137-presented i n t h i s work has concentrated more on s p e c i f i c elements than the o v e r a l l outward appearance, which might have to he expressed with more a r t i s t i c f e e l i n g , such as Kuthan's sketches, but h o p e f u l l y they can l e a d to a s i t u a t i o n i n which people can become more aware of t h e i r own neighbourhood. Whitehand (1967),although c r i t i c i z e d e a r l i e r f o r h i s rather unsound use of b u i l d i n g appearances to i n f e r current s o c i a l s tatus, used vernacular s t y l e s of s i m i l a r dimensions to the Kuthan examples, namely those drawn up by Osbert Lancaster (1963), who very p e r c e p t i v e l y i d e n t i f i e s houses such as 'By-pass Variagated', 'Wimbeldon T r a n s i t i o n a l ' , 'Pseudish', 'Pu b l i c -House C l a s s i c ' e t c . - which a l l have t h e i r own c l a s s / l i f e s t y l e connotations 0 The Vancouver equivalent would be B r i t i s h Properties/croquet-lawn 'types' portrayed by the cartoonist K o r r i s of the Vancouver Sun (-see P l a t e 42) Conzen,(1966), o f f e r s a more formal case f o r the need to view the urban landscape i n terms other than those of mere economic e f f i c i e n c y . He argues the long term b e n e f i t to s o c i e t y of the c u l t u r a l landscape, even though i t i s almost impossible to assess i n monetary terms. Recognising that the pressures of f u n c t i o n a l obsolescence i n e v i t a b l y l e a d to demolition and renewal, he focusses on the problems of townscape management, i n which he believes morphological analysis on the part of the geographer would appear to be one of the p r e r e q u i s i t e s f o r any informed a c t i o n (Conzen,1966,p.57) The same i n e v i t a b l e march of time has been used to j u s t i f y i n t e n s i t y of i n t e r e s t i n areas of imminent obsolescence, one excellent example being the study of V i c t o r i a n Camberwell( a London suburb) by Dyos (1961), who concluded:-To be w e l l informed about t h i s whole changeable landscape the topographer has to have an eye both f o r what i s now and f o r what w i l l s h o r t l y cease to be, and be a l e r t f o r the f i r s t signs of the demolition squad. P e n c i l l e d j o t t i n g s about the buildings of the disappearing suburb sometimes become invaluable as the only tangible evidence one has to r e c a l l the look and the f e e l of an architecture now gon®. I n some ways i t i s almost reasonable to speak of i t i n archeological terms. ..... What remains i s nevertheless enough to assess -138-N O F t R I S V A N C O U V E R S U N R O D N E Y M A Y N O T A G R E E W I T H A N Y T H I N G T H E Y S A Y B U T H E W I L L D E F E N D T O T H E D E A T H HIS D E M A N D T H A T T H E Y S A Y IT I N E N G L I S H . . . " PLATE 42 Another source for/vernacular architecture; suggestion of h o u s i n g / l i f e - s t y l e / s o c i a l status c o r r e l a t i o n s xn Vancouver's B r i t i s h P r o p e r t i e s . - 139 -noit only the force of the diverse influences which governed the pace and the character of the physica l development of V i c t o r i a n Camberwell and to throw some l i g h t on the means by which t h i s occurred, but to h i n t at i t s changing s o c i a l s t ructure . And more than t h i s , i t throws some l i g h t at the same time on the or igins and the charac ter i s t i cs of the genus i t s e l f - the V i c t o r i a n s u b u r b 9 ( D y o S j 1 9 6 l j p > 1 % _ 5 ) How applicable t h i s i s to Vancouver, with the V i c t o r i a n c i t y almost e n t i r e l y North of False Creek being cont inual ly eroded, the simple frame houses on the eastern f r inge and the imposing mansions of the once e l i t e West End being replaced at an alarming rate by what appear, by aesthetic comparison, to be s t e r i l e and co ld h i g h - r i s e apartments:-. . . some of these are mere chromium^plated rabbit-hutches, others are impressive s ize i n the c lean, almost ant iscept ic modern glass-walled archi tec ture , spectacular i n the mass rather than i n the i n d i v i d u a l b u i l d i n g . (Morley, 1961, p .230) See Plate 43 . A s i m i l a r s i t u a t i o n can be seen i n the r e s i d e n t i a l suburbs of the inner cijjy -Fairview and K i t s i l a n o - which are undergoing large scale renewals„ The area used i n the study, West K i t s i l a n o , i s r e l a t i v e l y free from renewal except foi? the apartment blocks on Alma Street ; but fur ther east, whole areas are now block a f t e r block of three-storey walk-ups. In about f i v e years time, what w i l l remain of the area to give ins ight into the development process? What record w i l l be kept of the single family structures which onee stood there? Few records w i l l remain of the size and style of the house, and so only the ©let lot-maps which indicate 25,33 or 50-foot l o t width w i l l h i n t 18 at what went before . So now i s the time to record the charac ter is t i cs of these areas and incorporate them into any general model of suburban evolution - to wait f i v e or ten years would mean that i t i s impossible to v e r i f y the model because of a gap i n the information, of an area peripheral to the central core during the streetcar era , and as such important i n any consideration of h i s t o r i c a l f r i c t i o n of distance 0 -140-PLATE 43 New high r ises and old houses i n West End. -141-Researchers should not be put o f f by the f a c t that the area of study i s the present and the immediate past, and thus somehow not a 19 h i s t o r i c e n t i t y and not worthy of study. Summerson expresses t h i s point w e l l : The a c t u a l i t y of things forgotten i n the recent past, the t r u t h under the surface of l a t e assumptions, the seeing f o r the f i r s t time as h i s t o r i c what has only l a t e l y been forgotten as contemporary, l i e s very near to the roots of creative thought and the formation of new a t t i t u d e s 0 (Summerson, 196l,p.lO) 5.5 Methodological Value I f the elements of h i s t o r i c a l enquiry can be shown i n t h e i r simplest form as the stages of P i g . 23, then i t i s possible to i d e n t i f y weaknesses i n two c r i t i c a l areas r e l a t e d to the approach of h i s t o r i c a l / c u l t u r a l geographers. The f i r s t of these i s that discussed i n the f i r s t chapter, s e c t i o n 1.2, (p.4), which focussed on the method of synthesis and the type of i n t e r p r e t a t i o n which comes between synthesis and presentation- i n t h i s case the presentation s t y l e being i d e n t i f i e d as the 'Berkeley 1 landscape s c h o o l 0 I t was stated then that an approach based on the use of a r t i f a c t s should be able to be "reconciled with the themes now advocated with the general paradigm s h i f t of the d i s c i p l i n e ; t h i s s h i f t does not mean a necessary dependence on q u a n t i t a t i v e method, i t being more importantly concerned with p r e c i s i o n and s c i e n t i f i c methodo Some of the model constructs o u t l i n e d e a r l i e r i n t h i s chapter would come under consideration i n t h i s context. However, such model constructs are i n v a l i d unless one can overcome the second area of c r i t i c i s m , that found i n the l i n k between evidence and f a c t s ; again t h i s can be characterised by subjective i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , as was pointed out i n the examination of the a r c h i t e c t u r a l l i t e r a t u r e . I n dealing with past periods, the researcher must r e l y on remains as evidence f o r v a l i d a t i n g h i s hypotheses. N a t u r a l l y , i f conclusions r e s u l t i n g from a successful t e s t i n g of hypotheses are to have any value, one should f i r s t e s t a b l i s h the v a l i d i t y of the information used as the basic data. I t i s i n t h i s area that the body -142-H i s t o r y as w r i t t e n riistory as a c t u a l i t y Synthesis Pacts 4 -^.Evidence (after Berkhofer,1969) FIGURE 23 : Elements of H i s t o r i c a l Enquiry 0 -14.3-of .the thesis' has attempted to provide a contribution, by seeking objective weightings for particular variables important in the dating of residential structures0 The 'excuse' of complexity offered by Kniffen Is no longer really valid, since geographers are now able to attack the problem with a multivariate approach. Simmons (1967) summarises the previous difficulty:-G-eographers have always wanted to examine the whole range of relevant variables. The problem, until now, has been how to generalise and organise this material without becoming hopelessly subjective. (t>immons,1967,p.34-8) and goes on to discuss the various examples of curent solutions to this problem. Certainly, the multivariate approach to analysis of the spatial character of the internal social -structure or cities is now commonplace, 20 not only in dealing with the contemporary but also beginning to move 2 1 into an examination of historical urban pattern and process, Similarily, this approach is used in examination of urban landscape; so far, this has been to see landscape as a variable to be correlated with 2 2 contemporary social statistics, but i t also has potential for the examination of the evolution of the urban landscape. One necessary step in such an analysis would be to begin to decode the contributions of the immediate past, as indicated by Summerson above0 Classification of styles and their historical social correlates certainly are a necessary prerequisite to work on residential patterns and the processes which underlie them. Cultural/ historical geography has too long been vunerable to criticisms of subjective interpretation; an objective base to statements on vernacular forms in Vancouver is better than either macro-scale generalisations or the un-questioned use of existing architectural histories without re-calibration for the Vancouver context. Objective measurement and classification in themselves are of limited use, however, and so in conclusion, i t is necessary to indicate the contribution -144-of such an exercise to c u l t u r a l / h i s t o r i c a l geography i n general, over and above the s p e c i f i c model constructs suggested i n t h i s chapter. Through the d e s c r i p t i o n of facade elements, the analysis of f i e l d data and then the assignment of s t y l e l a b e l s , i t i s possible to see the emergence of three i m p l i c i t themes, varying i n importance over time, which have had major impact on the nature of the urban r e s i d e n t i a l landscape. One theme i s design-related, i n which the various contributions of the a r c h i t e c t , the carpenter-builder, and the a c t u a l construction c a p a b i l i t i e s a v a i l a b l e to s o c i e t y at that time could be seen; these contributions represent f e e l i n g s , ideas and standards which r e f l e c t on s o c i e t y as a whole, and are important to the c u l t u r a l geographer i n h i s examination of the c u l t u r a l manifestations of a p a r t i c u l a r group through t h e i r a r t i f a c t s . A t the same time, the impact of these design-related f a c t o r s were as much constrained by economic forces as the aggregate l e v e l of c u l t u r a l s o p h i s t i c a t i o n , and t h i s was i n d i c a t e d i n the numerous v a r i a t i o n s of facade element appearances which d i d not conform to p a r t i c u l a r time boundaries. A second theme i s consumer-related, focussing on the house-occupant; h i s c o n t r i b u t i o n , both p a s s i v e l y as an unconscious actor of s o c i e t a l norms, and p o s i t i v e l y as an i n d i v i d u a l decision-maker, can be l a b e l l e d i n two ways: f i r s t l y , the previous c u l t u r a l experience of the occupant, which involves both h i s trans-Canadian or European heritage and also a previous r u r a l or urban l i f e s t y l e ; secondly, and t h i s would be l a t e r when the pioneering s e t t l e r s p i r i t i n the e a r l y town had been replaced a more mature urban m i l i e u , there would be d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n on the basis of income-groupings, which were r e f l e c t e d i n housing q u a l i t y and also the diverse s p a t i a l patterns of housing q u a l i t i e s r e l a t i v e to the c i t y centre. A t h i r d theme i s one which i s more corporate, i n e i t h e r constraints or encouragements - e.g. the contributions of p r i v a t e enterprise such as the B r i t i s h Columbia E l e c t r i c Railway Company, or r e a l estate i n t e r e s t s and - 1 4 5 -speculative f i n a n c i a l i n t e r e s t s ; then l a t e r , i n s t i t u t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s i n the form of u t i l i t y p r o v i s i o n and zoning by C i t y H a l l . These three themes, i n a multi-staged process, a l l contribute i n varying q u a n t i t i e s to the f a b r i c a t i o n of the urban landscape. With the passage of time, i n s t i t u t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s and interferences would be l i k e l y to exert more and more influence as the i n i t i a l l y n a t u r a l , almost spontaneous growth and expansion became more a r t i c u l a t e d and c o n t r o l l e d . Thus,defined urban functions would take over the dominant r o l e , a f t e r two major c u l t u r a l themes, at a s o c i e t a l and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l , have fused i n a p a r t i c u l a r place at a p a r t i c u l a r "time. I t could be argued, consequently, that the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n exercise has suggested three l a r g e r themes worthy of d e t a i l e d examination; f o r t h i s wider conceptual paradigm or model construct,the a c t u a l l a b e l l i n g and dating of . b u i l t - f o r m provides an invaluable data source. I t also provides valuable clues f o r the a n a l y s i s of the complexity of forces involved i n the urban •process, i n t e r a c t i n g over a period of eighty years i n the formulation of the Vancouver urban landscape. Footnotes -j A slackening of demand f o r new housing, due to a l u l l i n the general economic c y c l e , i s an obvious a d d i t i o n a l f a c t o r j the sequence may w e l l be a l u l l , causing a h a l t to b u i l d i n g , and then by the time demand increases again and a new construction boom i s under way, then the distance constraints would have lessened with the a d d i t i o n of new transportation modes or c a p a b i l i t i e s . p Conversations with Dr 0 Hardwick ^ Often the presence of quite l a r g e view windows on the side of a house suggests that there might w e l l have been a garden view i n i t i a l l y , i nstead of jus t the stucco w a l l of the now adjacent housing. u desired Hardwick has suggested that three blocks was the/optimum distance which s t i l l reaped the advantage of r e l a t i v e - p r o x i m i t y to the actual s t r e e t c a r l i n e . For an example of the examination of the impact of t r a n s i t l i n e s on settlement density, i n f i l l r a t e s , and land values i n successive blocks away from t r a n s i t l i n e s and stations i n Chicago, see EAViS, J.L. ( 1 9 6 5 ) " The Elevated System and the Growth of iNorthera Chicago',' Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y . Studies i n Geography.No. 1 0 . -146-5 Not e n t i r e l y i s o l a t e d from the current debate on female e q u a l i t y , i t i s perhaps appropriate to recognise at t h i s p o i n t , and also i n r e l a t i o n to the Jordan quote (p.119-120), that wives would have a considerable influence i n t h i s matter of housing choice and appearance. Recording the man's occupation i s s t i l l v a l i d , however, as the wife's choice and decoration are h o p e f u l l y commensurate with her husband's income capacity. 6 The categories used by Wolforth were:-1. P r o f e s s i o n a l and t e c h n i c a l 2. Managers, o f f i c i a l s and proprietors 3o C l e r i c a l 4 . Sales workers 5. Craftsmen and foremen 6. I n d u s t r i a l operatives lo Service workers 8. Primary workers 9. Labourers i n WOLFORTH, J.R., "R e s i d e n t i a l Location and the Place of Work," B.C. Geographical S e r i e s , No.4, Vancouver: Tantalus, 1965, p.78. For the purposes suggested here, care would have to be taken to allow f o r h i s t o r i c a l changes i n the r e l a t i v e status of p a r t i c u l a r occupations. 7 DYOS, J . I i . , V i c t o r i a n Suburb: A Study of the Growth of Camberwell, L e i c e s t e r : L e i c e s t e r U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1961, provide:., a good example of a d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n of the d i s t i n c t i v e embellishments which characterised b e t t e r housing i n V i c t o r i a n Caniberwell - variegated courses, ridge t i l e s , bay windows, p l a s t e r mouldings, e t c . A s i m i l a r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n should be possible f o r Vancouver housing. 8 Although t h i s has been attempted; see, f o r example, WHITEHAND, J.W.R., "The Settlement Morphology of London's C o c k t a i l B e l t , " T i j d s . voor econ. en Soc. Geo,?:.. V o l . 58, 1967,20-27. 9 I n Morley's quote, there i s an exaggerated causal connection between the opening of the G r a n v i l l e Street Bridge and the growth of Shaughnessy. The quote i s included more to i n d i c a t e the West End/Shaughnessy dichotomy and the changing l o c a t i o n of the 'best' place to l i v e . 10 Among the a u x i l i a r y buildings mentioned on p.46, examination of garages might provide some i n t e r e s t i n g f a c t s i n t h i s context; e.g. was the garage b u i l t onto the house at the same time the house was constructed?; i s there front-road access to the garage rather than back-lane access? A l s o , a record of l a t e r garages with t i g h t , rear access, or conversions of part of the house i n t o a garage (see, f o r example, P l a t e 13, p.45, house t h i r d from l e f t , lower row) would i n d i c a t e some attempt to adjust to the changing s i t u a t i o n . 11 A p a r t i c u l a r l y good example i s provided by a large and d e t a i l e d advertisement f o r the Talton Place development i n the Vancouver D a i l y Province.Saturday J u l y 20th, 1911, which emphasises the most desirable features of the property, not only i n the appearance of the house, but also the street scenery ( t r e e s ) , proximity to streetca r l i n e s , etc. As mentioned elsewhere i n t h i s study, ( r e a l estate tudor, p.36; the forces involved i n an i n d i v i d u a l choosing or being s o l d a house, p.52), r e a l estate forces have an important c o n t r i b u t i o n to both formulating and r e f l e c t i n g taste, and as such are an important source of the vernacular. 1 2 See, f o r example, HAWARD, D., unpublished term paper, Geography 572,1971 0 -147-1 3 Again, as i n footnote 6, there i s a great need f o r standardisation of occupation - c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s i f such a study were c a r r i e d out. S i m i l a r i l y , a re - r c a l i b r a t i o n of income-standards would be necessary: what i s the r e l a t i v e importance of a #1000 income i n 1912 and #2500 i n 1928? This i n e v i t a b l y leads to consideration of the vast quantity of l i t e r a t u r e i n urban sociology on topics such as e c o l o g i c a l change, f i l t e r i n g , i n v asion and succession, etc.; see, f o r example, BESHERS, J.M., Urban S o c i a l Structure, New York: G-lencoe Free Press,1962: DUNCAN, O.D. & DUNCAN, B., "R e s i d e n t i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n and Occupation S t r a t i f i c a t i o n ' , 1 American Journal of Sociology, Vol.60,1955,493-505; HOYT, H., The Structure and Growth of R e s i d e n t i a l Neighborhoods i n American C i t i e s , Washington:Federal Housing Administration,1 9 3 9 ; HOOVER, E. & VERNON, R., Anatomy of a Metropolis, Cambridge Lass.:Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press,1959; BEYER, G.¥77(1965),op. "cit. ,313"86 0 15 . Again there i s the problem of previous occupants, who may have been responsible f o r such modifications, rather than the current occupier. S i m i l a r i l y , modifications may r e f l e c t a landlord's pecuniary nature more than the desires of the tenant, 16 See WALHOUSE, F., "Minority Ethnic Groups i n Vancouver',' unpublished M.A. t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver,1961, f o r a d e s c r i p t i o n of the c o n t r i b u t i o n of Vancouver's ethnic communities to the urban landscape. 17 Students i n Urban Geography 350, Spring Term, 1970. 18 One record, of course, i s photographic, and this i s very r e l a t e d to the v i s u a l emphasis advocated i n t h i s study. One weakness i n r e l y i n g on a r c h i v a l c o l l e c t i o n s i s that they tend to be rather sparodic, both i n t h e i r time coverage and the areas of the c i t y which are photographed; consequently they l a c k the value of a. s y s t e m a t i c a l l y recorded v i s u a l h i s t o r y . "Given such photographic evidnce, however, one does not r e j e c t i t on the basis of incomplete cover. Several excellent c o l l e c t i o n s have been used to •considerable e f f e c t , p o s s i b l y the best being MAYER, H.M. & WADE, C.W., Chicago: Growth of a Metropolis, Chicago:University of Chicago.Press ,1969. See also WARNER, S.B., Streetcar Suburbs:The Process of Growth i n Boston, 1 870-1900« Cambridge,Mass".: K.I.fTTress, 1962;~J0NES, F.M., "The Aesthetic of the Nineteenth Century I n d u s t r i a l Town',1 pp.171-182 i n DYOS, J.H. (ed.) The Study of Urban H i s t o r y , London:Arnaol,1968. 1 9 I n DYOS, J.H.,1961, op. c i t , 20 See, f o r example, MURDIE, R. " F a c t o r i a l Ecology of Metropolitan Toronto, 1 951 -1961',' Un i v e r s i t y of Chicago, Department of Geography. Research Paper.Iio . i l 6 , 1969; ROBSON, B.T..Urban An a l y s i s : A Study of C i t y Structure with S p e c i a l Reference to Sunderland, Cambridge:Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y Press,1969, 21 See, f o r example,WARD,D.,"The In t e r n a t i o n a l S p a t i a l Structure of Immigrant R e s i d e n t i a l D i s t r i c t s i n the Late Nineteenth Century',' Geographical A n a l y s i s , V o l . 1,1 969,337~53;GOHEEN, P.','Victorian Toronto, 1 850-1 900',' U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago, Department of Geography, Research Paper, No.127, 1970. See, f o r example, PARKES, D.N.,"The Guttman Scalogram: An Emp i r i c a l A p p r a i s a l In Urban Geography',' A u s t r a l i a n Geographical Studies. Vol.7,1969,109-36-OPENSHAW, S., "Can-onical Correlates of S o c i a l Structure and Urban B u i l d i n g ^ ' Fabric - an exploratory study',' U n i v e r s i t y of Newcastle, D e P a r t r ^ ^ Seminar Paper, No.11 ,1969. " " ~ ~™~~ ~ ' -148-' BIBLIOGRAPHY ABELL, W. ( 1947) "Aa Introduction to Canadian Architecture".Canadian Geographical Journal. Vol.XXXIV,p.250-77. ADAMS, J.S. ( 1970) "Residential Housing i n Midwestern Cities" .A.A.A.G-. t Vol . 6 0 , 5 7 - 6 2 . B£8HAM,R. (1971) Los Angeles: the Architecture of Four Ecologies. London: Allen Lane Penguin Press. BELL,L.(1965) Metropolitan Vancouver: an overview for social planners. Research Dept., Community Area Chest and Council of Greater Vancouver. BEMIS, A.B. & BURCHARD,J.U(1933) The Evolving House. Vol.1.The History of the Htoe. Cambridge,Mass.s M.I.T. Press, BERKHOFER, R.F. (1969) A Behavioral Approach to Historical Analysis. New York: BESHERS, J.M. ( 1962) Urban Social Structure, New York:Gleneoe Free Press. BEYER, G.H. ( 1965) Housing and Society. New York:MacMillan. BLAKE, P. (1964) God's Own Junkyard, the planned deterioration of America's landscape. New York: Holt,Rinehart and Winston, BLANK, D.M. (1954) The Volume of Residential Construction, 1889-1950,. National Bureau of Economic Research, Technical Paper 9 * BOBEK, H. & SGHU!EH1SM,J, ( l949)"Me Landsschaft i n logiscen System der Geographic", Erdkuade .3.2/2.112-20, BROEK, J.O.M (1932) The Santa Clara Valley, California: a study in landscape change, Utrecht: A.Oosthoeck BRUNSKILL. R.W. (1970) Illustated Handbook of Vernacular Architecture. London:Fabe BURGESS, E\W. ( I 9 2 4 ) "The Growth ef the City-. An Introduction to a Research Project", Publ. Amer. S©ciol. Soc, Vol.18,85-97 BURTON, I. (1963) "The Quantitative Revolution and Theoretical Geography", Canadian Geographer. VII,4*151*^2. CARVER, H. (.1962) Cities i n the Suburbs, Toronto:University of Toronto Press„ CHAPMAN, J.D. (1966) "The Status of Geography", Canadian Geographer.X.5.133-^4k. CHORLEY, R.J.& HAGG-ETT, P., Frontiers i n Geographical Teaching. London:Methuen. CHORLEY, R.J. & HAGGETT, P., Models i n Geography, London:Methuea. COATES, C.J. & MOFFETT, K.M. ( 1969) Response to Environment. Student Publications ©f the School of Design, North Carolina State University, Raleigh,N.C., Vol.18. COGHEJ®, W.G. ( 1 9 5 4 ; "Sone methods of strengthening the common X 2 tests", Biometrioa, Vol. 1 0 , 4 1 7 - 5 1 . -149-COLLINS, P. (1967) Changing Ideals i n Modern Architecture,1750-1950, Montreal: K c G I l l U n i v e r s i t y Press. CONZEN, M.K.G. (1958) "The Growth and Character of Whitby",p.48-98 i n DAYSH,G.H.J., (ed.) A Survey of Whitby, London:Shakespeare Head Press. CONZEN, M.R.G. (1966) " H i s t o r i c a l Townscapes i n Great B r i t a i n : A Problem i n Applied Geography", p.56-79 i n HOUSE,J.W.,(ed.) Northern Geographical Essays. Newcastle:Oriel Press. COOPER, M. (1971) " R e s i d e n t i a l Segregation of E l i t e Groups i n Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia", unpublished M.A. t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver. CREUTZBURG, N. (1930) "Wirtschaft und Landschaft", Pet. M i t t . Erg.,209,275-86. DAVIS, J.L. (1965) "The Elevated System and the Growth of Northern Chicago", Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y , Studies i n Geography. No.10. DUNCAN, O.D. & DUNCAN, B. (1955) " R e s i d e n t i a l D i s t r i b u t i o n and Occupational S t r a t i f i c a t i o n " , American Journal of Sociology, Vol.60,193-505. DYOS, H.J. (1961) V i c t o r i a n Suburb. A Study of the Growth of Camberwell, Le i c e s t e r : L e i c e s t e r U n i v e r s i t y Press. DYOS, H.J. (1968) The Study of Urban H i s t o r y . London:Arnold. EDWARDS, A.L. (1957) Techniques of A t t i t u d e Scale Construction, New York: Appleton Century C r o f t s 0 • PENNBLL, R.I. & OPENSHAW, S. (1971) "Fieldwork Perception i n the Period Dating of Urban Buildings',' U n i v e r s i t y of Newcastle upon Tyne, Geographical Society Journal, Vol . 1 9 , 19-23. FIREY, W. (1945) "Sentiment and Symbolism as E c o l o g i c a l Variables',' American S o c i o l o g i c a l Review. Vol.X,140-48. FIREY, W. (1947) Land Uses i n Central Boston, Cambridge,Mass.: Harvard U.P. FORD, J . & FORD, K.M. (1940) The Modern House i n America, New York: FORDE, CD. (1934) Habitat. Economy and Society. A geographical i n t r o d u c t i o n to etnology, London:Methuen. FORSTER, C.A. (1968) "The Development of Bye-Law Housing i n Kingston-upon-H u l l : an example of m u l t i v a r i a t e morphological a n a l y s i s " , p.115-30 i n Techniques i n Urban Geography. I n s t i t u t e of B r i t i s h Geographers, Urban Study Group, Salford Conference. FREER, K. (1965) "Vancouver: a bibliography', 1 unpublished Master of L i b r a r i a n -ship t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver. GAYLER, H.J. (1971) "Private r e s i d e n t i a l development i n the inner c i t y . The West End of Vancouver, Canada", Journal of the Town Planning I n s t i t u t e , Vol.57,15-20. GEIDON, 3. (1948) Mechanisation Takes Command, New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press. -150-GIBSOH, E. (1971) "The Impact of S o c i a l B e l i e f on Landscape Change", unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver,, G-LASolE, H. (1969) P a t t e r n i n the M a t e r i a l Folk Culture of the Eastern United States. P h i l a d e l p h i a : U n i v e r s i t y of Pennsylvannia Press. GOHEEN, P. (1970) " V i c t o r i a n Toronto, 1850-1900", U n i v e r s i t y of Chicago. Department of Geography. Research Paper, No. 127 GOWANS, A. (1966) B u i l d i n g Canada: an A r c h i t e c t u r a l H i s t o r y of Canadian L i f e . Toronto: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press. GREBLER, L., BLANK, D. H. & WTNNICK, L. (1956) C a p i t a l Formation i n R e s i d e n t i a l Real Estate , Princeton: Princeton U n i v e r s i t y Press. GREBLER, L. (1952) Housing Market Behavior i n a Decl i n i n g Area, New York: Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press. GREIG-SMITH, P. (1964) Quantitative Plant Ecology. (2nd E d i t i o n ) , London: Butterworth. G-UTTMAN, L. (1944) "A basis f o r s c a l i n g q u a l i t a t i v e data," American Sociology Review. Vol.9,139-50 GUTTKAN, L. (1947) "The Cornell Technique f o r scale and i n t e n s i t y a n a l y s i s " , Educational Psychology Measurement , V o l . 7, 247-80 HALL, E.T. (1966) The Hidden Dimension. New York: Doubleday. HARDWICK, W.G. (1970) "The Changing Structure of Downtown: A Pu b l i c P o l i c y Context", C.A.G. Paper, Winnipeg. HARDWICK, W.G. ( l97 l ) "Regional P o l i t i c a l and Administrative Developments i n the Vancouver Region", C.A.G. Paper, S t . Catherines. HARRIS, R.C. (1967) " H i s t o r i c a l Geography i n Canada", Canadian Geographer. Vol.XI,4, 235-50 HARVEY, D. (1969) Explanation i n Geography. London: Arnold. HOOVER, E. & VERNON, R. (1959) Anatomy of a Metropolis. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Press. HOYT, H. (1939) The Structure and Growth of R e s i d e n t i a l Neighbourhoods i n American C i t i e s . Washington: Federal Housing Administration. JACKSON, J.B. (1953) "The Westward Moving House", Landscape, Vol.II,3 , 8 - 2 1 JACKSON, J.B. (1959) " F i r s t comes the house", Landscape.IXX.2.26-35. JACKSON, J.B. ( l 9 6 l ) " E s s e n t i a l A r c h i t e c t u r e " , Landscape. X,3,27-30 JOHNSTONE, R.J. (1969) "Towards an A n a l y t i c a l Study of the Townscape: The r e s i d e n t i a l b u i l d i n g f a b r i c " , Geografiska Annaler Vol.51B,20-32 JORDAN, R.F. (1966) V i c t o r i a n A r c h i t e c t u r e , London: P e l i c a n . KENNEDY, R.W. (1953) The House and the A r t of i t s Design. New York: Reinhold. -151-KOYfcMHOEVEw, i J.A. (194bj Made i n America. Garden City,N.Y. :Doubleday. K L U F F E L M , F. (1936) "Louisiana House Types", A.A.A.G-.. Vol.26,179-93. KNIITEN, j j ' . (1963) "Polk nousing: Key to Diffusion',* A . A . A . G . .Vol.53,549-77 • KDTHAiM, G. & STAINSBY, D. ( 1 9 0 ^ Vancouver: Sights and I n s i g h t s , Toronto: McMillan. LANCASTER, 0. (1963) P i l l a r to Post, or the Pocket ^ook or Architecture, 3rd e d i t i o n , London:Murray. LASSERRE, F. (1961) "Canada", i n RlCnARDa, J , M . (ed.) New Buildings i n the Commonwealth, London:Architectural Press. LEWIS, 0. (1957; Here Lived the C a l i f o r n i a n s , New York:Rinehart. LOWENTHAL, D, (1962) "Not Every Prospect Pleases", Landscape, Vol.12,2,19-23. LUTGENS, R. (ed.^^1^50-7) Erde und weltwirtschart, 5 v o l s . , S t u t t g a r t : LYNEo, A. v 1954) The Tastemakers, New York: Universal L i b r a r y , Grosset & Donlap. M A A S O , j . (195/) The Gingerbread Age: A View of V i c t o r i a n America, New York: Rineharto MATHER, E.G. & KAUPS, M. (19b3) "The F i n n i s h Sauna: A C u l t u r a l Index of Settlernent", A.A.A.G., V01.p3,4>4-5^4 MATHER, E.G. & HART, J.F.,(1961) "The Character of Tobacco Barns and t h e i r Role i n the Tobacco economy of the united States", A.A.A.G., V o l . 5 1 , 274-93. MAiWELL, A.E. (1961) Analysing; Q u a l i t a t i v e Data, London;Methuen. MAYER, H.M. & WADE, R.C. (19b9) Chicago:Growth of a Metropolis. Chicago: U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago Press« McURAE, M. (1963) The Ancestral Roof. Domestic Arcr.itectre of Upper Canada. Toronto: .. - - - - • • ? MICHELSON, W.H. (1970) Man and a i s Urban Environment: A S o c i o l o g i c a l Approach. Don M i l l s , Ontario: Addison 'Wesley. MIKEoELL, M.o. (I9b9) "The Borderlands of Geography as a S o c i a l Science", p.227-48 i n SHERIF, M. & SHERIF, C.W. ,(eds<>j I n t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y Relationships i n the S o c i a l sciences. Chicago:Aldine. MILLS, C.W. (1965) The Power E l i t e , New York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press. MORLEY, A. (1961) Vancouver. From Milltown to Metropolis, Vancouver:Mitchell Press. MUMFORD, L. (1959) Roots of Contemporary American A r c h i t e c t u r e . 2nd E d i t i o n , New lork:Grove P r e s s 0 -152-MUSDIE, R. (1969) "Factorial Ecology of Metropolitan Toronto, 1 951-1961',' University of Chicago, Department of G-eography, Research Paper, No.116. NELSON, H. (1963) "Townscapes of Mexico: an example of the regional variations of townscapes',' Economic Geography, Vol.39? 74-83. NORBURG, L. (ed.) (i960) "I.G.U. Urban Geography Symposium',' Lund Studies i n Geography. Series B, No.24. OPENSHAW, S. (1969) "Canonical Correlates of Social Structure and Urban Building Fabric - An exploratory study',' University of Newcastle, Department of Geography, Seminar Paper, No.11. OPENSHAW, S. (1971) "An algorithm f o r the continuous cluster analysis of large data sets" University of Newcastle. Department of . Geography. Seminar Paper. No.17 PARSES, D.N. (1969) "The Guttman Scalogram: An Empirical Appraisal i n Urban Geography',' Australian Geographical Studies,Vol.7, 109-56. PERIN, C. (1970) With Man i n Mind: An in t e r d i s c i p l i n a r y Prospectus f or Environmental Design, Cambridge,Mass.: M.I.T. Press. RAPOPORT, A. (1969) House Form and Culture, Englewood C l i f f s , N . J . : Prentice H a l l . filCKERT, J.E. (1967) "House Facades of the Northeastern United States: a tool of geographical analysis'^ A.A.A.G., Vol . 5 7 , 211-38. ROBSON, B.T. (1969) Urban Analysis: A Study of City Structure With Special Reference to Sunderland, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press. SAUER, CO. (1925) "The Morphology of Landscape',' University of Ca l i f o r n i a , Publications i n Geography, Vol.2,19-33. SAUER, CO. (1941 ) "Foreword to H i s t o r i c a l Geography',' A.A.A.G.,Vol.31,1-24. SAUER, CO. (1963) Land and L i f e : selections from the writings of Carl Ortwin~Sauer. (Ed. ~by ~j " . Leighly), Berkeley and Los A*ngeles: University of Cali f o r n i a Press. SCULLEY, V.J. (1955) The Shingle Style, Yale:Yale University Press. SIEMENS, A.H. (1968)"Lower Fraser Valley:The Evolution of a Cultural Landscape',' B.C. Geographical Series, No.9, Vancouver:Tantalus. SIM-IONS, J.W. (1967) "Urban Geography i n Canada", Canadian Geographer. Vol.XI,4,341 "356. SOLOMON, R.J. (1966) "Procedures i n Townscape Analysis; 1 A.A.A.G.,Vol.56.254-68. SOLOMON, R.J. & GOODHAND, W.E. (1965) "Past Influences i n Present Townscapes: Some Tasmanian Examples,"-New Zealand Geographer, Vol.21,113~320 STEINBRUECK, U. (1953) Seattle Architecture,1850-1953. New York:Reinhold. SOMiiER, R. (1969) Personal Space: the Behavioral Basis of Design, Englewood Cliffs,N.J.:Prentice H a l l . ' - 1 5 3 -TREWARTHA, G-.T. ( 1 9 4 6 ) "Types of Rural Settlement i n Col o n i a l America1,' Geographical Review,XXXVI,568-96. TUNNARD, C. & REED, H.A. ( 1 9 5 5 ) American Sk y l i n e , the growth and form of our c i t i e s and towns, Boston: WARNER, S.B. ( 1 9 6 2 ) Streetcar Suburbs: The Process of Growth i n Boston, 1 8 7 0 - 1 9 0 0 . Cambridge,Mass.: M.I.T. Press. WALHOUSE, F. ( 1 9 6 1) "Minority Ethnic Groups i n Vancouver',' unpublished MoA. t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver. WARD, D. ( 1 9 6 9 ) "The I n t e r n a t i o n a l S p a t i a l Structure of Immigrant R e s i d e n t i a l D i s t r i c t s i n the Late Nineteenth Century',' Geographical A n a l y s i s , V o l . 1 , 3 3 7 - 5 3 . WEINRICH, H. ( 1 9 6 8 ) "Vancouver Architecture;' Canadian A r c h i t e c t , V o l . 2 3 , No.13, 4 7 - 5 4 . WHIFFEN, M. ( 1 9 6 9 ) American Architecture Since 178O: A guide to the s t y l e s , Cambidge,Mass.: M.I.T. Press. WHITEHAND, J.W.R. ( 1 9 6 7 ) "The Settlement Morphology of London's C o c k t a i l B e l t , " Ti.jds. voor econ. en Soc. Geog., V o l . 5 8 , 2 0 - 2 7 . WILSON, H.L. ( 1 9 1 0 ) The Bungalow Book, Los Angeles: WOLFORTH, J.R. ( 1 9 6 5 ) "Residential Location and the Place of Work',' B.C. Geographical Series, No.4, Vancouver:Tantalus. W00DF0RDE, J . ( 1 9 6 9 ) The Truth About Cottages, London:Routledge and Kegan Paul. ZELINSKY, W. ( 1 9 5 9 ) "Walls and Fences1,' Landscape. V o l .9 , 2 , 1 4 0 - 4 1 . ZELIN3KY, W. ( 1 9 7 0 ) " C u l t u r a l Variations i n Personal Name Patterns i n the Eastern United States," A .A.A.G., V o l . 6 0 , 7 4 3 - 6 9 -m - 1 5 4 - APPENDU A Facade Element Details of Houses Selected ^^o^o_^m^l£Ji2^i^ LOCATION Y 1 . 3 6 8 1 C A 0 0 2. 2642WI 05 3. 294111 08 4. 1940EY 0 8 5 . 2781PG- 1 0 60 2622W1 1 0 7 . 1842ST 10 8 . 2 7 ^ 3 1 0 9 * 2733W3 10 10. 1902ST 1 0 11. 3036m 1 0 12. 3556PG- 1 0 13. 3148W1 1 0 14. 3011W3 10 15= 2997W2 1 2 l6 0 1915BY 1 2 1 7 . 2896W6 10 18. 3522IC3 1 2 1 9 . 3 6 4 3 ^ 5 12 20 . 2 0 4 3 CO 12 21, 2132BL 12 22. 3317W3 1 2 23 o 353W3 1 2 24o 1641DU 1 2 25» 12 26. 1724DU 1 2 27. " 3562W1 1 2 28„ 351+ZRl 1 2 2 9 . 3517W2 1 2 30. 31307a 12 3 1 . 2 7 4 0 1 0 1 2 3 2 . 3556W7 1 2 33.2667W2 1 2 34= 3 8 3 I P G 1 2 3 5 . 2940W6 1 2 3 6 . 1640A1 1 2 3 7 . 3121VT6 13 38. 3125W6 13 39. 3449W3 13 4 0 . 3486W2 1 4 41. 3663W2 1 4 42. 2868533 1 4 ' 4 3 . 3347W8 1 4 44. 3936FG 1 5 4 5 . 364211 1 5 4 6 . 320&W3 1 8 2 0 4 7 » IS1 | S . 3Q51W8 2 0 *9* 3293W4 2 0 ). 3655W5 2 0 X1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 6 2 1 6 1 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 1 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 6 6 2 2 2 6 3 3 X2 1 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 5 1 O c 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 2 3 3 3 X3 X4 4 4 1 4 1 l 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 3 2 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 1 r. d. 2 2 2 O c 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 4 6 4 2 6 2 4 6 1 2 2 2 6 2 2 2 2 2 2 5 2 2 5 1 4 6 4 2 2 5 LOCATION 51--3255W5 52. 33HW3 :971W5 2 2 4 2 3 2 2 55-iSb3Wi> 3406W2 560 3126W6 5 7 o 58« 5 9 . 61 62 3 0 0 9 W 8 3574W2 3 1 8 7 1 1 3 1 9 5 1 1 3 6 0 3 1 1 2181WA 6 3 o 2 1 2 0 D U 6 4 o 368QP& 6 5 o 3 6 7 2 \ f l 66.2435TU 6 7 , 2742W2 6 8 „ 3 5 9 1 1 0 6 9 . 3481W8 7 0 „ 3 4 9 W 8 7 1 3 2 7 9 W 8 7 2 o 2 2 2 I W A 3375W2 3270W5 3 6 5 8 1 1 3 6 2 5 1 1 2 8 3 4 1 1 2 8 2 8 1 1 8 0 . 3 5 6 6 W 8 81 o 3095PC 2 6 1 5 P & 331OW8 3065P& 2994P& 86.350901 8 7 o 364^3 88.3341PC 73 o 74. 7 5 . 7 6 0 7 7 o 7 8 . 820 83. 84. 85« 3448P& 3Q57W2 3621W2 3443W3 346710 2 7 2 4 P & 2716W3 3649WI 354&W7 356III 9 9o3 0 0 5 W 3 100. 3 6 5 1 P & 89< 90. 9I-0 92, 93o 94. 95 0 9 6 0 97 a 20 20 2 1 21 21 21 22 22 22 22 22 25 25 25 26 27 2 7 27 27 27 2 3 28 28 28 30 30 31 35 35 38 40 40 40 441 41 41 41 41 42 43 44 46 46 47 48 53 55 63 X1 3 J J 3 3 o 6 4 c 3 6 3 2 3 3 3 4 6 4 3 4 4 4 4 >, 5 5 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 5 1 2 4 4 3 3 2 3 4 3 3 4 3 2 4 4 L 4 4 4 4 4 2;. 4 5 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 5 4 5 5 5 5 X3 4 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 2 4 4 4 4 4 4 ~> 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 A 4 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 5 5 X4 4 2 2 4 4 5 4 4 4 4 1 6 3 3 3 3 ;, - r 3 3 3 2 2 3 3 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 6 4 4 4 5 4 6 4 4 4 5 AL = Alma Street CA BL - Blenheim Street CO BY - Bayswater Street JJTJ Cameron Avenue Collingwood St, Dunbar Street MC = MacDonald St. TU = Trutch St. PC- = Point Grrey Road WA = Waterloo- St. ST = Stephens Street 11 = West 1 1 t h Avenue, (otherwise W3 to mea.n West 3 r d . APPBiDIX B D i f f e r e n c e s B e t r r e e n C o r r e c t Y e a r o f C o n s t r u c t i o n a n d V a l u e s S x p e e t e d K r o m K i i l t i ^ l e R e p r e s s i o n T f e i d r t i n e ; o f B l e a e i r t S u h t y n e s C 3L o n « r >: o L t s I r i u _ r 0 I 6 T t "1 -' C 5 [ -HML 1 . 0 . 9 3 . C 6 2 3 46 2 3 61 . ;• (; 9; . 1 2 7 -'9 . 1 .3 ? 0 -> . s . ."> 0 0 3 . ' 6 2 3 = ' ? i 5 7 . 2 " j ; . . . i ? ? - 9 . 3 2 1 0 3 . H . r C C O 7 . 1 a 3 c ]'6 4 . 3 3 . 2 ] ; 'v . 7 44 •" . n 6 3 5 ? 4 . 3 .c . 3 " 8 . 9 6 2 3 - 0 . C 2 ? 3 6 4 . 2 1 j •... i 9 5 2.5 6-. - 4 . 2 34 5 5 . i <. 0. 0 0 0 . 7 2 2 2 4 E - 0 1 Q . " ? 7 9 5 5 . 2 1 O A > 2 . O F . 9 - 1 . 9 H 5 3 6 . 1 9 . .^ 5 , 6 8 5 1 £ , 3 1 4 9 2 1 ->jC 20 .->37 . 6 3 0 6 4 r - J 1 7 . 1 o . "•CO 1 2 . 01 7 - 2 . 0 1 7 4 - 7 . 2 ? C J O 9 7 , s )q - 6 . 3 9 f 3 P . I T . r o o 1 . 2 6 9 5 3 . 7 3 C 5 5 3 . 2 2 J j 0 2 6 9f>4 - 3. 3 9 3 9 9 . 19 c 9 0 Q . 2 80 3 1. 6 1 9 7 6 Q . 2 2 • J I.14 2 5 4 6 9 - 3 . 4 3 rtt 1 0 . 1- . 0 oc 1 0 . 9 6'J - 0 . =-6 6 4 9 6*" . 2 2 3 0 0 2 6 5 3 1 - 4 . 5 3 1 2 1 1 . 1 0 . o o o I C . =>69 - 0 . 9 6 9 4 9 6 1 . 2 2 v J 4 3 5 . 1 5 " - 1 3 . 1 3 9 ' 12 . 1 0 . C O O 1 0 . 9 6 9 - C . 9 6 9 4 9 6 2 . 2 4 0 - 0 9 1 96 7 2 . 1 3 3 3 1 3 . I C . 0 " " 1 4 . 6 5 0 - 4 , 64 r<! 6 3 . 2 5 . J i , 3 6 61 1 - 1. 5 3 1. 2 1 4 . n . 1 c . 7 5 9 7 5 6 6 6 4 . 2 6 J J O 2 i 5 7 3 - 9 . 9 7 7 6 1 5 . 0 o 0 I 3 . 0 0 4 - 6 . r 0 3 3 6 5 . 2 5 ". - . 4 2 4 531 0 . 6 1 0 7 q 1 6 . 1 2 . o r - 1 3 . 2 1 5 - 1 . 2 1 4 6 6 6 . 2 5 9 ^ 4 2 2 21 1 2 . 7 3 9 2 1 7 . I > r -. r 1 5 . 4 6 C _ Q O 4 5 C 3 6 7 . 2 6 J A 16 6 5 7 " . 3 4 2 9 1 3 . 12 . 0 ~' 2 0 . 7 4 4 - 3 . 7 4 4 2 6 3 . 2 7 o 3 4 1 3 4 <„r 9 . 5 32 3 1 0 . 1? r r r 1 C . 9 6 9 1 . 0 3 C 5 6 9 . 2 7 0 J 0 .444 - " ' . 4 4 4 1 2 0 . 1 2 0 0 ''' 1 0 . 9 6 9 1 . 03C 5 7 " . 3 7. 0 .• 4 •1 2 3 .5 3 -5.331-7 21 . 1 2 . r o r 1 1 . 6 73 0 . i 2 6 6 5 71 . 2 7 . 0 J L 3 0 4 4 4 - 3 . 4 4 4 1 2 2 , 12 r . i t 1 4 . 5 6 1 - 2 . 6 6 1 3 7 2 . 2 7 . 3 • 0 3 1 64 1 - 4 . 6 4 1 4 23 . 1 2 . n r 1 0 . 9 5 9 1 . 0 3C 5 7 5 . 2 , J . ^ C i ? 7 6 4 -4 . 7 4 4 . j 24 . 1 2 . 0 C C 1 0 . 9 6 9 1 . 0 3 0 6 7 4 . 2 5 j J.. 2 ^ t. 53 3 .64 14 2 5 . 12 i •' 0 1 3 . 5 5 9 - 1 . 5 6 3 7 7 5 . 2 5 . ., j ^ 3 1 6 4 1 - 9 . 6 4 1 4 2 6 . 12 . ^  -o 1 0 . 9 6 9 1 . 0 30 5 7 6 . 2 =. 0 j 0 30 4 4 4 - 2 . 4 4 4 1 2 7 . 1 2 . C 0 j I C . 9 6 5 1 . 0 3 C 5 7 7 . 2 0 1 3 0 6 1 5 - 0 . 5 1 J 4 5 2B . 1 2 r oc. 1 C . 9 6 9 1 . 0 3 C 6 7 3 . 3 0 . u . 1, = " 6 1 <-l - 0 . 5 1 J ; 3 2 9 . 1 2 . C 0 0 10 . 9 6 9 1 . 0 3 0 5 7 5 . 3 I . o o o 3 1 . 0 4 1 - 0 . 6 4 1 4 3 3 1 . 1 2 C C O 1 3 . 1 4 0 - 1 . 135C u r, , 3 3 . J O u i 1 6 4 1 3 . 3 5 Li 5 ">1 . 1 2 r, r 3 7 . 4 3 0 - 2 5 . A P O 3 1 . 3 6 . :j 4 4 3 3 3 3 7 1 . 1 1 3 4 3 2 . 1 2 . C 0 r i . 7 2 2 2 4 0 - 0 1 11 . 6 2 3 3? . "53. 3 5 . 034 2,9161 3 3 . 1 ? 1 3 . 2 1 5 - 1 . 2 1 4 6 d '• . 4 J . i J i° 9 5 ..' ;. 6 04 7 41 - 0 1 \9 4 . 1 2 . 1 ^ . 4 6 r - 3 . 4 5 93 96 . 4 0 . ... J 0 3 6 . 1 5 9 •1 .34 1 4 3 « . 1 2 . •"0 0 1 C . 9 6 5 1 . 0 3 C 5 . 3 6 . 60 . oo c 4 2 . 6 J Q - 2 . 5 337 3 6 . 1 2 3 0 r 1 9 . 54 7 - 7 . 5 4 6 9 5 6 . 4 1 . 3 6 . 3 6 0 4 . 4 4 9 5 3 7 . 1 3 . o-oc 1 5 . 2 1 5 - 0 . 2 1 4 6 4 9 7 . 4 1 . V.0 42. 5 3 5 - 1 . 6 3 3 7 38 . 1 3 . " r : 1 0 . 5 6 9 2 . C33 6 5 3 . 4 1 . J J O 35 . 0 3 4 6 . 9 1 6 1 3 ° . 1 3 . 0 oo 10 . 9 6 9 2 . 03C 5 8 9 . 4 1 . •J J i. 3 5 . OO 9 5 . 9 9 0 3 4 0 . 1 4 . c. c r 1 4 . 3 3 7 - 1 . 3 3 7 2 2 9 9 . 4 1 . J 0 0 3 6 . 6 5 0 4 . 4 4 9 3 4 1 . 1 4. 1 0 . & 6 9 3 . 0 3 0 6 9 1 . 4 2 . J .1 J 3 3 . 7 5 2 3 . 2 4 7 3 . 42 . 14. 14.09 1 0 . 9 6 G -j r 3 n 5 9 2 . 4 3 . c o o 3 i . 0 51 9 . 0 38 7 4 3 . 1 4 . " 0 0 1 5 . 7 5 5 -1 . 75»6 9 3 . 4 4 . 0 0 0 3 9 . 9 5 0 4 . 0 5 0 5 4 4 . 1 5 . C O O 2 6 . 6 3 1 - 1 1 . 6 e l 4 6 . u J U • 2 . 5 3 9 3 . 4 6 1 3 4 5 . 1 5 . C " 0 1 C . 9 6 5 4 . r 3 " 5 5 5 . 4 ft . 0, J o J 6. O H 4 1 0 . 91 0 4 6 . •13 .' '•. ,~ 1 9 . 2 " 3 - 1 . 2 C 2 " 3 6 . 4 7 . a J 0 1 9 5 4 . 8 0 6 3 4 7 . 2 0 . " • : 2 •;. 744 -<1. 7 4 4 17 5 7 . 4 3 . 3 0 0 1 9 . 9 5 0 3 . 9 5 0 4 4 3 . 2 : . Oi 0 2 0 . 7 4 4 - 0 . 7 4 4 1 7 O 9 , 5 3. JOO -f i. 7 3 6 5 . 2 6 4 "• 4 9 . 2 3 . 0 " 0 1-0. 9 6 5 i. 3 C 5 '•• 5 . 6 5 . 0 0 j 4 - . 7 36 1 1 . 2 0 4 50 . 2 3 • 0 " 0 2 5 . 4 5 6 — 5 . 4 5 3 5 1 0 0 . 6"-. J J O 4 6 . 2 5 0 1 6 . 7 5 0 C a l c u l a t e d " v a l u e s a r e - d e r i v e d f r o r n e q u a t i o n : - T = -10.825 + 1 . 1 9 7 Z , + 5 . 9 8 8 2 X , , + 2.5892X- + 1 . 1 2 2 6 X , V a l u e s f o r i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e s a r e a s i n A P P E N D I X A , a n d t h e n u m b e r s c o r r e s p o n d . -156-APPETOIX 0 D a t a on H o u s i n g C o m p l e t i o n s i n K i t s i l a n o S t u d y A r e a and A n n u a l V a l u e s o f B u i l d i n g s i n C i t y o f V a n c o u v e r ACTUAL VALUES YEAR K i t s i l a n o : C i t y A n n u a l Bld£ A n n u a l C o m p l e t i o n P e r m i t s $ V a l u e 3 Y e a r M o v i n g Means K i t s i l a n o $ M i l l i o n s 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 3 0 0 0 12 1 0 25 6 136 34 574 33 97 35 10 4 30 15 118 34 80 33 78 151 135 138 111 62 39 30 13 3 3 6 8 23 11 7 18 23 11 5 13 12 19 21,572,727 14,645,206 10,066,425 2,854,206 1,564,541 1,418,822 3,892,655 4,641,545 6,760,880 8,274,300 6,253,796 8,053,725 9,216,520 5,996,015' 4,663,734 12,601,818 16,843,897 28,136,963 1 1 4 4.3 4.6 8.6 10.3 55.6 58.6 248.0 214.0 234.6 53.0 47.3 16.3 14.6 16.3 54.3 55.6 77.3 39.0 63.6 87.3 121.3 140.0 128.0 103.6 70.6 43.0 15.43 27.3 9.19 15.1 4.83 6.0 1.95 3.6 2.29 5.1 3.32 12.3 5.59 14.0 6.54 13.6 7.08 12.0 7.51 16.0 7.84 17.3 7.76 13.0 6.63 9.6 7.84 10.0 11.37 14.6 19.19 20.3 22.29 -157-APEENDIX 0 - CQgTimJEI) ACTUAL VALUES 3 Y e a r M o v i n g Means YEAR K i t s i l a n o : C i t y A n n u a l B l d g . K i t s i l a n o $ M i l l i o n s A n n u a l C o m p l e t i o n P e r m i t s $ V a l u e 1947 30 21,877,675 22.6 29.09 1948 19 37,262,817 21.0 30.72 1949 14 33,041,252 13.0 35.09 195,0 6 34,999,669 8.0 30.06 1951 4 23,942,309 4.3 29.11 1952 3 28,387,737 3.6 34.36 1955 4 50,748,757 45,258,767 5.0 41.47 1954 8 4.6 50.49 1955 2 55,446,193 64,679,148 5.0 55.14 1956 5 4.3 58.88 1957 6 56,499,913 5.0 59.11 1958 4 56,433,775 3.6 56.50 1959 1 56,869,832 2.3 49*95 I960 2 36,847,190 1.0 44.19 1961 0 38,848,447 1.3 40.18 1962 2 44,852,461 1.0 45.42 1963 1 52,544,443 1.6 58.81 1964 2 79,037,630 2.6 71.98 1965 5 84,351,749 3.1 77.40 1966 0 68,801,850 2.6 84.44 1967 3 100,154,600 1.6 92.87 1968 2.-. 109,658,419 2.0 108.08 1969 1 114,423,702 1.0 112.04 

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}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            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:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0107069/manifest

Comment

Related Items