Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Orchard Park: a tenant survey of the second installment of public housing in Vancouver (December 1958-May… Reid, Ella Mary 1962

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1962_A5 R33 O7.pdf [ 7.19MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0302582.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0302582-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0302582-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0302582-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0302582-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0302582-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0302582-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0302582-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0302582.ris

Full Text

ORCHARD PARK: A T e n a n t S u r v e y o f t h e S e c o n d I n s t a l m e n t o f P u b l i c H o u s i n g i n V a n c o u v e r . (December 1958 - May I960.) b y E l l a Mary R e i d T h e s i s S u b m i t t e d i n P a r t i a l F u l f i l l m e n t o f t h e R e q u i r e m e n t s f o r t h e Degree o f MASTER OF SOCIAL WORK i n t h e S c h o o l o f S o c i a l Work A c c e p t e d as c o n f o r m i n g t o t h e s t a n d a r d r e q u i r e d f o r t h e d e g r e e o f M a s t e r o f S o c i a l Work S c h o o l o f S o c i a l Work The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a . In presenting this thesis in p a r t i a l fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make i t freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It i s understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of The University of British Columbia, Vancouver 8, Canada. Date /e>' i v A b s t r a c t The Orchard Park Housing P r o j e c t , f i r s t tenanted i n December 193>8> i s the second instalment of s u b s i d i z e d housing i n Vancouver. A l s o managed by the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y under the s a n c t i o n of f e d e r a l , p r o v i n c i a l and m u n i c i p a l govern-ments, i t i s the s i s t e r p r o j e c t - t o " L i t t l e Mountain", the p u b l i c housing p r o j e c t s i t u a t e d at Main S t r e e t and 33rd Avenue, Vancouver. T h i s p r o j e c t has been the s u b j e c t o f a previous s u r -vey ( E l a i n e Fromson, Joy Hansen, and Roger Smith: The L i t t l e  Mountain Low-Rental Housing P r o j e c t : A Survey of i t s Welfare  Aspects"*!! An important s i m i l a r i t y to the L i t t l e Mountain pro-j e c t i s t h a t Orchard Park, too, was c o n s t r u c t e d without d i r e c t involvement w i t h slum-clearance; i n other words, the people here re-rhoused were drawn from many d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n s to a new s i t e . T h i s study attempts to analyse, from the tenants 1 p o i n t of view, the e f f i c a c y w i t h which t h e i r v a r i o u s "welfare" needs are being met by the p r o v i s i o n of publicly-owned housing; the rami-f i c a t i o n s of project-community r e l a t i o n s ; and the a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e i m p l i c a t i o n s of the e n t i r e u n d e r t a k i n g . T h i s i n f o r m a t i o n was o b t a i n e d by means of i n t e r v i e w s (a one-in-three sampling of the tenant p o p u l a t i o n ) , averaging approximately one hour i n l e n g t h . P r o p o r t i o n a l samples of the tenant " c a t e g o r i e s " were obtained, w i t h r e g a r d to (a) types of f a m i l y ("complete" f a m i l i e s , "broken" f a m i l i e s , " s i n g l e " occupants) and (b) income groups. An o v e r a l l s t a t i s t i c a l p i c t u r e , f o r comparison, was d e r i v e d from the r e g i s t r a t i o n f i l e s of the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y . Tenant r e a c t i o n s v a r i e d g r e a t l y depending p a r t i a l l y upon previous housing experience; but the p r o v i s i o n of new, b r i g h t , and c l e a n surroundings, w i t h adequate heat and hot water, was h a i l e d w i t h v i r t u a l unanimity. However, s e v e r a l areas of con-c e r n are outstanding ( l ) No a p p r o p r i a t e l y planned f a c i l i t i e s f o r c h i l d r e n e x i s t ; ( 2 ) i n i t i a l laundry arrangements were u n s a t i s f a c -t o r y ; (3) the layout of Orchard Park i n c l u d e s three "through" s t r e e t s , a h a z a r d to b o t h young and o l d ; and, (Ij.) so f a r as space and f a c i l i t i e s are concerned, a b s o l u t e l y no p r o v i s i o n has been made f o r tenant g a t h e r i n g s . The growing p r o p o r t i o n of lower-income f a m i l i e s , and a l s o of multi-problem f a m i l i e s i n l o c a l p u b l i c housing i s v i t a l i n the i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h i s study, which are d i s c u s s e d f u l l y i n Chapter IV. I t i s c l e a r t h at not o n l y f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h , but more a t t e n t i o n t o "welfare p r a c t i c a l i t i e s " i s e s s e n t i a l , i f present d e f i c i e n c i e s are to be avoided i n the f u t u r e . V Acknowledgment s J u s t as no man i s an i s l a n d u n t o h i m s e l f , no s t u d y i s c o n c e i v e d and b r o u g h t t o f r u i t i o n w i t h o u t t h e c a r e and c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f many p e o p l e . F o r t h e g e n e r o s i t y o f t h e two s o c i a l w o r k e r s , M i s s J a n e t K e r r and M i s s L u k i a M i c h a s , who v o l u n t a r i l y com-p l e t e d b etween them a number o f t h e n e c e s s a r y i n t e r v i e w s , I am s i n c e r e l y g r a t e f u l . F o r t h e p a t i e n t and u n t i r i n g c o - o p e r a t i o n o f Mr. C o l i n S u t h e r l a n d , Manager o f t h e V a n c o u v e r H o u s i n g A u t h o -r i t y , and t h a t o f h i s s t a f f , I w o u l d l i k e t o r e c o r d r e s p e c t and g r a t i t u d e . F o r t h e k e e n i n t e r e s t and i n f i n i t e a s s i s t a n c e o f Dr. L e o n a r d M a r s h o f t h e S c h o o l o f S o c i a l Work, who h a s b e e n as a b e a c o n , g u i d i n g t h i s s u r v e y f r o m i n c e p t i o n t o c o m p l e t i o n , I am d e e p l y o b l i g a t e d . i i TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I : The Pros and Cons of Low-Rent Housing Welfare and Housing—some d e f i n i t i o n . P e r t i n e n t recent st u d i e s on e f f e c t s of housing. Suggestions on minimal neighbourhood standards. D i f f i c u l t i e s i n housing the low-income groups. Current need f o r e f f e c t i v e low-r e n t a l housing—demand and supply. Some c o n t r i b u t i o n s of p u b l i c a c t i o n and housing experiences elsewhere. Delayed l o c a l acceptance of p u b l i c housing. Scope and purpose of present study 1 Chapter I I : Orchard Park and i t s Tenants The p r o j e c t : geographical l o c a t i o n ; "layout"; s t r u c -t u r a l features of Orchard Park. The f a m i l i e s : s o c i o -economic f a c t o r s ; method of s e l e c t i o n ; income l e v e l s ; f a m i l y c o n s t e l l a t i o n s ; former l o c a t i o n s . The new l o c a t i o n : general d i s t r i c t and f a c i l i t i e s ; p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n . Concepts of "community" and"neighbour-hood " among tenants 1 8 Chapter I I I : F a m i l i e s Rehoused P h y s i c a l e f f e c t s of r e l o c a t i o n . F a c i l i t i e s f o r c h i l d r e n . Homemakers' views of f a c i l i t i e s . Econo-mic e f f e c t s of rehousing. S o c i a l e f f e c t s of r e l o c a -t i o n : home l i f e and f a m i l y r e l a t i o n s ; l e i s u r e time and r e c r e a t i o n . S o c i a l f a c i l i t i e s : p r o j e c t and neighbourhood. Negative aspects of Orchard Park Chapter IV: P u b l i c Housing A d m i n i s t r a t i o n Rents and e l i g i b i l i t y : p u b l i c housing as a s o c i a l s e r v i c e ; p u b l i c housing p o l i c y . Admissions p o l i c y and procedure. The rent s c a l e . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e d i f -r i c u l t i e s . Landlord and tenant r e l a t i o n s . Implica-t i o n s of survey f i n d i n g s 77 APPENDICES A. The Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y Progressive Rent Scale.. 1 0 2 B. The Interview Outline lOlj. C. The In s p e c t i o n Report 1 1 0 D. The Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y Family Income Form I l l E. B i b l i o g r a p h y 1 1 2 i i i TABLES AND CHARTS IN THE TEXT a) Tables Table 1 D i s t r i b u t i o n and Composition of Housing U n i t s , Orchard Park, 1959 26 Table 2 Income and Fa m i l y D i s t r i b u t i o n , Orchard Park, 1959 2 6 Table 3 Percentage A n a l y s i s of Income and Family D i s t r i b u t i o n , Orchard Park, 1959 28 Table 1+ Income Sources of Tenant F a m i l i e s (Ex-c l u d i n g S i n g l e Tenants) Orchard Park, 1959 29 Table 5 D i s t r i b u t i o n o f C h i l d P o p u l a t i o n , Orchard Park, 1959 32 Table 6 F a m i l i e s Dependent on Income other than Employment, December, 1959 8 l Table 7 Comparison of Vancouver C i t y S o c i a l Ser-v i c e S o c i a l Allowance Rates i n 195^- and i n I960.. 8i| Table 8 Comparison of Income and R e n t a l A l l o c a t i o n . as s e t out by Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y and Vancouver- C i t y S o c i a l S e r v i c e Depart-ment, I960 85 b) Charts F i g u r e 1 Sketch Map showing both Orchard Park and L i t t l e Mountain Housing P r o j e c t s , and Env i r o n s 19 F i g u r e 2 Schematic D i s t r i b u t i o n of Types of Accom-modation, L i t t l e Mountain and Orchard Park Housing P r o j e c t s , 1959 21 F i g u r e 3 Sketch Map, Types of L i v i n g U n i t s 21+ F i g u r e 1+ Former l o c a t i o n s o f tenants p r i o r t o r e l o c a t i o n i n Orchard Park 35 F i g u r e 5 Sketch Map of Orchard Park and surround-i n g d i s t r i c t 39 v i ORCHARD PARK: A Tenant Survey of the Second Instalment of Public Housing in Vancouver Chapter 1 THE PROS AND CONS OP LOW-RENT HOUSING Housing and Welfare "Housing" i s not simple s h e l t e r . Good housing f o r f a m i l y l i v i n g demands the c o - o r d i n a t i o n of design, c o n s t r u c t i o n and economics; neighbourhood, urban and r e g i o n a l p l a n n i n g ; p o l i -t i c s , s a n i t a t i o n , p r e v e n t a t i v e medicine and w e l f a r e s e r v i c e s . Of e s s e n t i a l importance, and y e t o f t e n overlooked, are the i n -d i v i d u a l s and f a m i l i e s f o r whom the end r e s u l t o f housing p o l i c y and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i s intended. Adequate housing i s one of the b a s i c needs of humanity--but p a r t i c u l a r l y of u r b a n i z e d Westerners. I t has been proved r e p e a t e d l y i n North American c i t i e s t h a t when t h i s need i s im-p r o p e r l y met, the community s u f f e r s s o c i a l l y and economically, both i n de p l e t e d human r e s o u r c e s , and through the monetary c o s t s of f i r e , disease and delinquency. A s i d e from the p h y s i c a l v u l -n e r a b i l i t y , the emotional d e t e r i o r a t i o n of the p o o r l y housed i n d i v i d u a l s through squ a l o r and overcrowding, w i t h t h e i r concomit-ant e f f e c t s of d i s c o n t e n t , f r u s t r a t i o n , a n x i e t y and apathy, may r e s u l t i n f a m i l y d i s i n t e g r a t i o n or c o n t r i b u t e t o f r a n k mental i l l n e s s . Prom a p u r e l y r e a l e s t a t e p o i n t of view, b l i g h t and d e c l i n i n g c i t y revenues have f o r c e d one c i t y a f t e r another to undertake d e m o l i t i o n and rehousing. Some rec e n t s t u d i e s have i n d i c a t e d t h a t a s u b s t a n t i a l pro-p o r t i o n of w e l f a r e and h e a l t h s e r v i c e s and funds are t y p i c a l l y 2 expended on behalf of a small percentage of the population. This i s much more than a housing matter. But every experi-enced s o c i a l worker i s aware of the high concentration of "multi-problem f a m i l i e s " i n areas of bl i g h t and inadequate hous-ing. A recent Canadian study has observed, "These families tend to gravitate toward the slum or blighted areas of the c i t y since slum housing may be a l l they can aff o r d or a l l that i s available to them. 1 , 2 Another relevant and up-to-date study, undertaken i n New Haven over a ten-year period, has indicated how fa r s o c i a l and personal experiences i n the development of psychiatric disorders are c o r r e l a t i v e to an individual's p o s i t i o n i n the class ( i . e . : income) structure. The data i n t h i s study was consistently r e l a t e d to the d i v i s i o n of the community into socio-economic strata, (Class I being used to designate the top socio-economic group, and Class V the lowest) with the following findings: "Almost without exception, Class V patients complained of overcrowded conditions during childhood. They f e l t t h i s crowding added to the general disorganization at home and thei r lack of privacy...." "The congested conditions under which the patients grew up were related d i r e c t l y to t h e i r parents' poor f i n a n c i a l c i r -cumstances. Not only were they unable to afford better housing, but they were usually overcharged f o r what they did have. The crowding, i n turn, e a s i l y l e d to f r i c t i o n , general 1. Bradley Buell and associates, Community Planning f o r Human  Services. Columbia University Press, New York. 1952. p.2. ~~ 2. Albert Rose, Regent Park. A Study i n Slum Clearance. Toronto University Press, Toronto, 1958. p.105. d i s o r d e r , and i n t e n s i f i c a t i o n of i n t e r p e r s o n a l c o n f l i c t w i t h i n the home." "Cla s s V p a t i e n t s a l s o moved f r e q u e n t l y d u r i n g t h e i r c h i l d -hood; on the average n e a r l y twice as o f t e n as C l a s s I I I p a t i e n t s . T y p i c a l l y , the C l a s s V p a t i e n t ' s f a m i l y moved f i v e or more times b e f o r e he was s i x t e e n years o l d . At times h i s f a m i l y c o u l d not pay t h e i r r e n t and were f o r c e d t o move even though other f a c i l i t i e s were not a v a i l a b l e immediately. The f a m i l y would then s p l i t up t e m p o r a r i l y , moving i n w i t h f r i e n d s or r e l a t i v e s u n t i l new q u a r t e r s were found." "Since t h e i r f a m i l i e s moved so f r e q u e n t l y , many l o w e r - c l a s s p a t i e n t s had d i f f i c u l t y forming s u s t a i n e d peer group con-t a c t s i n the neighbourhood.... There has been g a t h e r i n g evidence t h a t these d i f f e r e n t i a l s are t r u e i n other c i t i e s . I n Vancouver, there has been a c c e l e -r a t i n g a t t e n t i o n to slum c l e a r a n c e as a c i t y wide (urban p l a n -ning, or urban redevelopment) matter. 1. Jerome K. Myers and Bertram H. Roberts, Family and  C l a s s Dynamics i n Mental I l l n e s s . John Wi l e y and Sons, Inc., New York, 1959. p.17«. 2. The f o l l o w i n g r e f e r e n c e s are p e r t i n e n t here: (a) Leonard C. Marsh, R e b u i l d i n g a Neighbourhood; u n i v e r -s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1950. (b) T e c h n i c a l P l a n n i n g Board, C i t y of Vancouver Re-Devel- opment, P r o j e c t #1; November 1959 (Report presented t o Vancouver C i t y C o u n c i l . ) (c) Warren A. Wilson, Housing C o n d i t i o n s among S o c i a l A s s i s t a n c e F a m i l i e s ; Master of S o c i a l Work 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, 1955-(d) M i c h a e l Wheeler; E v a l u a t i n g the Need f o r Lox^r-Rental  Housing; Master of S o c i a l Work 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. IQtt. ..... ._ .... -- r (e) E l a i n e Fromson, Joy Hansen and Roger Smith, The L i t t l e  Mountain Low-Rental Housing^ P r o j e c t ; Master of S o c i a l Work 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, 1959. k That "slum-dwellers make the slums" i s no longer the dogma t h a t i t was (though i t s t i l l s u r v i v e s I n some un t u t o r e d a r e a s ) . The o l d " c o a l I n the bathtub" s t o r i e s , at l e a s t , have l o s t t h e i r p o i n t through the e x i s t e n c e of modern, c e n t r a l l y heated u n i t s . " I t has been proved time and time a g a i n t h a t as soon as housing c o n d i t i o n s have improved, the f a m i l y ' s standard of l i v i n g has improved."1 B e t t e r housing i s not a complete answer f o r everybody, but i t i s an unavoidable p a r t of the answer. T h i s problem of l o c a t i n g s u i t a b l e housing i s i n t e n s i f i e d f o r the lower-income groups, whether s i n g l e persons or f a m i l i e s , and the p r o p o r t i o n o f f a m i l y income t h i s group must a l l o c a t e f o r r e n t when competing f o r accommodation on the commercial market i s o f t e n h i g h e r than i n the case of medium- or higher-Income f a m i l i e s . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , i t does not n e c e s s a r i l y f o l l o w t h a t the payment of r e l a t i v e l y h i g h r e n t i n s u r e s these low-income f a m i l i e s of a good q u a l i t y of accommodation; and, most c e r t a i n -l y a r e l a t i v e l y low r e n t i s almost c e r t a i n to acquire o n l y low-q u a l i t y h o u s i n g . 2 "The slum p r o v i d e s the most dramatic evidence of what happens when poor housing i s coupled w i t h the problems of l i v i n g on a m a r g i n a l income."3 And one obvious r e s u l t of paying a d i s p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y h i g h r e n t i s a shortage of r e a d i l y a v a i l a b l e money f o r the purchase of other v i t a l n e c e s s i t i e s , whether food, f u r n i t u r e , c l o t h i n g , m e d i c a t i o n s , e d u c a t i o n or 1. Canadian Welfare, Vol.XXVIII, No.6, Dec.1 5 , 1 9 5 2•^bus-i n g and L i f e , p.10. " 2. Such evidence appears i n the study by Warren A.Wilson of Housing C o n d i t i o n s Among S o c i a l A s s i s t a n c e F a m i l i e s . Master of S o c i a l Work 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, 1955. 3. M i c h a e l Wheeler, E v a l u a t i n g the Need f o r Low-Rental Hous-i n g . Master of S o c i a l Work t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Colum-b i a . 1955. $ r e c r e a t i o n . When c h i l d r e n are i n v o l v e d , t h i s a f f e c t s them through environment even i f they should escape p h y s i c a l or other m a l n u t r i t i o n . But does the s i t u a t i o n r i g h t i t s e l f i n time? What of the b u i l d i n g boom x^hich has c h a r a c t e r i z e d not o n l y Vancouver but a l l Canadian c i t i e s s i n c e the end of the war? The answer to t h i s i s t h a t low-income groups can a f f o r d o n l y cheap accommodation and most of t h i s i s second-hand, t h i r d - h a n d , or worse. The " f i l t e r -i n g down" of o l d e r accommodation o r i g i n a l l y designed as s i n g l e -f a m i l y d w e l l i n g s , i n x^hich the m a j o r i t y o f lower-income f a m i l i e s r e s i d e , i n "converted" s u i t e s or rooms, b r i n g s w i t h i t more prob-lems than s o l u t i o n s , not always temporary. P o o r l y l i g h t e d and v e n t i l a t e d u n i t s , dampness and c o l d , d i r t and vermin, l a c k of adequate f a c i l i t i e s , overcrowding, and d i f f i c u l t maintenance take t h e i r t o l l , p h y s i c a l l y and e m o t i o n a l l y . The d i s r u p t i v e and d i s i n t e g r a t i n g i n f l u e n c e s upon f a m i l y r e l a t i o n s h i p s of uncomfor-t a b l e , dreary, d e m o r a l i z i n g housing are l i m i t l e s s . The outcome i s t h a t , m a t e r i a l l y and p s y c h o l o g i c a l l y , the low-income group s u f f e r s from want of adequate housing p r i c e d w i t h i n i t s range, without any r e s e r v a t i o n f o r o l d people. But o l d people's s p e c i a l housing i s c a l l e d f o r p r i m a r i l y because most pensioners are low-income groups. The p a t h o l o g i c a l i n f l u e n c e s of poor housing r e s o u r c e s do not stop at the boundary of the f a m i l y u n i t . The b l i g h t e d , p o o r l y l o c a t e d , unplanned neighbourhood exert s i t s e v i l influence' upon the community In a v a r i e t y of ways--through inadequate r e c r e -a t i o n a l areas f o r both c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s ; a "dog-eat-dog" approach i n l a n d l o r d - t e n a n t r e l a t i o n s ; the d e m o r a l i z i n g e f f e c t 6 upon f a m i l y l i f e of l o c a t i o n i n predominantly commercial or i n d u s t r i a l zones; and a l a c k of community s o c i a l resources i n g e n e r a l . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to compare the suggestions of the Vancouver Housing A s s o c i a t i o n f o r neighbourhood improvement, made i n a 19^9 b u l l e t i n , w i t h the r e a l i t i e s of the appearance and am-e n i t i e s of many s e c t i o n s of Vancouver at the present time: " 1 . Have we an adequate system of parks and p l a y l o t s ? " " 2 . Is the a p p l i c a t i o n of the H e a l t h , B u i l d i n g and Zoning By-laws e f f e c t i v e i n p r e v e n t i n g the spread of b l i g h t i n the area?" "3. Is there s u f f i c i e n t o f f - s t r e e t p a r k i n g t o serve the b u s i -ness s e c t o r ? " "ij.. Are the f u t u r e s c h o o l needs of our c h i l d r e n , i n c l u d i n g playground space, b e i n g p r o v i d e d f o r ? " "5» Can we improve s t r e e t appearance through c o n s t r u c t i o n of curbs or through boulevard p l a n t i n g ? " " 6 . Can owners be encouraged to r e p a i r or r e p a i n t t h e i r houses and to keep yards t i d y ? " " 7 . Does the s t r e e t system keep through t r a f f i c o f f r e s i d -e n t i a l s t r e e t s and reduce t r a f f i c hazards to a minimum?" " 8 . Is there a Community Center, or other s o c i a l f a c i l i -t i e s , a v a i l a b l e f o r a l l age groups of the p o p u l a t i o n ? " " 9 . Are steps b e i n g taken t o see t h a t o l d people can continue to l i v e i n the neighbourhood when they r e t i r e or when t h e i r p a r t n e r d i e s ? " l A comprehensive program based on these suggestions would do wonders f o r both i n d i v i d u a l and community w e l l - b e i n g . Can t h e r e I. Vancouver Housing A s s o c i a t i o n , B u l l e t i n #1|0, Vancouver, B. C. October 1 9 5 9 . 7 be much doubt t h a t , from the long range p o i n t of view, t h i s would prove e c o n o m i c a l l y sound? The f o r c e s i n t e n s i f y i n g most g r e a t l y the d i f f i c u l t i e s i n housing the loxtf-income group have f r e q u e n t l y been summed up under " u r b a n i z a t i o n " and " i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n " . Attendant upon the d e - p o l a r i z a t i o n of c l a s s s t r u c t u r e , w i t h an e n l a r g i n g middle c l a s s , have come s o c i a l m o b i l i t y and the concomitant m o b i l i t y of housing "zones". I n c r e a s i n g l a n d v a l u e s i n c e n t r a l areas have encouraged the "move t o the suburbs". "The popula-t i o n of m e t r o p o l i t a n r i n g s has grown almost three times as f a s t as c e n t r a l c i t i e s from 1 9 3 0 to 1 9 5 0 . 1 , 1 The problems of "subur-ban sprawl" are not w i t h i n the scope of t h i s study, but whether we de f i n e "good" l i v i n g c o n d i t i o n s i n terms of s e r v i c e s and p h y s i c a l l i v i n g c o n d i t i o n s (adequate housing, s c h o o l s , l i b r a r i e s , churches, s t r e e t s , e t c . ) or i n terms of low i n d i c e s of d i s o r g a n i -z a t i o n (crime, delinquency, mental i l l n e s s ) , the o l d e r , more d e t e r i o r a t e d d i s t r i c t s , f i r s t s e t t l e d i n Vancouver, are gradu-a l l y b e i n g abandoned to use by the lower economic groups. A powerful s o c i a l , as w e l l as economic, f a c t o r i n u r b a n i -z a t i o n and i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n i s the h i g h e r p o t e n t i a l standard of l i v i n g , c o n s t a n t l y promulgated by a l l the media o f mass com-munication, which, together w i t h the r i s i n g c o s t of l i v i n g , motivates more women towards becoming wage e a r n e r s . 2 Employment out o f the home, e s p e c i a l l y f o r the u n s k i l l e d or s e m i - s k i l l e d group of female workers, who are l e s s able t o pay f o r worthwhile 1 . H a r o l d L. Wilensky, and Ch a r l e s N. Lebeaux, I n d u s t r i a l  S o c i e t y and S o c i a l Welfare; R u s s e l l Sage Foundation, New York, 1 9 5 8 - P - 1 3 6 " 2. The pros and cons of t h i s c o n t r o v e r s i a l s u b j e c t are w e l l set out i n a re c e n t t h e s i s : Margaret B a r d a l , Margaret Dick, and Eva Rogerson. The M a r r i e d Woman in.Employment» Master of Soc-i a l Work t h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of b r i t i s h r C o l u m b i a , 1956. 8 household "help", may i n c r e a s e f a m i l y s t r e s s . A f u r t h e r compli-c a t i o n i s the h e t e r o g e n e i t y of the urban p o p u l a t i o n , w i t h i n t e n s i f i e d anonymity of f a m i l y l i f e , t ending t o exaggerate s t i l l f u r t h e r the i s o l a t i o n of those i n d i f f i c u l t circumstances from the o l d value of n e i g h b o u r l i n e s s . Thus i t i s that complex s o c i a l f a c t o r s , promoted by the c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of i n d u s t r i a l p o p u l a t i o n , f u r t h e r complicate the l o t of the "poor", who are, i t seems in e s c a p a b l y , always w i t h us, even though t h e i r names may change. The number who are "poor i n housing" i s probably much g r e a t e r than i s g e n e r a l l y r e a l i z e d ; c e r t a i n l y i f "housing" i s taken to mean not o n l y the p h y s i c a l accommodation, but i t s weight i n the f a m i l y budget, and the neighbourhood environment and c i t y ameni-t i e s and s e r v i c e s which ought to be p a r t of c i v i l i z e d , h e a l t h y l i v i n g . Current Need f o r E f f e c t i v e Low-Rental Housing When the demand f o r r e n t a l h ousing exceeds the supply, the standards e x i s t i n g i n much of Vancouver's p r i v a t e l y owned r e n t a l accommodation are t o l e r a t e d only i n sheer d e s p e r a t i o n . T h i s has been t r u e f o r many y e a r s . W r i t i n g of the L i t t l e Mountain p r o j e c t , M i c h a e l Wheeler had to r e p o r t t h a t , "by the end of 1951+, l» 7 l + 2 a p p l i c a t i o n s had been r e c e i v e d f o r the 221). s u i t e s at the pro-j e c t . " ! The o r i g i n a l tenant p o p u l a t i o n of Orchard Park was drawn l a r g e l y from the w a i t i n g l i s t of d i s a p p o i n t e d p r o s p e c t i v e tenants f o r the L i t t l e Mountain p r o j e c t , and t h i s need i s f a r from being assuaged. That the w a i t i n g l i s t f o r Orchard Park t o t a l l e d 8I4.9 1. M i c h a e l Wheeler, E v a l u a t i n g the Need f o r Low-Rental  Housing. Master of S o c i a l Work 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, 1955-9 a p p l i c a t i o n s i n 1959 i s but one index of the c o n t i n u i n g demand, f o r low-income housing i n Vancouver. 1 T h i s f i g u r e would not i n c l u d e the thousands of seasonal "migrants" who crowd the c i t y i n s e a rch of employment (or entertainment) dur i n g peaks of unem-ployment or during t o u r i s t seasons. Nor does i t i n c l u d e the numbers of u n i v e r s i t y students and s t a f f members, many w i t h f a m i l i e s , who take up r e s i d e n c e i n g r e a t e r Vancouver f o r the •duration of u n i v e r s i t y s e s s i o n s . 2 That the supply of e x i s t i n g r e n t a l housing i s inadequate, both q u a n t i t a t i v e l y and q u a l i t a t i v e l y , f o r the demand of low and moderate income people, seems to be unquestionable. S e v e r a l f a c t o r s c u r r e n t l y a f f e c t t h i s supply. One important c o n s i d e r a -t i o n i s the r a p i d p o p u l a t i o n growth i n g r e a t e r Vancouver. F i g u r e s f o r 1958 i n d i c a t e that 6!|6,700 people i n 186,500 house-holds r e s i d e d i n the area composed of Vancouver c i t y , North Vancouver c i t y , North Vancouver d i s t r i c t , West Vancouver d i s t r i c t , Burnaby M u n i c i p a l i t y , Richmond and New Westminster c i t y . The Vancouver c i t y c l e r k ' s data f o r 1958 show lj.07,000 people i n Vancouver c i t y proper, compared w i t h the 1951 census count of 314}.,833, and. the I 9 i|l census, one of 275,353 Aside from numerical f a c t o r s of p o p u l a t i o n , another impor-t a n t index of the need for.: l o w - r e n t a l housing i s s u p p l i e d by the income d i s t r i b u t i o n i n the Vancouver a r e a . In the 1958 t a x a t i o n year, out of a Vancouver t o t a l of 201)., 887 income t a x 1. Annual Report 1959, Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , P.I4.. 2. The non-permanent p o p u l a t i o n of Vancouver i s estimated at between 25,000 and 30,000 by the 'Vancouver Sun' Research D i v i s i o n i n i t s F a c t u a l Inventory o f . B r i t i s h Columbia. 3. F i g u r e s quoted i n F a c t u a l Inventory of B r i t i s h Columbia, 'Vancouver Sun' Research D i v i s i o n . 10 r e t u r n s , 8J4.O people d e c l a r e d annual incomes of under $1000, 27,1+1+0 d e c l a r e d incomes of between $1000 and $1999, l+k»720 a t t e s t e d t o incomes of between $2000 and $2999, and Ij.7,020 d e c l a r e d annual incomes of between $3000 and $I|.000.^ Income tax s t a t i s t i c s of t h i s k i n d do not give a l l the f a c t s of t o t a l income d i s t r i b u t i o n . Por one t h i n g , there are many earners who do not reach the t a x a b l e l e v e l . There i s a l s o the import-ant m o d i f i c a t i o n of numbers of dependents per income r e c i p i e n t . But even t h i s p a r t i a l p i c t u r e r e f l e c t s a lower-income stratum of l o c a l p o p u l a t i o n where there i s need f o r c o n s i d e r a b l e low-cost accommodation. Other evidence comes from w a i t i n g l i s t s f o r o l d people's housing p r o j e c t s and the housing r e g i s t r y , from the Vancouver p u b l i c p r o j e c t s , - f r o m the s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e r o l l s , and C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing A s s o c i a t i o n s t a t i s t i c s on the lower l i m i t s of home purchase. While the demand e x i s t s and i s i n c r e a s i n g , on examination, i t appears t h a t the present supply i s not only inadequate, but a l s o d i m i n i s h i n g . I n i t i a l l y , the q u a n t i t y of c u r r e n t l y a v a i l -a b l e , l o w - r e n t a l housing i s d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to the r e s t r i c t i o n s i n c o n s t r u c t i o n of the d e p r e s s i o n of the » 3 0's and the ensuing war y e a r s , when m a t e r i a l s were g e n e r a l l y u n a v a i l a b l e and s k i l l e d labour d i f f i c u l t to o b t a i n . The h i g h - c o s t h ousing has now caught up; medium cost accommodation ( p a r t i c u l a r l y apartments) s t i l l l a g s . Old houses, the "best" source of cheap u n i t s , are being demolished. An a d d i t i o n a l f r u s t r a t i o n of the '5>0's and '60's i s the h i g h cost of c o n s t r u c t i o n , r e l a t e d to v a r i o u s economic f a c t o r s c u r r e n t l y o p e r a t i n g l o c a l l y and n a t i o n a l l y , and y i e l d i n g 1. Department of N a t i o n a l Revenue, T a x a t i o n D i v i s i o n ; i 9 6 0  T a x a t i o n S t a t i s t i c s ; The Queen's P r i n t e r , Ottawa, Canada, p.61 11 r a i s e d c o s t s o f p r o d u c t i o n and, e v e n t u a l l y , o f r e n t . Many b u i l d i n g d e m o l i t i o n s w h i c h d i s p l a c e h u n d r e d s o f p e o p l e a r e s u c c e e d e d o n l y b y c o m m e r c i a l b u i l d i n g s , i n d u s t r i a l u n i t s o r " l u x u r y " h i g h - r e n t a l a p a r t m e n t s , a g a i n p r o v i d i n g no s u r c e a s e t o t h e p r o b l e m o f t h e low-income r e n t e r . I n r e c e n t y e a r s , i m m i g r a t i o n has added t o t h e numbers s e e k i n g modest r e n t s ; and c o m m e r c i a l e x p a n s i o n r e q u i r i n g more c l e r i c a l s t a f f o f t e n means t h a t b u s i n e s s g i r l s compete w i t h low-income f a m i l i e s f o r rooms and s u i t e s . How much s h o u l d p u b l i c a c t i o n c o n t r i b u t e ? C a n a d i a n governments have r e s p o n d e d , w i t h i n c r e a s i n g commitment, t o a s s i s t i n g home p u r c h a s e s . T y p i c a l l y , f a r more t h a n h a l f o f a l l h o u s e s and o t h e r u n i t s b u i l t f o r s a l e b e n e f i t f r o m s u b s i d i z e d b u i l d i n g i n one f o r m o r a n o t h e r . Bu t r e n t a l h o u s i n g , and most o f a l l s u b s i d i z e d l o w - r e n t a l h o u s i n g , h a s l a g g e d i n t e r m i n a b l y . One o f t h e many r e a s o n s u n d o u b t e d l y h a s b e e n t h e u n w i l l i n g n e s s and sometimes i n c a p a c i t y o f m u n i c i p a l g o vernments t o t a k e any i n i t i a t i v e h e r e . F o r p u b l i c h o u s i n g must be managed: t h e r e  must be a l a n d l o r d . I t h a s t a k e n p r o v i n c i a l c o - s p o n s o r s h i p as w e l l as f e d e r a l a i d t o g e t l o c a l h o u s i n g p r o j e c t s s t a r t e d . Many c i t i e s s t i l l l a c k them a l t o g e t h e r . I n Sweden, a m a j o r i t y o f a l l h o u s i n g i s e i t h e r s t a t e - a i d e d o r b u i l t b y c o - o p e r a t i v e o r g a n i z a t i o n s . I n B r i t a i n , f o r many y e a r s t h e a c c e p t e d r a t i o was t h a t f o u r u n i t s o f r e n t a l h o u s i n g s h o u l d be s u p p l i e d f o r e v e r y one o f o w n e r s h i p h o u s i n g . A c c o r d i n g t o M r . D a v i d Mansur, C h a i r m a n o f t h e M e t r o p o l i t a n T o r o n t o H o u s i n g A u t h o r i t y , a n d f o r s e v e r a l y e a r s h e a d o f C e n t r a l M o r t g a g e and H o u s i n g C o r p o r a t i o n , p u b l i c h o u s i n g , u n d e r c o n d i t i o n s e x i s t i n g i n F e b r u a r y I960, 1 2 should t o t a l at l e a s t t e n per cent of the number of d w e l l i n g u n i t s i n the community. There are i|.00,000 d w e l l i n g u n i t s i n the m e t r o p o l i t a n area of Toronto, and the number of p u b l i c housing u n i t s at present i n e x i s t e n c e there r e p r e s e n t s l e s s than .one'per cent of t h i s f i g u r e . 1 Transposing t h i s premise to the g r e a t e r Vancouver scene, where there are 1 8 6 , ^ 0 0 house-h o l d s , but only 3 9 2 u n i t s i n the combined p u b l i c housing pro-j e c t s of L i t t l e Mountain and Orchard Park, t h i s y i e l d s 0 . 2 1 $ of l o c a l d w e l l i n g u n i t s i n p u b l i c housing form. Even i f a l l o l d people 's u n i t s were added, i t i s d o u b t f u l i f the t o t a l would r i s e above 1 per cent. The obvious inadequacy of the c u r r e n t l o c a l supply of p u b l i c housing marks Canada as the l a s t major i n d u s t r i a l i z e d n a t i o n i n the Western wor l d to u t i l i z e s u b s i d i z e d p u b l i c housing as a n a t i o n a l measure. T h i s delayed acceptance of p u b l i c h o using i s probably a t t r i -butable to two i n n a t e f e a t u r e s of N o r t h American s o c i e t y -r e s i s t a n c e to the "welfare s t a t e " , whether understood or not; and the o l d e r but e q u a l l y confused a t t i t u d e , t h a t stigma i s at t a c h e d to " c h a r i t y " i n any form, which undoubtedly s t i l l c o l o u r s some of the p u b l i c approach to s u b s i d i z e d h o u s i n g . Although the stigma has d i s s i p a t e d c o n s i d e r a b l y , to achieve something p r i -v a t e l y , i n c l u d i n g good housing, by "one's own r e s o u r c e s " , s t i l l c a r r i e s much st a t u s i n a s t a t u s - c o n s c i o u s s o c i e t y . Although t h i s l e g a c y of independence i n North American c u l t u r e b e t t e r meets the needs of the middle and upper s t r a t a of s o c i e t y , the "poorer" stratum, g e n e r a l l y i n a r t i c u l a t e , remains w i t h us and remains 1 . Prom C i t i z e n ' s Forum - Resolved t h a t ; We Need More Sub- s i d i z e d P u b l i c Housing; Pamphlet 1 2 , February I 9 6 0 . Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r A d u l t Education.. 13 f r e q u e n t l y " u n d e r - p r i v i l e g e d " i n the g e n e r a l scheme of t h i n g s . A d d i t i o n a l l y , North America was s e t t l e d and e s t a b l i s h e d as a major i n d u s t r i a l i z e d s o c i e t y much l a t e r than most of Europe; hence, w i t h a p r o p o r t i o n a t e l y s m a l l e r p o p u l a t i o n and r e l a t i v e l y delayed u r b a n i z a t i o n , the need f o r p u b l i c housing emerged chrono l o g i c a l l y l a t e r t h an was the case i n Europe. P o s s i b l y a l l these f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c e the f i n a l p o i n t , which i s the gross p u b l i c unawareness of and d i s i n t e r e s t i n the need f o r s u b s i d i z e d hous-i n g — i n d e e d , i n the f a c t t h at such a r e s o u r c e e x i s t s at a l l , i n many ca s e s . Nonetheless, we have seen t h a t , q u a n t i t a t i v e l y , the demand f o r t h i s "welfare" resource has c o n s i d e r a b l e weight. Nor do q u a n t i t a t i v e d i f f i c u l t i e s alone complicate the hous-i n g problem. The matter of q u a l i t a t i v e standards i n p r i v a t e , low-income housing, compound the c o m p l e x i t i e s of e s t a b l i s h i n g even a minimum degree of h e a l t h and w e l f a r e . The f a c t o r s con-ducive to accommodation on the p r i v a t e r e n t a l market being des-t i n e d f o r the low-income tenant c o n t a i n i n themselves the a n t i t h e s e s of p r o g r e s s i v e housing standards. " F i l t e r i n g - d o w n " and "conversion" are, of n e c e s s i t y , s u b s t i t u t e measures i n the p r o v i s i o n of accommodation. "At t h i s p o i n t i t i s important to emphasize t h a t the hous-i n g s i t u a t i o n i s the r e v e r s e of s t a t i c . I f i t i s not b e i n g improved i t d e t e r i o r a t e s . . . The removal of r e n t c o n t r o l . . . m e r e l y means th a t r e n t s now depend on t e n a n t s ' a b i l i t y to pay, r a t h e r than on the q u a l i t y of the accom-d a t i o n . C l e a r l y , the substandard nature of the h ousing a v a i l a b l e i s as much a p a r t of the housing problem as the Ik actual shortage of dwellings. A survey completed by Dr. Leonard Marsh i n Vancouver i n 19Lj-9 i l l u s t r a t e d graphically a whole series of examples of housing conditions i n the most c h a r a c t e r i s t i c low-rental and deteriorated Vancouver area.^ Warren A. Wilson, f i v e years l a t e r , i n a sample survey of s o c i a l assistance f a m i l i e s , high-l i g h t e d the budget aspect of poor housing as well as the physical conditions the f i n a n c i a l l y underprivileged tenant must endure i n accommodation.^ That low-income housing on the private rental market i s almost always s e c o n d - h a n d , overcrowded by multiple-occupancy, located i n blighted areas, i n poor r e p a i r and lacking i n adequate, minimal f a c i l i t i e s f o r family l i v i n g , i s well known to every perceptive observer of the l o c a l housing scene. But a r e c i t a l of the worst conditions of slums s t i l l seems to be necessary to keep up the necessary l e v e l of housing and planning a c t i v i t y . I t i s not hard to f i n d . Dampness, ver-min, dry rot, f i l t h and general decrepitude f a l l to the l o t of the low-income tenant. Indeed, some of the descriptions of private accommodation ex i s t i n g i n the f i l e s of most l o c a l s o c i a l agencies, read l i k e scenes from a horror story. Scope and Purpose of Present Study Housing research and welfare research a l i k e reach a new and welcome stage once some units of public housing have been b u i l t . 1 . Michael Wheeler, Evaluating the Need fo r Low-Rental  Housing; Master of Soc i a l Work thesis, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1 9 5 5 • P»5» 2 . Leonard C. Marsh, Rebuilding a Neighbourhood; University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver, 1 9 5 0 . pages 1 5 - 2 1 . 3 . Warren A. Wilson, Housing Conditions Among Social A s s i s t - ance Families; Master of Social work th e s i s , University or b r i t i s n uoiumDia, 1 9 5 5 . pages 3 0 and 5 3 . 1 5 The s p o t l i g h t s can be turned from inhuman, u n s a n i t a r y or de p r i v e d c o n d i t i o n s , to s i t u a t i o n s i n which human beings are t r y i n g to make readjustments, w i t h some of the minimum advantages of decent l i v i n g . They can be turned from negative attempt's to arouse i n t e r e s t , to p o s i t i v e survey t o assess p o l i c y and e x p e r i -ence, and f i l t e r out c o n s t r u c t i v e c r i t i c i s m . T h i s k i n d o f r e s e a r c h i s now be i n g i n i t i a t e d . I t i s , of course, not xvrlthout i t s own d i f f i c u l t i e s . Research i s of primary importance i n the i d e n t i f i c a t i o n , comprehension and r e s o l u t i o n of problems, but i t i s w i t h i n o n l y comparatively r e c e n t times t h a t r e s e a r c h methods have been a p p l i e d to the sphere of human w e l f a r e . I n the present i n s t a n c e , the methods employed can be l a r g e l y o n l y q u a l i t a t i v e , but they p o i n t the way to an "aim of p o l i c y " f o r f u t u r e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and p o s s i b l y f o r c o n s t r u c t i o n of other p u b l i c housing p r o j e c t s . Orchard Park p u b l i c housing p r o j e c t i s the second of i t s k i n d to be completed i n Vancouver, so t h a t the present survey f o l l o w s c l o s e l y and d e l i b e r a t e l y the p a t t e r n of i n v e s t i g a t i o n e s t a b l i s h e d f o r the L i t t l e Mountain s t u d y 1 i n 1 9 5 9 . A f t e r i n i -t i a l d i s c u s s i o n s w i t h the manager of the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , a c a r d index was prepared on each tenant f a m i l y , i n -c l u d i n g name, address, f a m i l y s i z e , age and sex of c h i l d r e n , net f a m i l y income and s o u r c e ( s ) , and m a r i t a l s t a t u s of the breadwin-ner. T h i s i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d the source f o r maps and t a b l e s and a l s o guided the s t r a t i f i c a t i o n f o r the sample. But to p r e -serve anonymity, these cards were l a t e r d estroyed upon com p l e t i o n of the i n t e r v i e w i n g and c o m p i l a t i o n of the s t a t i s t i c a l t a b l e s . 1 . E. Promson, J. Hansen, and R. Smith; The L i t t l e Mountain  Low-Rental Housing P r o j e c t ; Master of S o c i a l Work 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, 1 9 5 9 . 16 Of the one hundred and s i x t y - e i g h t tenant u n i t s i n t h i s p r o j e c t , f i f t y - s i x were v i s i t e d , a sampling of one i n three of the p r o j e c t ' s f a m i l i e s . The o n e - t h i r d sampling was a l s o a p p l i e d as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e l y as p o s s i b l e to three c a t e g o r i e s : "complete" f a m i l i e s ( t o t a l i n p r o j e c t b%), "broken" f a m i l i e s ( t o t a l 66), and " s i n g l e " occupants ( t o t a l 18). The sample t o t a l s thus were 28, 22 and 6 r e s p e c t i v e l y . T h i s d i v i s i o n was designed to cover not only d i f f e r e n t f a m i l y types, but a l s o accommodation types, i . e . , row house, apartment b l o c k , and " s i n g l e " and "couple" u n i t s f o r both the aged and the handicapped. These components are i l l u s t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 1 (Chapter I I ) . Wniie the sample i s somewhat s m a l l , the coverage of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e i s q u i t e l a r g e . A l l i n f o r m a t i o n was o b t a i n e d by means of i n t e r v i e w s w i t h each f a m i l y , f o l l o w i n g the i n t e r v i e w o u t l i n e reproduced I n Appendix B, and l a s t i n g , on the average, from one to two hours each. Interview content i n c l u d e d subjec-t i v e and d e s c r i p t i v e comparisons by the tenant of present and p r e v i o u s housing c o n d i t i o n s . Other s e c t i o n s d e a l w i t h tenant views on the accommodation per se (design, f a c i l i t i e s , e t c . ) ; f a m i l y l i v i n g ( r e c r e a t i o n , hobbies, e n t e r t a i n i n g , s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s , c h i l d r e n ' s r e a c t i o n to r e - h o u s i n g ) ; neighbourhood and d i s t r i c t ; the budget; and g e n e r a l remarks and suggestions a f f o r d e d by the tenant's experience. On the whole, tenants were co - o p e r a t i v e and evinced i n t e r e s t i n the r e s e a r c h under-taken."'" L. The a s s i s t a n c e of two v o l u n t e e r s , both p r a c t i s i n g s o c i a l workers, i s r e f e r r e d to i n the Acknowledgements. The c h i e f i n t e r v i e w e r , and the w r i t e r of t h i s r e p o r t , was the r e -c i p i e n t of one of the C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing C o r p o r a t i o n b u r s a r i e s awarded a n n u a l l y f o r approved housing s t u d i e s d i r e c t e d by u n i v e r s i t y p e r s o n n e l . Dr. Leonard Marsh, of the f a c u l t y of the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, s u p e r v i s e d the d i r e c t i o n and p r e p a r a t i o n of the study. 17 There i s an u n w r i t t e n chapter t o the t o t a l s t o r y of Orchard Park, namely, the community o r g a n i z a t i o n and s o c i a l a c t i o n h i s t o r i e s of how the p r o j e c t was advocated and r e a l i z e d . I t i s worthy of r e s e a r c h documentation, but i t i s not one which c o u l d be i n c l u d e d w i t h i n the c o n f i n e s of the present study. I t was not intended, e i t h e r , t h a t t h i s study should a p p r a i s e f i n a n -c i n g , a r c h i t e c t u r e and c o n s t r u c t i o n techniques as these f a c t o r s apply to t h i s p a r t i c u l a r p r o j e c t . The o b j e c t i v e of the present study i s towards f i r s t - h a n d understanding of what the p r o j e c t means today i n the day-to-day l i f e of the present occupants, i . e . , the t e n a n t s ' view of the second instalment of p u b l i c housing i n Vancouver; together w i t h some suggestions f o r the pl a n n i n g of f u t u r e p u b l i c housing p r o j e c t s . L i t e r a t u r e on p u b l i c housing p r o j e c t s , which i s now q u i t e voluminous, has been s t u d i e d and u t i l i z e d as background, but only as i t per-t a i n s to the w e l f a r e aspects of p u b l i c housing and i t s a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c o n s t i t u e n t s . Chapter I I ORCHARD PARK AND ITS TENANTS The s i t e of Orchard Park was decided upon by the m u n i c i p a l government, s u b j e c t t o approval by the p r o v i n c i a l and f e d e r a l governments. The suggested l o c a t i o n was then examined by a r c h i t e c t s w i t h v a r i o u s p e r t i n e n t c r i t e r i a i n mind. A minimal amount of cl e a r a n c e of the p r o p e r t y was r e q u i r e d , inasmuch as there e x i s t e d at the time of s e l e c t i o n only three p r i v a t e d w e l l i n g s , two of which were near 1+5th Avenue, w h i l e the t h i r d , an a n c i e n t farmhouse and s c a t t e r e d o u t - b u i l d i n g s , was near I}.lst Avenue. I t i s of i n c i d e n t a l i n t e r e s t to note that t h i s farm was owned o r i g i n a l l y by the Jane f a m i l y , who r a n horse-drawn coaches along l | l s t Avenue t o Kingsway to New Westminster, at a f a r e of $1.00 per head, i n the e a r l y days of Vancouver.' I t was the Jane orchard i n t h i s l o c a t i o n which b e l a t e d l y gave the p r o j e c t I t s name of Orchard Park. The e l e v e n acres now comprising Orchard Park are s i t u a t e d between ij.lst and 1|5th Avenues, the approximate e a s t e r n and western boundaries being B e r k l e y and S t i r l i n g S t r e e t s , and Nanaimo and Gladstone S t r e e t s , f a r t h e r n o r t h . The area surround-i n g the p r o j e c t s u f f e r s markedly from a l a c k of urban p l a n n i n g , and t h i s area, p a r t i c u l a r l y , has o n l y sparse and s c a t t e r e d com-munity f a c i l i t i e s . F i g u r e I i n d i c a t e s some of these resources i n r e l a t i o n to both Orchard Park and L i t t l e Mountain housing p r o j e c t s . ~" F I G U E E l . Sketch Map Showing Both Orchard Park and L i t t l e Mountain Housing Projects, and Environs. 20 (a) "Layout" The g e n e r a l l a y o u t of Orchard Park o b v i o u s l y was concerned w i t h good appearance, and the r e s u l t i s g e n e r a l l y conceded t o be an improvement on that of the L i t t l e Mountain housing p r o j e c t . Without l a y i n g c l a i m to the same viewpoint as an a r c h i t e c t or a landscape a r c h i t e c t , however, from the "humanist" p o i n t of view, c e r t a i n f a c t s are s a l i e n t . The extent to which the u n i t s are separated appears s a t i s -f a c t o r y t o o b j e c t i v e eyes, but judgment on t h i s matter v a r i e s s u b j e c t i v e l y from tenant t o tenant. The u n i t s f o r the aged and handicapped are s i t u a t e d adjacent to the row houses and a p a r t -ment b l o c k s housing l a r g e numbers of c h i l d r e n , and many complaints were v o i c e d r e g a r d i n g t h i s arrangement. General access arrangements lea v e a good d e a l to be d e s i r e d , as w e l l , from any c i t i z e n ' s p o i n t of view. Many row houses, c o n t a i n i n g a l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n of the c h i l d p o p u l a t i o n , are o r i -ented toward both ij.lst and l+5th Avenues, where the flow of t r a f f i c -i s heavy. No fences surround the p r o j e c t . Nanaimo S t r e e t , c u t -t i n g through the middle of the p r o j e c t , has become a through s t r e e t . Whether t h i s i s to be blamed on the designer, the C i t y C o u n c i l , or the t r a f f i c engineer, the t o t a l r e s u l t i s i n e x c u s a b l e . Some of the s o c i a l i m p l i c a t i o n s of the l a y o u t c a l l f o r comment l a t e r , i n the d i s c u s s i o n of "neighbourhood". The p l a n of Orchard Park i n c l u d e s e i g h t apartment b l o c k s , c o n t a i n i n g 10 apartments each, of which a t o t a l of 16 are one-bedroom apartments, and 6l± two-bedroom apartments. In a d d i t i o n , t here are 53 row houses, of which 50 have three bedrooms and 3, f o u r bedrooms. The balance of the 169 u n i t s i s composed of 18 21 —r~ ] kl — i — AO —I— 3o —I— So — i — —I— To I — i — 9o \/ A /bar- Asdsvo/n $&u> &&**S&s so -**> 3 o «£» ' 1 1 So • S o 22 u n i t s f o r couples, and 18 s i n g l e u n i t s . Comparative f i g u r e s f o r L i t t l e Mountain are i n t e r e s t i n g - - l 6 one-bedroom apartments, 92 two-bedroom apartments, 1+1+ three-bedroom apartments, 1+8 three-bedroom row houses, and 2l+ u n i t s f o r p e n s i o n couples, ( F i g u r e 2). Thus Orchard Park r e p r e s e n t s an e x t e n s i o n i n the concept of p u b l i c housing i n two d i r e c t i o n s : i t i s the f i r s t example, i n l o c a l s u b s i d i z e d housing f o r Vancouver, of f o u r -bedroom row houses; a l s o of u n i t s f o r s i n g l e people. E x t e r n a l c o n s t r u c t i o n i s of frame and stucco, p a i n t e d white, w i t h b r i g h t l y c o l o u r e d doors on the u n i t s , groups of which are arranged a t t r a c t i v e l y on the e l e v e n acres of the pro-j e c t . At the time t h a t the f i r s t tenants moved i n t o the p r o j e c t i n December 1958, no l a n d s c a p i n g had been done, but s i n c e t h i s time, lawns have been seeded and s a p l i n g s p l a n t e d by the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y . I n a d d i t i o n , some tenants have p l a n t e d , adjacent to t h e i r u n i t s , borders or p l o t s of t h e i r f a v o u r i t e f l o w e r s . The g e n e r a l e x t e r i o r appearance of the p r o j e c t now compares f a v o u r a b l y w i t h the p r i v a t e housing i n i t s e n v i r o n s , and, bordered by the huge shade t r e e s along k l s t Ave-nue, w i t h the n o r t h shore mountains as a backdrop, the p r o j e c t presents a p l e a s i n g scene to the viewer* Of the v a r i o u s u n i t s , the row houses seem most s i m i l a r to the average p r i v a t e house, although they have no basements or a t t i c s . They are two s t o r e y s i n h e i g h t , w i t h the bathroom up-s t a i r s and a u t i l i t y room on the ground l e v e l . The i n t e r n a l appearance c o u l d be improved by h a v i n g a washable f i n i s h on the l a r g e l y unpainted w a l l s , and by some m o d i f i c a t i o n s i n d e s i g n . The f l o o r s , are l i n o l e u m t i l e ; but i t i s l a i d d i r e c t l y over cement, 2 3 so that the f l o o r s are o f t e n c o l d . There Is a s m a l l , enclosed d r y i n g area o u t s i d e each row house, •-containing c l o t h e s l i n e s . In a l l the apartments, one enters d i r e c t l y i n t o the l i v i n g room; and i n the two-bedroom apartments, the l i v i n g room i s not separated from the k i t c h e n at a l l . The b l o c k s are c o n s t r u c t e d w i t h a laundry room i n the basement, x^ith an a d d i t i o n a l i n d o o r area c o n t a i n i n g c l o t h e s l i n e s . No o u t s i d e d r y i n g by apartment tenants i s p e r m i t t e d . The s m a l l e r "pension couple" u n i t s are designed x^ith some a t t e n t i o n to p r i v a c y , w i t h both back and f r o n t doors, as i n the row houses. There i s one bedroom, bathroom, l i v i n g room and a k i t c h e n e t t e , i n these u n i t s . (A f r e q u e n t complaint heard from both these types of u n i t s i s that one does not o b t a i n much use. from the f r o n t door as no sidewalks are c o n s t r u c t e d i n f r o n t o f the u n i t s , and w a l k i n g on the grass i s not permitted.) The " s i n g l e " u n i t s are s i m i l a r l y c o n s t r u c t e d , except t h a t there i s no separate bedroom, but r a t h e r a b e d - s i t t i n g room. In the centre of each group of "pension" u n i t s i s a laundry room, with two tubs and a wringer s u p p l i e d by Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y . (b) The F a m i l i e s 1. Socio-economic f a c t o r s The tenants chosen f o r r e s i d e n c e i n Orchard Park were drawn l a r g e l y from the w a i t i n g l i s t compiled o r i g i n a l l y when the f i r s t p r o j e c t , at L i t t l e Mountain, x<ras b u i l t . Then, as w i t h the L i t t l e Mountain p r o j e c t , p r i o r i t i e s were worked out to s e l e c t the most urgent cases from the remaining, q u i t e 2k B E R K L E Y 5 T R. E E T N A N A I M O S T R E - N A N A I M O -if S 7 0 6 S T I R L I N q • 571b 57Zt 57J6. 57j»fc S756 57*6 5776 J 7 a 6 S T I R. L I N q S T I R L I N G • • • m FIGURE 3. Sketch Map of Orchard Park, Showing Types of L iv ing Units, Row Houses Pensioner Units Units for the Handicapped Apartment Blocks 2 5 s u b s t a n t i a l w a i t i n g l i s t . 1 By the end of 1 9 5 9 , twenty-one vacancies had o c c u r r e d , 2 but a much h i g h e r r a t e of v a c a t i n g appeared to be i n e f f e c t i n the l a t t e r h a l f of i 9 6 0 . T h i s i s l i k e l y due t o both a lowering of r e n t a l r a t e s o f f the p r o j e c t ( i . e . on the p r i v a t e market) and a l s o to the f a c t t h a t when a p r o j e c t i s f i r s t opened, a number of tenants are accepted about whom the management i s unsure, and some of the process of s e l e c -t i o n must, of n e c e s s i t y , come a f t e r the o r i g i n a l acceptance as t e n a n t s . 3 The f a m i l y income l i m i t s e s t a b l i s h e d i n 1951+ have not kept pace w i t h r i s i n g wages. The Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y ' s annual r e p o r t of 1 9 5 9 i n d i c a t e s a net o p e r a t i n g s u r p l u s lower by more than $ 1 2 , 0 0 0 than t h a t of 1 9 5 5 , & n d a marked i n c r e a s e i n the pro* p o r t i o n of broken homes w i t h attendant s o c i a l problems. I t i s of i n t e r e s t to note t h a t at the time Orchard Park was being tenanted, 8 5 $ of the a p p l i c a t i o n s r e j e c t e d met w i t h t h i s f a t e because of "over-income", most of the r e j e c t e d a p p l i c a n t s being s t e a d i l y employed male workers. For the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , a s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d a p p l i c a t i o n of the r u l e s leads to a decrease i n income, r e s u l t -ing from housing f a m i l i e s of very low Income as replacements f o r outgoing f a m i l i e s , or s u b s t i t u t i o n s f o r excluded ( I . e . , h i g h e r -income) f a m i l i e s . Conversely, there has been an i n c r e a s e i n 1 . According to the 1 9 5 9 Annual Report of the Vancouver Hous-ing A u t h o r i t y , "there were 8I4.9 a p p l i c a t i o n s on f i l e , but over 60O of these were p e n s i o n e r s " . 2 . i b i d . 3 . I n f o r m a t i o n obtained v e r b a l l y from Mr. C o l i n S u therland, manager, Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y . r 26 Table 1 D i s t r i b u t i o n and Composition of Housing; Units, Orchard Park. 19 59 Type of I Occupants / Apartments / Row Houses Special Units Total Complete Families 0 children 1 - 2 children 3 or more children 3 25 l 5 34 16 19 30 35 Sub Totals 29 39 16 84 Broken Families 0 children 1 - 2 children 3 or more children 36 14 1 13 2 2 37 27 Sub Totals 50 14 2 66 Single Persons 18 18 Totals 79 53 36 168 Table 2 Income and Family D i s t r i b u t i o n , Orchard Park f 19 59. Monthly Income Families with 1 adults adults Families with 0 - 2 children 3 or more children A l l Families Less than $100 $100 - |199 §200 - $299 §300 or more 3 39 22 20 4 18 1 6 55 19 6 1 27 21 2± 7 82 4o 21 Total 84 66 86 64 150* Single persons (18) not included here, a l l had incomes of less than $100 per month. A few families have adult dependents other than spouses; these are included i n second part of Table 2, along with children. 27 maintenance expense (a d i f f e r e n c e of approximately $9,000 between 1955 and 1959)> owing t o i n c r e a s e d costs of wages, m a t e r i a l s , c o n t r a c t r e p a i r s , e t c . Prom the tenant's p o i n t of view, c o n s i d e r a b l e resentment, undoubtedly i l l u s t r a t i n g a marked need f o r f u r t h e r c l a r i f i c a -t i o n and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n , was expressed d u r i n g t h i s survey. On the one hand, t h i s came from comparatively high-income f a m i l i e s , some of whom were d i s t i n c t l y h o s t i l e about paying two or t h r e e times as much r e n t as t h e i r neighbours, who were occupying the same type of housing u n i t , and were i n r e c e i p t of some form of p u b l i c a s s i s t a n c e . On the other hand, the l a t t e r o f t e n v o i c e d resentment t h a t people who, f o r example, " c o u l d a f f o r d a c a r " , would be allowed to remain i n s u b s i d i z e d housing. A t h i r d aspect of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r socio-economic problem, i s the f a c t t h a t many r e s i d e n t s of the m e t r o p o l i t a n area are earning, too h i g h an income to be accepted as tenants i n p u b l i c housing, but s t i l l experience great d i f f i c u l t y i n f i n d i n g accommodation on the p r i v a t e market which i s both s u i t a b l e f o r c h i l d r e n and w i t h i n the breadwinner's means. A s o c i a l a n a l y s i s of Orchard Park r e v e a l s that i n 1959, \0 per cent of the u n i t s were o c c u p i e d by m a r r i e d couples, 38.6 per cent by separated, d i v o r c e d , d e s e r t e d or widowed mothers and t h e i r c h i l d r e n , 10.7 per cent by s i n g l e p e n s i o n e r s , and 10.7 per cent by pension c o u p l e s . For the purposes of t h i s survey, the tenants were d i v i d e d i n t o three c a t e g o r i e s - - " w h o l e " f a m i l i e s (8k)> i n which b o t h parents are i n the home, "broken" (66), w i t h o n l y the mother and c h i l d r e n present., and 18 " s i n g l e " t e n a n t s . I n these c a t e g o r i e s , 57 "whole" f a m i l i e s have members who are p a r t i a l l y or f u l l y employed, only 25 "broken" f a m i l i e s 2 8 -have p a r t i a l or f u l l employment as a source of income, and no " s i n g l e " people work out of the home. Only 3 k "whole" f a m i l i e s had, p a r t i a l l y or f u l l y , some form of p u b l i c a s s i s t -ance. A l l 1 8 of the " s i n g l e " persons were i n r e c e i p t of pen-sions or s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e . Table 3 Percentage a n a l y s i s of Income and F amily D i s t r i b u t i o n , Orchard Park, 1 9 5 9 .  Monthly income I F a m i l i e s w i t h F a m i l i e s w i t h A l l f a m i l i e s 0 - 2 3 or more 2 a d u l t s 1 a d u l t 1 c h i l d r e n c h i l d r e n Less than $ 1 0 0 # 1 0 0 - $199 $ 2 0 0 - #299 $ 3 0 0 or more 1 .77% ' 2 3 . 0 7 1 3 . 0 1 11 .8k • 2 . 3 6 $ I O . 6 5 . 5 9 3-5k$ 3 2 . 5 k 1 1 . 2 4 3.5k . 59^ 1 5 .97 1 2 . k2 8 . 9 3 k . l k $ k 9.11 • 2 3 . 6 6 1 2 . k2 T o t a l s k 9 . 7 0 $ 3 9 . 0 k $ 5 0 . 8 9 $ 37.87$ 89 .31|> S i n g l e persons ( 1 8 ) , not i n c l u d e d i n these f i g u r e s , complete the t o t a l . The trend, i l l u s t r a t e d i n Table 3 , which giv e s the percentage a n a l y s i s of Income and f a m i l y d i s t r i b u t i o n i n both "complete" and "broken" f a m i l i e s , c o u l d l e a d to a t o t a l o c c u p a t i o n of the p r o j e c t by "broken" f a m i l i e s , r e c i p i e n t s of s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e and pensioners a t some f u t u r e time. I f t h i s i s to be the f u t u r e p o l i c y of p u b l i c housing, the c o s t s w i l l have to be met and the a p p r o p r i a t e changes i n s c r e e n i n g p o l i c y made by the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . However, t h i s p o t e n t i a l problem i s beyond the immediate scope of the present survey. Recognizing the s o c i a l and p e r s o n a l problems which would be p r e v a l e n t among the tenants, the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y added to t h e i r s t a f f a f a m i l y c o u n s e l l o r at the b e g i n n i n g of 2 9 Table 1+ Income Sources of Tenant F a m i l i e s ( e x c l u d i n g s i n g l e tenants) F a m i l i e s Source of Income f Complete| Broken T o t a l 1. Employment of a f a m i l y member. 1 60 (a) 2 7 (b) 87 2 . D i s a b i l i t y pen-sions ( i n c l u d i n g Veterans Allow-ances.) 9 (c) 7 16 3. Old Age and Re-tirement Pensions. 17 k 2 1 k. S o c i a l A s s i s t a n c e . 5 3 1 (d) 3 6 5 . Alimony or separa-t i o n allowances. — 6 6 T o t a l 91 7 5 1 6 6 (e) At time i n f o r m a t i o n was ob t a i n e d (December 1 9 5 9 ) , (a) 3 tenants were i n r e c e i p t of unemployment insurance, (b) 2 were i n r e -c e i p t of unemployment a s s i s t a n c e , (c) 1 of B l i n d Pension, and (d) 2 of Mother's A l l -owance. T o t a l (e) i n c l u d e s more than one source of income per f a m i l y where a p p l i c -able, but excludes income sources f o r s i n g l e t enant s. 30 October, 1959. T h i s s o c i a l worker i s a d d i t i o n a l l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the i n s p e c t i o n of a p p l i c a n t s ' accommodation p r i o r to acceptance and. f o r the placement of tenants to f i l l v a c a n c i e s . Method of s e l e c t i o n . Apart from the l i m i t a t i o n s , a l r e a d y des-c r i b e d , which are set by income l e v e l s and a v a i l a b l e v a c a n c i e s , the s e l e c t i o n of tenants i s a f f e c t e d by means of a p o i n t s c o r e . The p o i n t s are enumerated i n a form drawn up by the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , and the form i s now u s u a l l y completed by the s t a f f s o c i a l worker. (See Appendix c ) . Each a p p l i c a t i o n , . , e l i g i b l e on the b a s i s of income, i s submitted to t h i s p o i n t t e s t , i n which such f a c t o r s as overcrowding, dangerous d i s r e p a i r , f a u l t y k i t c h e n , bathroom and h e a t i n g f a c i l i t i e s , v e n t i l a t i o n , safe p l a y space f o r c h i l d r e n , e t c . , are g i v e n a range of p o i n t s , and an i n d i v i d u a l score based on them. Assessment i s a l s o made of such f a c t o r s as " s u i t a b i l i t y " and "present c o n d i t i o n s " . (The former i s not s t a n d a r d i z e d i n any way, and i n c l u d e s c r e d i t r a t i n g , as w e l l as emotional s t a b i l i t y ; "present c o n d i t i o n s " i n c l u d e housekeeping standards, f a m i l y h e a l t h , amount of f u r n i -t u r e owned, etc.) A l l t h i s , of course, n e c e s s i t a t e s home v i s i t s t o the p r o s p e c t i v e tenant's accommodation, a f t e r which the degree of urgency of the need i s determined. Then> when vacancies occur, the cases scored as most urgent are g i v e n p r i o r i t y . A l l the 66 "broken" f a m i l i e s were headed by the mother. Of t h i s group, 15 were widowed, 6 d i v o r c e d , 1+3 separated, and too inadequate data was a v a i l a b l e on two of these f a m i l i e s ^ t o permit c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . Complete or "whole" f a m i l i e s , w i t h both mother and f a t h e r i n the home, occupied 81+ u n i t s i n 31 Orchard Park i n December 1959, when these f i g u r e s were c o l l e c t e d . Of the 18 " s i n g l e " u n i t s , 15 were occupied by widows, and three by a widower, a "separated" spouse, and an unmarried person r e s p e c t i v e l y . Income l e v e l s . Income l e v e l i s one of the most important f a c t s i n understanding t h i s p r o j e c t and i t s b e n e f i c i a r i e s . The p resent summary (Table 2) i s d e r i v e d from f i g u r e s o b t a i n e d i n December 1959, and shows a l s o the key i n f o r m a t i o n of the number of f a m i l y members i n each of the 168 t e n a n t - o c c u p i e d u n i t s . (The c a r e t a k e r - o c c u p i e d u n i t i s not I n c l u ded i n these f i g u r e s . ) By f a r the most t y p i c a l s i t u a t i o n i s an income of #100 - $200 a month. The 18 " s i n g l e " u n i t occupants have monthly incomes of under $100. I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t over 65$ of the "broken" f a m i l i e s has monthly incomes of under $200, and even k6$ of the "whole" f a m i l i e s f a l l i n t o t h i s income group. I t i s , of course, f o r low-income f a m i l i e s t h a t the p r o j e c t i s designed; but the h i g h e r the p r o p o r t i o n of these, the more -the f i n a n c i a l arrangements must be adapted a c c o r d i n g l y . F amily C o n s t e l l a t i o n s . The d i s t r i b u t i o n of f a m i l y members i n both "whole" and "broken" f a m i l i e s p r o v i d e s another aspect of the socio-economic f a c t o r s o p e r a t i n g w i t h i n the p r o j e c t . - The h i g h e s t c o n c e n t r a t i o n of "broken" f a m i l i e s i s i n the 2-k member groups, and t h a t of the "whole" f a m i l i e s i s understandably somewhat h i g h e r , b e i n g i n the 2-6 member groups. One of the most important f a c t s i s that t h i s p r o j e c t houses n e a r l y 350 c h i l d r e n . The d i s t r i b u t i o n of these c h i l d r e n i s summarized i n Table 5. These s t a t i s t i c s do not i n c l u d e what might be termed the "independent" c h i l d r e n of the tenants 32-i . e . , some who l i v e at home but who are g a i n f u l l y employed on a f u l l - t i m e b a s i s . I t i s noted that 19 "whole" f a m i l i e s have no c h i l d r e n , and there are two "broken" f a m i l i e s who are c h i l d l e s s . The t o t a l number of c h i l d r e n b e l o n g i n g to "whole" f a m i l i e s i s l 8 l , and to"broken" f a m i l i e s , 162, making a t o t a l dependent c h i l d p o p u l a t i o n of 3l+3» The s i z e of f a m i l y v a r i e s from zero t o 8 c h i l d r e n , w i t h a median of 2 c h i l d r e n per f a m i l y . Table 5 D i s t r i b u t i o n of C h i l d P o p u l a t i o n , Orchard Park, 1959. Age i n Complete F a m i l i e s Broken F a m i l i e s 1 A l l > T o t a l s "' Years V Boys G i r l s Boys G i r l s C h i l d r e n 'Boys G i r l s Under 6 6-15 15 - 19 19 or olde k ? 38 2 r 0 55 39 k 0 28 36 11 1+ 22 k i 13 1 151+ 15)+ 30 5 77 7i+ 13 1+ 77 80 17 1 T o t a l 89 98 79 77 31+3 168 175 Table 5 i l l u s t r a t e s the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the p r o j e c t ' s c h i l d p o p u l a t i o n , w i t h r e g a r d to bot h age and f a m i l y type. I n the complete f a m i l i e s , a m a j o r i t y of the c h i l d r e n are v e r y young—under f i v e years ( i . e . , 1+9 boys and 5 5 g i r l s ) , whereas, i n the "broken" f a m i l i e s , most c h i l d r e n are i n the f i v e t o f i f t e e n year o l d group ( i . e . , 36 boys and i+1 g i r l s ) . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t o n l y 6 c h i l d r e n of "whole" f a m i l i e s used i n the sample are s t i l l dependent a f t e r the age of 1 5 , whereas 29 i n the same age range continue dependence i n the "broken" f a m i l i e s . Some of these c h i l d r e n are dependent because of p h y s i c a l and i n t e l l e c t u a l d i s a b i l i t i e s , some because of neces-sary prolonged dependence i f they are i n v o l v e d i n extended ed u c a t i o n (at c o l l e g e , t e c h n i c a l s c h o o l , e t c . ) , and others 33 because of g r e a t e r d i f f i c u l t i e s i n a c h i e v i n g e d u c a t i o n a l l y than most of t h e i r p e e r s . Types of accommodation occupied by the tenants are d i s t r i b u t e d a c c o r d i n g to f a m i l y s i z e . I n both "complete" and "broken" f a m i l i e s , one f i n d s f a m i l i e s w i t h three or more c h i l d -r e n r e s i d i n g i n row houses {3k "whole" f a m i l i e s and 13 "broken" f a m i l i e s ) , whereas, the b u l k of the p r o j e c t p o p u l a t i o n w i t h one or two c h i l d r e n occupy apartments (25 "complete" f a m i l i e s and 36 "broken" f a m i l i e s ) . The 18 " s p e c i a l " u n i t s are occupied by " c h i l d l e s s " , handicapped or p e n s i o n couples, and by t h e i r " s i n g l e " c o u n t e r p a r t s , as are three of the apartments. Former l o c a t i o n s . By p l o t t i n g the l o c a t i o n of a l l tenants immediately p r i o r to t h e i r r e l o c a t i o n i n Orchard Park, a r e v e a l -i n g spot map i s produced. Two p o i n t s stand out as main sources of tenant supply, the b l i g h t e d areas of K i t s i l a n o - F a i r v i e w and Mount Pleasant-Grandview, although there was c o n s i d e r a b l e s c a t -t e r throughout a l l s e c t i o n s of the m e t r o p o l i t a n area. In other words, there i s a good d e a l of cheap but poor housing. The survey asked about the type of accommodation p r e v i o u s l y occupied through the query, "Did you l i v e i n apartment, rooms, house, o t h e r ? " Since the enquiry d i d not s p e c i f y the d i f f e r e n c e between an apartment i n an apartment b l o c k and a s u i t e of rooms i n a house, "apartment" or "rooms" might c o n c e i v a b l y r e f e r to the same type of accommodation, depending on the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the i n d i v i d u a l tenant. S i m i l a r l y , rooms or a s u i t e i n a house might both be g r a n d i o s e l y c l a s s i f i e d by the tenant as "house". Beari n g these q u a l i f i c a t i o n s i n mind, the q u e s t i o n n a i r e response a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e d that 23 f a m i l i e s had l i v e d i n a p a r t -34 merits o r s u i t e s , and $ in e x t e n s i o n s o f (above o r b e h i n d ) s t o r e s o r w a r e h o u s e s . Some o f t h e 20 f a m i l i e s p r e v i o u s l y o c c u p y i n g h o u s e s h a d s h a r e d them w i t h a n o t h e r f a m i l y . D u p l e x e s h a d b e e n t e n a n t e d b y k f a m i l i e s , a row house b y 1, whereas "rooms" were l i s t e d as t h e f o r m e r home o f 3 f a m i l i e s . D e s p i t e t h e n o m e n c l a -t u r e c h o s e n b y t h e i n t e r v i e w e e s , one c o n c l u d e s , i n d i r e c t c o n -v e r s a t i o n w i t h them, t h a t most o f t h e s e u n i t s were l i m i t e d i n some way. The Hew L o c a t i o n R e c o g n i z e d e x p e r i e n c e i n d i c a t e s t h a t i n e v e r y n e i g h b o u r h o o d o f w h i c h a h o u s i n g p r o j e c t i s a p a r t , c e r t a i n e s s e n t i a l community f a c i l i t i e s s h o u l d be p r o v i d e d b y e i t h e r p u b l i c o r p r i v a t e a g e n c i e s o t h e r t h a n t h e h o u s i n g a u t h o r i t y . I n g e n e r a l , i t s h o u l d be t h e aim o f t h e h o u s i n g a u t h o r i t y t o u t i l i z e e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s w h e r e v e r / o b t a i n a b l e . S o u t h V a n c o u v e r s u f f e r s g e n e r a l l y f r o m a l a c k o f u r b a n p l a n n i n g , b u t t h i s i s t r u e o f most a r e a s o f w o r k i n g c l a s s V a n c o u v e r , w i t h t h e s p e c i a l e x c e p t i o n o f F r a s e r v i e w and Re n f r e w H e i g h t s , b o t h o f w h i c h a r e a s b e n e f i t t e d f r o m modern l a y o u t s when veterans.? and N. H. A. h o u s i n g were b u i l t a f t e r t h e war. The community r e s o u r c e s i n t h e n e i g h b o u r h o o d s u r r o u n d i n g O r c h a r d P a r k a r e s c a t t e r e d o v e r l a r g e d i s t a n c e s , a r e few i n number, and j u d g i n g by t h e t e n a n t s ' r e s p o n s e t o t h e q u e s t i o n -n a i r e , a r e n e i t h e r w e l l known n o r w e l l u s e d b y t h o s e r e l o c a t e d i n O r c h a r d P a r k . The s h o p p i n g a r e a s t y p i c a l l y f o l l o w " s t r i n g " d e v e l o p m e n t s a l o n g V i c t o r i a D r i v e a n d K i n g s w a y . D i f f i c u l t i e s i n t h i s a c t i -v i t y were s t r e s s e d b y t h e h a n d i c a p p e d and t h e aged, who must FIGURE 4 . In Orchard 36 : r e l y f o r t h e i r s u p p l i e s on shopping by telephone or through the medium of neighbours. However, 4.6 of the f>6 f a m i l y spokesmen i n t e r v i e w e d s a i d they were r e a s o n a b l y s a t i s f i e d w i t h the l o c a l shopping f a c i l i t i e s ; o n l y 10 i n d i c a t i n g t h a t they p r e f e r r e d to do b u s i n e s s e x c l u s i v e l y elsewhere because of " b e t t e r s e l e c t i o n of goods" or " b e t t e r p r i c e s " . Most f a m i l i e s appeared to pur-chase g r o c e r i e s i n the neighbourhood, but p r e f e r r e d to shop elsewhere f o r drygoods and s t a p l e s , c h i e f l y i n l a r g e department s t o r e s downtown or i n a big.new shopping centre r e c e n t l y b u i l t on i+lst and Oak. N a t u r a l l y , schools are of f i r s t importance among the f a c i l i t i e s t o be a s s e s s e d i n t h i s area. For the 343 c h i l d r e n i n Orchard Park, there are three l o c a l p u b l i c schools and two p r i v a t e C a t h o l i c s c h o o l s . The neighbourhood elementary s c h o o l s are from f o u r to e i g h t b l o c k s away, depending upon tenant l o c a -t i o n i n the p r o j e c t . Most i n t e r v i e w e e s were s a t i s f i e d w i t h the d i s t a n c e to be t r a v e l l e d , except a few who had c h i l d r e n a t t e n d i n g J e r i c h o H i l l School, King Edward High School, and so f o r t h (longer d i s t a n c e s are common f o r a l l h i g h s c h o o l s t u d e n t s ) . However, those tenants b o r d e r i n g lj.5th Avenue v o i c e d c o n s i d e r a b l e concern r e g a r d i n g the l a c k of a t r a f f i c l i g h t at the s c h o o l c r o s s i n g , the poor n i g h t l i g h t i n g , and the heaviness of the t r a f f i c on t h i s "through" s t r e e t . A l r e a d y , at l e a s t two s e r i o u s a c c i d e n t s have o c c u r r e d here, one of which ( i n v o l v i n g an e l d e r l y man) was f a t a l . The c l o s e s t h i g h school i s over a m i l e away, and t h i s c r e a t e s some d i f f i c u l t y f o r handicapped c h i l d r e n , inasmuch as p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n i s not convenient from the p r o j e c t t o the K i l l a r n e y High School area. E v i d e n t l y many tenants are e i t h e r not aware of the e x i s t a n c e of a p r i v a t e 37 k i n d e r g a r t e n i n the neighbourhood, or they are f i n a n c i a l l y unable t o u t i l i z e t h i s r e s o u r c e , as almost a l l tenants i n t e r -viewed agreed that a k i n d e r g a r t e n was b a d l y needed, 1 but no tenant was encountered who had a c h i l d i n one. Although r e l i g i o u s a f f i l i a t i o n was not s p e c i f i c a l l y d i s -cussed i n the course of the Interviex^s, 21 tenants i n the sample i n d i c a t e d t hat they s a t i s f a c t o r i l y managed t o a t t e n d a nearby church, whereas approximately 13 i n t e r v i e w e e s p r e f e r r e d t o main-t a i n c ontact w i t h churches i n t h e i r p r e v i o u s neighbourhood. T h i s p r o p o r t i o n (about 1 i n 3) i s worthy of note, and i l l u s t r a t e s the s i g n i f i c a n t impact of emotional " t i e s " to "the o l d n e i g h - , bourhood". One important s o c i a l r e s o u r c e , the l i b r a r y , seemed to be i n great n e g l e c t . The Gollingwood Branch of the Vancouver P u B l i c L i b r a r y at 2985 Kingsway, which address a l s o serves as head-quart e r s f o r the Mobile Branch of the l i b r a r y , appeared too l i t t l e used, whether because of d i s t a n c e , l a c k of i n f o r m a t i o n or l a c k of i n t e r e s t . South U n i t of Vancouver C i t y S o c i a l S e r v i c e Department i s l o c a t e d at 61(45 Knight Road, and U n i t #k of the M e t r o p o l i t a n H e a l t h Committee i s at 61|05 Knight Road, both of which are w i t h -i n one m i l e of the Orchard Park p r o j e c t . " L e i s u r e time" and " r e c r e a t i o n " must mean p l a y space, whatever e l s e . T h i s e v i d e n t l y l e a v e s a good d e a l to be desired--something appears to have s l i p p e d between the cup of 1. T h i s need may be met i f p r e s e n t hopes m a t e r i a l i z e . I n t h e i r Annual Report i960, the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y s t a t e s , "Because of the problems r e l a t e d above, the need of a common room or meeting h a l l such as has been req u e s t e d b e f o r e becomes more p r e s s i n g and i t i s s i n c e r e l y hoped t h a t the A u t h o r i t y can be g i v e n t h i s very necessary f a c i l i t y t o meet the growing problem." p.3-3'8 i n t e n t i o n and the l i p of r e a l i z a t i o n . Assuming t h a t the i n t e n -t i o n of the p r o j e c t was to p r o v i d e adequate, low-cost housing f o r tenants f i n a n c i a l l y r e s t r i c t e d by e i t h e r income or numbers of dependents or both, there appears to be a r e g r e t t a b l e l a c k of p l a n n i n g f o r the needs of the p r o j e c t 's c h i l d r e n . Internally., there i s no soundproofing. E x t e r n a l l y , the g r a s s y areas are w i r e d o f f and "verboten" f o r c h i l d r e n ' s p l a y , although no p l a y areas, per se, have been p r o v i d e d . The r e s u l t a n t e f f e c t i s t h a t small c h i l d r e n e i t h e r wander at l i b e r t y throughout the n e i g h -bourhood, u t i l i z e the "parking areas" as p l a y space, or c r e a t e c o n s i d e r a b l e c o n s t e r n a t i o n i n the more c o n s c i e n t i o u s mothers, who f i n d these c h i l d r e n r e q u i r e e i t h e r constant s u p e r v i s i o n out-of-doors or temporary i n c a r c e r a t i o n i n the u n i t s u n t i l the mothers' household d u t i e s have been completed momentarily. The o n l y p l a y f a c i l i t i e s which have been p r o v i d e d are l a r g e cement tubes and sandboxes; but the l a t t e r were condemned by the S a n i t a t i o n Department i n the S p r i n g of I 9 6 0 . For a compact area, housing s e v e r a l hundred c h i l d r e n , t h i s i s o b v i o u s l y not good at a l l , and o f the 5 6 f a m i l i e s i n t e r v i e w e d , I4I1 v o i c e d the need f o r playgrounds, p r e f e r a b l y s u p e r v i s e d , w i t h adequate f a c i l i -t i e s . These are needed not only f o r s m a l l e r c h i l d r e n , but f o r teenagers, as even b a l l p l a y i n g i s out of the q u e s t i o n a t p r e s e n t . Two f a c t o r s may operate i n the e x i s t i n g , n o n - f u n c t i o n a l p l a n — c o n f l i c t between standards of a r c h i t e c t u r a l d e s i g n p e r t i -nent to upper and to lower socio-economic stratum u n i t s ( i . e . , West End or K e r r i s d a l e apartment u n i t s designed f o r couples, as opposed to p u b l i c housing u n i t s f o r f a m i l i e s ) ; and c o n f u s i o n 39 between r e a l i s t i c p r o v i s i o n f o r c h i l d r e n and "economic" use of land, the l a t t e r b eing, i n t h i s i n s t a n c e , as example of penny-wisdom and p o u n d - f o o l i s h n e s s . A w e l l equipped and s u p e r v i s e d park nearby, would have r e s o l v e d much of t h i s need. F i g u r e 1+, showing the l o c a t i o n of v a r i o u s community r e s o u r c e s , g r a p h i c a l l y i l l u s t r a t e s the long d i s t a n c e s one must t r a v e l t o rea c h the "nearby" parks. The tenants r e p o r t t h a t no parks i n the area i n c l u d e e i t h e r exten-s i v e playground equipment or s u p e r v i s i o n . Thus, i t becomes o b v i o u s t h a t o n l y o l d e r c h i l d r e n , c a p a b l e of t r a v e l l i n g a l o n e , or smaller c h i l d r e n whose mothers have s u f f i c i e n t m o t i v a t i o n and spare time, c o u l d u t i l i z e the neighbourhood park areas. F u r t h e r -more, the i n c e n t i v e t o use them appeared t o be l a c k i n g i n a great many of the 56 tenants i n t e r v i e w e d , many of whom were unaware of t h e i r e x i s t e n c e . The need f o r a community l e i s u r e - t i m e centre was almost u n i v e r s a l l y acknowledged, e s p e c i a l l y f o r use by c h i l d r e n of a l l ages. Only a h a n d f u l of the tenants i n t e r v i e w e d mentioned Sun-set Memorial Centre at kOk East 5lst Avenue, some two m i l e s d i s t a n t , or V i c t o r i a D r i v e Community H a l l at 0^26 East k3rd Avenue as p o t e n t i a l r e s o u r c e s , but almost a l l agreed t h a t "something In the p r o j e c t " was u r g e n t l y r e q u i r e d . D i s t a n c e , i n the f i r s t i n s t a n c e , and l a c k of i n f o r m a t i o n , i n the second, appear as the c h i e f d e t e r r a n t s to use of the e x i s t i n g r e s o u r c e s . That the c i t y beaches, a r t g a l l e r i e s and museums are a minimum d i s t a n c e of from f o u r t o s i x m i l e s from the p r o j e c t , e l e v a t e s them to the p o s i t i o n of a r a r e t r e a t f o r most of the tenants, f o r many of whom each bus f a r e i s an a d d i t i o n a l f i n a n -c i a l burden. S i m i l a r l y , another t r e a t which might be i n c l u d e d o c c a s i o n a l l y , i f d i s t a n c e p e r m i t t e d , i s a movie, and a f r e -quent complaint among both parents and c h i l d r e n Is the l a c k i n t h i s area of a movie t h e a t r e . P u b l i c T r a n s p o r t a t i o n . Bus r o u t e s e x i s t along k5th Avenue and along V i c t o r i a D r i v e , w i t h much t a l k i n the p r o j e c t i n the l a t e S p r i n g of I 9 6 0 of a proposed bus r o u t e along k l s t Avenue. I t was a l s o f r e q u e n t l y suggested by those p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the sample t h a t a r o u t e along Hanaimo S t r e e t would ease the problem of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f o r the e l d e r l y and the handicapped, who f i n d the present t r a n s p o r t a t i o n r e s o u r c e s inadequate. The m a j o r i t y of those i n t e r v i e w e d appeared p a s s i v e l y content w i t h the e x i s t -i n g p u b l i c t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , although 11 out of 5>6 s p e c i f i c a l l y v o l u n t e e r e d that they had purchased a c a r i n order to r e s o l v e t h e i r own t r a n s p o r t a t i o n problems. The g e o g r a p h i c a l l o c a t i o n of Orchard Park i n South Vancouver, combined w i t h the f a c t t h a t the g r e a t e s t c o n c e n t r a t i o n of i n d u s t r i a l and comraerical employ-ment e x i s t s i n the n o r t h e r n end of the c i t y and i n the downtown area, does complicate the problem of commuting by p u b l i c t r a n s -p o r t a t i o n , as many r e p o r t e d d a i l y bus r i d e s l a s t i n g from an hour t o two hours, each way. Pour tenants i n the sample men-t i o n e d the great commuting d i s t a n c e as the item r e q u i r i n g the g r e a t e s t adjustment to r e l o c a t i o n i n Orchard Park. Concepts of Community and Neighbourhood i n Tenants Some attempt was made to ex p l o r e what meaning the i d e a s of "community" and "neighbourhood" had f o r tenants, three questions b e i n g used i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e : "would you say t h a t 42 you f e e l p a r t of a new neighbourhood here?", "or t h a t you belong mostly to the p r o j e c t ? " , "would you c a l l i t a community?". Many inter v i e w e e s were vague i n t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the d i f f e r e n c e between "community" and "neighbourhood", some answering a f f i r m a -t i v e l y (or n e g a t i v e l y ) t o a l l three q u e s t i o n s . Some appeared to r e g a r d t h e i r "neighbourhood" as the p r o j e c t alone;, whereas others considered the p r o j e c t as a separate e n t i t y , and "neigh-bourhood" to be the area surrounding the p r o j e c t . S i m i l a r l y , "community" was sometimes a p p a r e n t l y i n t e r p r e t e d as r e f e r r i n g to a communal f e e l i n g among the tenants of the p r o j e c t i t s e l f , and, sometimes as the l a r g e r area surrounding the immediate neighbour-hood of the p r o j e c t . Semantics a s i d e , a f e e l i n g o f togetherness i n some s p e c i f i c g e o g r a p h i c a l area appeared i n many minds as the i s s u e i n ques t i o n , and i n d i v i d u a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s i^ere not p r e s s e d f u r t h e r , u n l e s s the tenant s p e c i f i c a l l y v o l u n t e e r e d more i n f o r -mation. Some tenants mentioned a f e e l i n g of shame r e l a t e d t o being a p a r t of the p r o j e c t , and, e v i d e n t l y , l i v i n g i n s u b s i d i z e d housing r e f l e c t s some i n f e r i o r i t y i n s t a t u s . Many mentioned a sense of r e j e c t i o n by the o f f - p r o j e c t neighbours. One reason g i v e n was the a l l e g e d d e p r e c i a t i o n i n p r o p e r t y values i n the immediately surrounding area, where "many" houses had been p l a c e d on the r e a l e s t a t e market s i n c e the p r o j e c t opened. Without a c o n t r o l study g i v i n g r e a l e s t a t e values and the number of houses on the market p r i o r t o the p r o j e c t ' s l o c a t i o n i n the area, and s i m i l a r i n f o r m a t i o n for. other areas i n Vancouver at t h i s time, " d e p r e c i a t i o n " remains an u n t e s t e d theory. I t i s a l t o g e t h e r 43 l i k e l y t h a t any house put up f o r s a l e i n t h i s area may be a l l e g e d to be s o l d because of the p r o j e c t nearby; even though i t i s obvious t h a t i n some d e f i n i t e way the a r e a as a whole has been improved. S e v e r a l tenants suggested t h a t l o c a l merchants " d i s c r i m i n a t e " a g a i n s t p r o j e c t d w e l l e r s , on the grounds t h a t t h e i r c r e d i t r a t i n g i s poor, i n some i n s t a n c e s , and, t h e r e f o r e , payment by cash at the time of purchase, r a t h e r than by cheque, i s i n s i s t e d upon. Another more fre q u e n t complaint i s t h a t "there are too many c l a s s e s " of people i n the p r o j e c t to e f f e c t a s a t i s f a c t o r y m i n g l i n g of these c l a s s e s , whether s o c i a l l y or i n some form of a s s o c i a t i o n . Again, the sentiment i s s i g n i f i -cant but i t cannot be taken as proved without f u r t h e r study. Summarizing the i s s u e of community and neighbourhood con-cepts i n simple aggregate terms, 32 r e s i d e n t s i n t e r v i e w e d i n the sample i n d i c a t e d that they d i d not f e e l p a r t of a community, whereas, only 11 agreed t h a t they d i d . A major number (37) f e l t t h a t they belonged, m a i n l y to the p r o j e c t , and some were most emphatic i n t h i s , s t a t i n g t h a t t h i s was e n f o r c e d by the o f f -p r o j e c t neighbours. Only 6 f e l t t h a t they d i d not belong e x c l u s i v e l y to the p r o j e c t , some s t a t i n g t h a t they f e l t no i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h the p r o j e c t at a l l . P e e l i n g s on the matter of "neighbourhood" were more evenly s c a t t e r e d , 16 tenants i n the sample agreeing that they f e l t p a r t of a new neighbourhood, as a g a i n s t l k d i s a g r e e i n g . Chapter I I I FAMILIES REHOUSED . " I t i s e a s i l y f o r g o t t e n t h a t a'housing p r o j e c t a f f e c t s a l a r g e number of people. I t Is envisaged as a number of " u n i t s " , or perhaps as a number o f " f a m i l i e s " . But the aggregate of people i s much l a r g e r ; some 600 persons are the r e a l i t y o f "Orchard P a r k " — a n d most l i k e l y of a l l to be f o r g o t t e n , a majo-r i t y of these are c h i l d r e n . How have these people r e a c t e d to t h e i r new l i f e ? Homemakers 1 Views of F a c i l i t i e s To s t a r t w i t h the a d u l t s , a good beg i n n i n g i s the view-p o i n t of the housewife, f o r whom the k i t c h e n , the laundry, and c h i l d care i s indeed " c l o s e to home". The v a r i a t i o n s i n u n i t types, f a c i l i t i e s , and s e r v i c e s have a l r e a d y been d e s c r i b e d . N a t u r a l l y , i n t h i s area of com-p a r i s o n , the type and c o n d i t i o n of the accommodation p r e v i o u s l y occupied by the tenants d i d much to c o n d i t i o n t h e i r response to the present f a c i l i t i e s . A very few tenants had p r e v i o u s l y occupied housing which was adequate and were i n Orchard Park p r i m a r i l y because of f i n a n c i a l r e v e r s e s , due to h e a l t h , f i r e , age or d i s a b i l i t y . N a t u r a l l y , p l e a s a n t or adequate housing on the p r i v a t e market does not compare un f a v o u r a b l y w i t h accommo-d a t i o n i n a low-income housing p r o j e c t . But e n f o r c e d p h y s i c a l p r o p i n q u i t y without common i n t e r e s t s , c r e a t e s attendant problems of g o s s i p , m i s t r u s t , or l a c k of c o - o p e r a t i o n and understanding between tenants. These d i f f i c u l t i e s were r e f l e c t e d by responses to the ques t i o n , "What took the most g e t t i n g used t o ? " , and,• "Are there s t i l l some th i n g s you f i n d strange?", i n the ques-t i o n n a i r e s e c t i o n d e a l i n g w i t h a comparison of p r e v i o u s and present accommodation. To these q u e s t i o n s , t h i r t e e n tenants mentioned "a l a c k of p r i v a c y " , s i x d i s l i k e d " l i v i n g so c l o s e to o t h e r s " , and nine r e p l i e d , "the neighbours" as t h e i r primary adjustment d i f f i c u l t y . In t h i s s e c t i o n , a l s o , and undoubtedly b e a r i n g a c l o s e r e l a t i o n s h i p to each other, were f r e q u e n t men-t i o n s of the l a c k of soundproofing, and "the c h i l d r e n " (meaning the l a r g e number of them, n o i s e s , damage done or a l l e g e d l a c k of d i s c i p l i n e ) as t h e i r c h i e f concern. "What t h i n g s do you l i k e best about i t ? " , r e f e r r i n g t o the present accommodation, e l i c i t e d most responses f o r "good h e a t i n g " (29 t e n a n t s ) , and " c l e a n l i n e s s " or "newness" (13 t e n a n t s ) . Next i n order were " b r i g h t n e s s " (16), "more space" (10), " f l o o r p l a n " , "design", "convenience" or "compactness" (13), and " p r i v a c y " (10). "Loxtf r e n t " was p i c k e d out by only nine, and "hot water" by o n l y f o u r . Other responses commented upon s p e c i f i c areas or i n s t a l l a t i o n s , (e.g., k i t c h e n (3), bathroom ( k ) , cupboards and c l o s e t s ( k ) , r e f r i g e r a t o r (3), and k i t c h e n s i n k (1). Pour pen-s i o n e r s c o n s i d e r e d l i v i n g on the ground f l o o r t h e i r f a v o u r i t e aspect of the p r o j e c t . As most tenants were able to gi v e q u i t e a l i s t of b e s t - l i k e d f a c t o r s , a v a r i e t y of comments was obta i n e d . One woman x<ras an ou t s t a n d i n g e x c e p t i o n l i k i n g " n o t h i n g — i t ' s j u s t a p l a c e t o l i v e . " Another w i t h d e c i d e d o p i n i o n s s a i d she l i k e d e v e r y t h i n g i n the i n t e r i o r of her u n i t , "but nothing o u t s i d e " . A v a i l a b l e l i v i n g space was s i m i l a r l y a t o p i c which opened k6 up p l e n t y of comment, a d d i t i o n a l enquiry being made i n t o the matter of adequacy of the space p r o v i d e d f o r the f a m i l y ' s o r d i n a r y a c t i v i t i e s . The m a j o r i t y (LL2*tenants) s a i d they had more space i n Orchard Park, as a g a i n s t 13 (about a quarter) s t a t i n g t h a t they had l e s s than i n t h e i r p r e v i o u s accommodation; only one tenant had "about the same amount". Regarding ade-quacy of the space p r o v i d e d , 1+2 tenants admitted t o h a v i n g enough space, and 13 f e l t t h a t they had inadequate space. I t i s important to remember here how much would depend on the standard by which space i s judged. To anyone who has l i v e d i n a slummy shack, a l l space, even though small', i s u s a b l e . Yet compared w i t h contemporary ranch house s t y l e s , p u b l i c u n i t s are economized t o the l i m i t . Inasmuch as storage space i s a d i f f e r e n t and v e r y s p e c i a l aspect of f a m i l y l i v i n g space, t h i s q u e s t i o n was sometimes pursued s e p a r a t e l y . Somewhat s u r p r i s i n g l y , 60 per cent, (32 tenants) s t a t e d t h a t they had "enough" or " p l e n t y " of storage space; and 1+0 per cent regarded t h e i r accommodation as r e q u i r -i n g more storage space. Some s p e c i a l i z e d areas appeared l i m i -t e d to some t e n a n t s , 20 commenting t h a t they had comparatively small or inadequate d i n i n g areas, and 16 complaining that the "counter" or meal p r e p a r a t i o n space was e i t h e r Inadequate or p o o r l y designed. (In the row houses, a s m a l l counter area e x i s t s I n the c o r n e r , but i s p l a c e d beside the r e f r i g e r a t o r , and i n the path of the inward-opening k i t c h e n door.) S p e c i a l p o i n t s about house c l e a n i n g was a l s o e l i c i t e d , w i t h 18 tenants s t a t i n g t h a t t h i s chore was regarded- as "easy" or " a l r i g h t " ; but a s u r p r i s e was t h a t h a l f (27) commented on 47 the comparative d i f f i c u l t y . I n the l a t t e r group, most tenants mentioned the l i g h t - b e i g e f l o o r s , "which show every mark", and the gyproc p l a s t e r board w a l l s , which are white and of a rough, unwashable f i n i s h . Obviously, these f e a t u r e s would cre a t e a severe s o i l i n g and damage hazard. Once again, i t has to be remembered t h a t there are between three and f o u r hundred c h i l d -r e n being housed i n the p r o j e c t . I n some u n i t s , the tenant f e l t sure that the a c t u a l c o n s t r u c t i o n of the f l o o r s was at f a u l t ; too much t a r had. a p p a r e n t l y been p l a c e d under the t i l e s , and t h i s oozed through the j o i n t s , f u r t h e r c o m p l i c a t i n g house c l e a n i n g . One of the most g r a t i f y i n g , e n t h u s i a s t i c responses was t o the q u e s t i o n "Do you f e e l you can r e a l l y take a p r i d e i n the p l a c e ? " , no l e s s than kk tenants agreeing t h a t they c o u l d . The 8 c o n s i d e r i n g t h a t they d e f i n i t e l y c o u l d not, g i v e f o o d f o r thought. In t h i s l a t t e r group, some mentioned the d i f f i c u l t y of keeping up the appearance of t h e i r accommodation because of the f i n a n c i a l i m p o s s i b i l i t y of t h e i r a f f o r d i n g p a i n t , the non-washable w a l l s u r f a c e s , and the sometimes unpleasant aspects of the h a l l s o u t s i d e t h e i r apartment as a r e s u l t of c h i l d r e n p l a y -i n g t h e r e . Others f e l t " p r i d e " i m p o s s i b l e because of the a l l e g e d o f f - p r o j e c t a t t i t u d e toward the p r o j e c t and i t s tenants, a l r e a d y d i s c u s s e d elsewhere. These are matters which are of c o n s i d e r a b l e consequence i n p r o j e c t management. S p e c i f i c questions on laundry f a c i l i t i e s were not i n c o r -p o r a t e d i n the q u e s t i o n n a i r e , but t h i s matter appears to m e r i t c o n s i d e r a b l e emphasis. A good d e a l of tenant r e a c t i o n was v o l -unteered, almost a l l of a negative nature. The q u e s t i o n , " o t h e r ? " which was designed as a c a t c h - a l l f o r m i s c e l l a n e o u s tenant il-8 comments, i n s p i r e d 1? tenants to complain of the washing f a c i l i t i e s at Orchard Park, and 23 to express t h e i r unhappi-ness w i t h the p r o v i d e d d r y i n g f a c i l i t i e s . At another p o i n t , the q u e s t i o n s , "What th i n g s would you most l i k e t o see improved i n the p r o j e c t ? " , and, "Have you any suggestions which you would l i k e to make f o r any new p r o j e c t s i m i l a r t o Orchard Park i n the f u t u r e ? " , e l i c i t e d "improved laundry f a c i l i t i e s " from every second one of the t e n a n t s . Some d e s c r i p t i o n o f e x i s t i n g laundry f a c i l i t i e s i n Orchard Park i s necessary i n order t o understand the nature of these complaints more thoro u g h l y . The row house u n i t s , designed w i t h -out basements, have on the ground f l o o r a "storage" room i n which the tenant i s meant to s t o r e the f a m i l y washing machine, when not i n use. When laundry i s to be done, the machine must be moved to the k i t c h e n , as no taps, tubs nor e l e c t r i c a l o u t l e t s e x i s t i n what might b e t t e r have been designed as a " u t i l i t y " room. Located o u t s i d e each row house i s a s m a l l , e n c l o s e d area c o n t a i n i n g c l o t h e s l i n e s . The r e s t r i c t i o n s and r e l a t i v e i n e f f i -c i e n c y of the laundry arrangements are obvious. By the average h a r a s s e d housewife, the fence around the d r y i n g area i s seen as a p r e v e n t i o n of a i r c i r c u l a t i o n and a d e t e r r e n t from d r y i n g the f a m i l y wash, r a t h e r than as a p r o t e c t i o n of the a e s t h e t i c p r o p e r t i e s of the p r o j e c t . The row houses are the o n l y u n i t s i n which o u t s i d e d r y i n g i s f a c i l i t a t e d , although, according t o the a u t h o r i t y , tenants may supply t h e i r own f o l d i n g r a c k s and p l a c e them out o f doors. T h i s l a t t e r f a c t does not appear to be w e l l understood among the t e n a n t s , and a common grie v a n c e among the women i n other than row house u n i t s i s the "harshness" 49 .. of l aundry d r i e d i n d o o r s , and the "more p l e a s a n t s m e l l " of laundry d r i e d outdoors. N a t u r a l l y , the o u t s i d e drying f a c i -l i t i e s are of no use to the tenants d u r i n g inclement weather, and many survey i n t e r v i e w s were conducted i n l i v i n g rooms or k i t c h e n s d i s p l a y i n g f o l d i n g r a c k s f u l l of damp laundry. (Is t h i s perhaps a " s l i p " of the middle c l a s s d e s i g n e r s , as b e t t e r -o f f f a m i l i e s "send the laundry out",have diap e r s e r v i c e , or use the launderomat?) In the apartment b l o c k s , basement storage l o c k e r s are pro-v i d e d f o r each tenant, but they are s m a l l , and they must share space r e q u i r e d f o r tubs and c l o t h e s l i n e s . In each l o c k e r , i n a d d i t i o n to such s u p p l i e s as are c o n s i d e r e d r e l a t i v e l y unim-p o r t a n t by some f a m i l i e s who are now i n s m a l l e r q u a r t e r s , and, b i c y c l e s , t r i c y c l e s , wagons, and so f o r t h , the tenant keeps her washing machine, which i s wheeled out once a week at her p r e -s c r i b e d l a u n d e r i n g time. ( I n theory, the person a s s i g n e d to a c e r t a i n time has f i r s t c hoice t o wash, but i f she does not want t o , or f i n i s h e s e a r l y , others may, w i t h her p e r m i s s i o n , use the laundry room). A host of complaints i n the apartment b l o c k s centered around the d i f f i c u l t y i n p r o v i d i n g s u f f i c i e n t c h i l d r e n ' s c l o t h i n g on l i m i t e d incomes to l a s t f o r the d u r a t i o n of one week. I t i s e s p e c i a l l y d i f f i c u l t f o r the mothers' of babies or young c h i l d r e n , r e q u i r i n g f r e q u e n t changes, who must make a u x i l i a r y laundry arrangements w i t h the other t e n a n t s . When d r y i n g time i s l i m i t e d i n order t h a t the next tenant may keep the laundry schedule, such c l o t h e s as l i n e d jeans, heavy j a c -k e t s , and so f o r t h , important f o r c h i l d r e n , o f t e n do not com-p l e t e l y dry, e s p e c i a l l y i n view o f the f a c t t h a t the laundry room i s not heated i n the summer months. A c t u a l l y , the laundry problems and others p e r t a i n i n g to c h i l d care i n apartment b l o c k s , has l e d many to q u e s t i o n a l t o g e t h e r whether t h i s type of accommodation i s b a s i c a l l y s u i t e d t o the needs of tenants w i t h c h i l d r e n at a l l . The d i f f i c u l t i e s w i l l be eased when the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y c a r r i e s through w i t h t h e i r c u r r e n t p l a n t o permit a f i r m t o i n s t a l l c o i n -operated automatic dryers i n the apartment blocks,. Laundry i s by c o n t r a s t a r e l a t i v e l y small matter f o r some ol d e r people. The "pensioner" groups of u n i t s have a c e n t r a l laundry u n i t i n each, a small room w i t h tubs and a wringer. The A u t h o r i t y has i n s t a l l e d d r y e r s i n these u n i t s , and one e n t e r p r i s i n g group had purchased t h e i r own automatic washer. Although the pensioners would have l e s s laundry t o do than would the f a m i l i e s , advanced years and f a i l i n g h e a l t h caused many pensioners who c o u l d a f f o r d the l u x u r y to "send the laundry out". There would appear to e x i s t a v a l i d case f o r the i n s t a l l a -t i o n of automatic washers and dryers i n a l l groups of u n i t s , as many tenants f e l t t h a t even c o i n - o p e r a t e d laundry f a c i l i t i e s would be a f e a s i b l e c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r them, inasmuch as t h e r e would be l e s s of t h e i r money t i e d up i n machine s f o r which the use was r e s t r i c t e d anyway. When basement storage space i s a t a minimum, the need to s t o r e a washing machine i n each of t e n apartment b l o c k l o c k e r s presents a r a t h e r i n e f f e c t i v e means of d e a l i n g w i t h s t o r a g e , as w e l l as w i t h l a u n d r y . Some of the area taken up w i t h c l o t h e s l i n e s c o u l d h e l p f u l l y be converted t o an indoor p l a y area f o r c h i l d r e n — a n o t h e r f r e q u e n t l y expressed 51 need of apartment b l o c k tenants. Indeed, improved p l a y f a c i l i t i e s and improved laundry f a c i l i t i e s were the two t h i n g s most f r e q u e n t l y mentioned among the "things we would most l i k e to see improved". The changes suggested would go a'long way towards a l l e v i a t i n g both. A d u l t s w i t h P h y s i c a l D i s a b i l i t i e s . A s p e c i a l word i s needed about d i s a b l e d a d u l t s . Orchard Park provides the f i r s t u n i t s i n l o c a l p u b l i c housing i n Van-couver designated s o l e l y f o r tenants w i t h p h y s i c a l d i s a b i l l t e s , although some more mobile d i s a b l e d or aged people are s c a t t e r e d i n a l l types of accommodation throughout the p r o j e c t . A d i s -t i n c t i m p r e s s i o n was gained t h a t more e s p r i t de corps e x i s t e d among the s e r i o u s l y d i s a b l e d group than throughout the r e s t of the p r o j e c t , p o s s i b l y because the d i s a b l e d form a m i n o r i t y group i n a g e o g r a p h i c a l l y c o n c e n t r a t e d arrangement. However, t h i s i m p r e s s i o n c o u l d be q u a l i f i e d by the f a c t t h a t some r e f u s e d to be i n t e r v i e w e d , and these were apt to be the more s e v e r e l y handicapped, or even the more s u s p i c i o u s • o r a n t i - s o c i a l t e n a n t s . At any r a t e , the c r i t i c i s m s r e g i s t e r e d can be segregated i n t o p o s i t i v e and negative r e a c t i o n s , some of which may be of a s s i s -tance i f a p p l i e d t o f u r t h e r p r o j e c t s f o r r e h o u s i n g the aged and the i n f i r m . An o u t s t a n d i n g example of p o s i t i v e a c t i o n on the p a r t of the d i s a b l e d tenants was t h e i r p e t i t i o n f o r a ramp to b e set up which was s u i t a b l e f o r w h e e l c h a i r s , to a i d access to t h e i r p a r t of the p r o j e c t from the nearby road. T h i s p e t i t i o n was honoured by Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y and had y i e l d e d con-s i d e r a b l e s a t i s f a c t i o n to these tenants, although i t was suggested by some of the people i n t e r v i e w e d i n the present survey that s t i l l another o u t l e t to the road would be h e l p f u l . A second example of the "togetherness" of the pensioner groups, was the f r e q u e n t l y expressed d e s i r e f o r entertainment, r e c r e a -t i o n , or v i s i t i n g s e r v i c e s , which came from both the aged and the d i s a b l e d , many of whom described themselves as "alone so much". There was also an unexpected unanimity of agreement regarding the d e s i r a b i l i t y of segregating themselves from "the r e s t of the p r o j e c t " , ( i . e . , f a m i l i e s w i t h c h i l d r e n ) , and seme went so f a r as t o say that t h i s would be p r e f e r a b l e from the f a m i l i e s ' point of view, as w e l l . Although the degree of i n -t o l e r a n c e of the status quo v a r i e d from i n d i v i d u a l to i n d i v i -d ual, t h i s view was shared by a l l the " f a m i l y " tenants. Was t h i s a m i s c a l c u l a t i o n ; or could i t have been avoided by d i f -ferences i n design and lay-out? I t would bear d e t a i l e d study, un but q u e s t i o n a b l y i t demands c o n s i d e r a t i o n by those planning f u t u r e p r o j e c t s . One d i s a b l e d tenant suggested t h a t her "group" should have i t s own store f o r h a n d i c r a f t s , to which they could a l l c o n t r i -bute, and which would give them something to do, besides encouraging l e s s dependence upon p u b l i c funds. One group of three e l d e r l y pensioners i n a f o u r - u n i t row, had c o l l a b o r a t e d i n buying t h e i r own automatic washer, and evinced great p r i d e i n t h e i r a c q u i s i t i o n . The "handicapped" u n i t s d i f f e r from the "pensioner" u n i t s i n that the former are constructed on ground l e v e l , w i t h no s t a i r s , obviously a great asset to tenants w i t h serious p h y s i c a l problems. However, many of the "pensioners" expressed great s a t i s f a c t i o n , too, i n having "only" one or two 53 steps, e s p e c i a l l y a f t e r t h e i r experiences w i t h previous accommodation. Some adverse c r i t i c i s m of p r o j e c t or u n i t f a c i l i t i e s i n g e n e r a l was encountered. The sidewalks are wide enough f o r only one wheelchair at a time, and t h i s i s c o n s i d e r e d f r u s -t r a t i n g by those tenants depending on t h i s means of locomotion. S e v e r a l complained s p e c i f i c a l l y of the uncomfortable combina-t i o n of people on crutches and c h i l d r e n on b i c y c l e s , t r a v e l l i n g on the same narrow sidewalk at the same time. One tenant was annoyed that the f r o n t and back door b e l l s sound the same, o f t e n n e c e s s i t a t i n g needless movements. (As only the back doors are s e r v i c e d by sidewalks, t h i s c r i t i c i s m may seem i r r e l e v a n t ; but i t i s s u r e l y one example of the small t h i n g which means so much.) S e v e r a l aged and handicapped people complained of the low k i t c h e n s i n k , the k i t c h e n storage s h e l v e s , which are low and deep, and comparatively h i g h k i t c h e n windows, a l l of which c r e a t e d i f f i -c u l t i e s f o r those w i t h r e s t r i c t e d p h y s i c a l a b i l i t i e s . Many are immobilized enough to f i n d i t i m p o s s i b l e t o shop p e r s o n a l l y , but seemed r e c o n c i l e d to r e l y i n g upon f r i e n d s or f a m i l y , u t i l i z -i n g the " p e r s o n a l shopper" s e r v i c e i n l a r g e department s t o r e s , or i n shopping by telephone. A common t r a i t among the e l d e r l y and d i s a b l e d i s t h e i r d e s i r e to be " c l o s e r to t h i n g s " , and many appeared to f e e l i s o l a t e d by the p r o j e c t ' s l o c a t i o n because of t h e i r own decreased m o b i l i t y . A l a r g e percentage expressed a d e s i r e f o r "more p r i v a c y o u t s i d e " . Some complained s p e c i f i c a l l y t h a t because of the low c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h e i r u n i t s , with the sidewalk immedi-a t e l y o utside t h e i r back doors and windows, "people can l o o k i n " . 54 L a s t l y , b e t t e r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n was a need c o n s t a n t l y r e f e r r e d t o . Many of these people f e e l i n c a p a b l e of j o u r n e y i n g by bus and they must r e l y on f r i e n d s or r e l a t i v e s w i t h c a r s , or on t a x i s i n emergencies, or remain a somewhat u n w i l l i n g " c a p t i v e " at home. T h i s l a t t e r unmet need c o u l d be m o d i f i e d or r e s o l v e d by the e s t a b l i s h m e n t ' o f a s o c i a l c e n t r e or a s e r i e s of clubs f o r these people. I n t e r e s t e d v o l u n t e e r s would be needed t o make t h i s p l a n s u c c e s s f u l . F a c i l i t i e s f o r c h i l d r e n For c h i l d r e n , by c o n t r a s t , s p e c i a l needs seem t o have been l e a s t c o n s i d e r e d . As a l r e a d y i n d i c a t e d (Chapter I I ) , both the p r o j e c t i t s e l f and the surrounding area l a c k " s o c i a l " r e s o u r c e s of the g r e a t e s t f a m i l y consequence. Judging by the q u e s t i o n n a i r e responses, an organized, s u p e r v i s e d playground f o r the c h i l d r e n , p r e f e r a b l y away from the l i v i n g area, or, c o n v e r s e l y , c l o s e to the l i v i n g area, but i n c o r p o r a t i n g adequate soundproofing i n t o u n i t c o n s t r u c t i o n , i s seen, almost u n i v e r s a l l y , as the most b l a t a n t l y unmet need. F o r t y - s i x of the sample of f i f t y - s i x mentioned t h i s m i s s i n g r e s o u r c e , g e n e r a l l y i n emphatic terras.1 A v o l u n t e e r c o - o p e r a t i v e playgroup or day-care k i n d e r g a r t e n was welcomed as a good sug g e s t i o n by 35 tenants. Seven s p e c i -f i c a l l y mentioned t h e i r doubt that much c o - o p e r a t i o n between tenants could be aroused f o r such a p r o j e c t , and the remainder was undecided, or u n i n t e r e s t e d because the problem of p r o v i d i n g t h i s p a r t i c u l a r experience f o r c h i l d r e n d i d not apply i n t h e i r cases. 1. The remaining 10 tenants are accounted f o r by the f a c t that u n l e s s " s i n g l e " people or " c h i l d l e s s " pensioners v o l u n -t e e r e d i n f o r m a t i o n on the s e c t i o n of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e d e a l i n g w i t h c h i l d r e n , t h e i r response was not e l i c i t e d . 55 The p r o v i s i o n of adequate p l a y space f o r young c h i l d r e n was deemed completely l a c k i n g by 35 tenants, although a quar-t e r of the respondents f e l t t h a t e x i s t i n g f a c i l i t i e s were ac c e p t a b l e . (As mentioned p r e v i o u s l y , c h i l d r e n u t i l i z e the parking areas, sidewalks, and roads as outdoor p l a y areas, the grassy areas b e i n g f o r b i d d e n f o r p l a y i n g . T h i s i s , of course, what happens i n " o r d i n a r y " unplanned areas.) The l a c k of soundproofing was a f r e q u e n t l y mentioned item i n t h i s i n s t a n c e , as during inclement weather, when the c h i l d r e n must remain i n -doors, the h a l l s o r a p a r t m e n t s b e c o m e q u i t e n o i s y w h i l e c h i l d r e n are at p l a y . As the Orchard Park apartment b l o c k ' s basements c o n t a i n s u i t e s and l a u n d r y rooms, along w i t h storage l o c k e r s , and the row houses are c o n s t r u c t e d completely without basements, the indoor area a v a i l a b l e f o r p l a y i s s e r i o u s l y r e s t r i c t e d . R e l o c a t i o n and i t s e f f e c t s upon the c h i l d r e n was t e s t e d by a q u e s t i o n e x p l o r i n g any d i f f e r e n c e s i n the amount of time spent b y the c h i l d r e n at home, as compared w i t h that i n p r e v i o u s l o c a -t i o n s . The responses showed a c o n s i d e r a b l e range, 12 tenants s t a t i n g the c h i l d r e n were at home more, 13 sure t h a t i t was l e s s , and 18 f e e l i n g t h a t the time spent at home was the same as previously/-; but the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of these f i n d i n g s i s not c l e a r - c u t . For example, many s t a t e d the c h i l d r e n were at home more, as "there i s n o t h i n g f o r them i n the p r o j e c t " . Others s t a t e d that the c h i l d r e n were absent from home more f r e q u e n t l y because they v i s i t e d e i t h e r new or o l d f r i e n d s " o f f the project'.'. A c t u a l l y , the age of the c h i l d under c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s very important; I n c r e a s i n g independence should a t t e n d i n c r e a s i n g age, and o l d e r c h i l d r e n normally spend more time away from home than would p r e - s c h o o l e r s , f o r example. 56 "Do they get more a t t e n t i o n from mother; and from f a t h e r ? " , were questions intended t o probe any changes i n t h i s sphere, presumably brought about by r e l o c a t i o n . As mentioned p r e v i o u s l y , 66 f a m i l i e s i n the p r o j e c t had no f a t h e r i n the home, and 22 of these homes were i n c l u d e d i n the present sample, so that of n e c e s s i t y , the s e c t i o n d e a l i n g w i t h the f a t h e r would not apply i n these c a s e s . Twelve mothers s t a t e d that they gave more a t t e n t i o n to t h e i r c h i l d r e n s i n c e moving to Orchard Park, 6 s a i d they d i d not, and 10 noted no change. Only 2 f a t h e r s were f e l t by the i n t e r v i e w e e s to spend more time w i t h t h e i r c h i l d r e n , 3 t o spend l e s s time, and the remainder t h a t the amount of time spent w i t h the c h i l d r e n remained the same, or, as e x p l a i n e d above, the q u e s t i o n d i d not apply. Again, i n t e r -p r e t a t i o n Is v i t a l ; some tenants f e l t t h a t they "had t o " spend more time w i t h the c h i l d r e n "because of the f i g h t s " o u t s i d e , or s t a t e d t h a t they kept the c h i l d r e n i n s i d e to a v o i d these c o n f l i c t s . ' A l s o , depending on the age of the c h i l d , and probably upon the emotional atmosphere i n the home, v i s i t i n g away from the p r o j e c t accounted f o r many c h i l d r e n who accord-i n g l y spent l e s s time w i t h t h e i r p a r e n t s . D i f f e r e n c e s i n school attendance and i n t e r e s t s i n c e moving to Orchard Park were compared with the p r e v i o u s ex-p e r i e n c e . For the c h i l d r e n who s t a r t e d s c h o o l f o r the f i r s t time, s i n c e r e l o c a t i o n , no comparison c o u l d be made on b e h a l f of grade one p u p i l s . There were, of course, i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r -ences e x i s t i n g betx^een c h i l d r e n i n the same f a m i l y w i t h r e g a r d to school p r e f e r e n c e , but e i g h t tenants noted that at l e a s t one of t h e i r c h i l d r e n p r e f e r r e d t h e i r s c h o o l i n g i n the Orchard Park area, as a g a i n s t o n l y f o u r p r e f e r r i n g t h e i r s chool experience i n 57 the previous l o c a t i o n ; a f a i r p r o p o r t i o n (20 per cent) seemed to know of no change i n a t t i t u d e toward s c h o o l . Judging by many responses, the c h i l d r e n d i d b e n e f i t by having t h e i r own bedroom i n which to do t h e i r homework, apart from the r e s t of the f a m i l y ; but i t was not p o s s i b l e to know whether t h i s improved t h e i r school performance. "Baby s i t t i n g " problems, while parents e i t h e r shopped or engaged i n s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s , were r e a d i l y d i s c u s s e d , There was some o v e r l a p p i n g i n r e s o u r c e s u t i l i z e d , so t h a t the number of r e p l i e s i s g r e a t e r than the number of tenants i n t e r v i e w e d . Ten tenants noted no problem r e g a r d i n g t h i s matter, due to the f a c t t h a t e i t h e r a l l t h e i r c h i l d r e n were of 'teen age or t h a t at l e a s t one 'teenager was i n the f a m i l y and able to care f o r h i s younger s i b l i n g s . E l e v e n tenants mentioned "swapping s i t t i n g " s e r v i c e s w i t h a neighbour i n the p r o j e c t , and two s a i d t h a t as a l l t h e i r c h i l d r e n a t t e n d s c h o o l , shopping was scheduled f o r s c h o o l hours. A m a j o r i t y (22) u s u a l l y took t h e i r youngsters w i t h them when they shopped. Ten i n t e r v i e w e e s r e p l i e d , s i g n i -f i c a n t l y , that they never go out without the c h i l d r e n , owing e i t h e r to f i n a n c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s or to d i f f i c u l t i e s experienced i n l o c a t i n g a r e l i a b l e s i t t e r . F i v e mothers had a few outings while e i t h e r a husband or other r e l a t i v e "took over" at home. Only three tenants — l e s s than 5 per c e n t - - s t a t e d t h a t they " h i r e d " a s i t t e r , and three more d e s c r i b e d the whole matter of making b a b y s i t t i n g arrangements as " d i f f i c u l t " . G e n e r a l l y , people appeared able to make c o - o p e r a t i v e arrangements e i t h e r w i t h i n t h e i r Immediate f a m i l i e s or w i t h neighbouring t e n a n t s . However, i t does appear to be borne o u t l t h a t a f a i r l y l a r g e 1. See a l s o r e f e r e n c e s to r e c r e a t i o n i n Chapter I I I . 58 percentage of the tenants do s u f f e r from a p a u c i t y of s o c i a l i n t e r e s t s or a c t i v i t i e s ; t h i s f a c t c o u l d c e r t a i n l y be important to the c h i l d r e n , inasmuch as t h i s s i t u a t i o n c o u l d a f f e c t g e n e r a l f a m i l y morale. Economic E f f e c t s of Rehousing Although t h i s s u b j e c t w i l l be d e a l t w i t h i n g r e a t e r d e t a i l l a t e r (Chapter I V ) , two aspects of the economic e f f e c t s of r e -housing are o u t s t a n d i n g . Over 66 per cent of the tenants I n t e r -viewed s t a t e d t h a t they were paying r e n t s which x-jere lower than those p a i d p r e v i o u s l y , and an almost equal p r o p o r t i o n (61 per cent) agreed t h a t , as a r e s u l t of t h i s and other g a i n s , i t was now e a s i e r t o balance the budget. P u b l i c housing, w i t h r e n t s reduced by subsidy, i s Intended to b e n e f i t f a m i l i e s which cannot pay the commercial r e n t s of decent accommodation: and the Carver-Hopwood s c a l e , on x<rhich i s based t h a t of the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , excludes from b e n e f i t of subsidy those f a m i l i e s whose income permits them to a f f o r d r e n t a l accommodation on the p r i -vate market. T h i s should come as no s u r p r i s e . A t t i t u d e s toward the r e n t a l assessment on each tenants income were i n v e s t i g a t e d p r i m a r i l y by two q u e s t i o n s : "Do you c o n s i d e r the rent s c a l e here (so f a r as you understand i t ) f a i r ? " , and, "Do you t h i n k your r e n t should be h i g h e r i f your income goes up?" The response was very c l e a r , i n d i c a t i n g good understanding of the b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s : 82 per cent of the r e p l i e s t o the former query being a f f i r m a t i v e , and 75 P e r cent to the l a t t e r being a l s o i n agreement. Many q u a l i f y i n g comments accom-panied these p o s i t i v e r e p l i e s , however, and some responses 59 t o t a l l y i r i the negative are p a r t i c u l a r l y worthy of note, because they were not i s o l a t e d nor extreme. These q u a l i f y i n g statements appear to have r e f e r e n c e t o two g e n e r a l groups: (a) those tenants who x-jere s t e a d i l y employed but e a r n i n g a m a r g i n a l income (as opposed to those on marginal incomes d e r i v e d from some form of p u b l i c a s s i s t a n c e ) , and (b) those i n the upper income groups. N a t u r a l l y , the number of dependents i s of v i t a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n , but t h i s f a c t o r i s to some degree c o r r e c t e d by the " s l i d i n g s c a l e " . C o nsiderable r e s e n t m e n t was v o i c e d a g a i n s t the a l l e g e d i n e q u i t y inherent i n the d i s t i n c t i o n between having a minimal income d e r i v e d from p u b l i c a s s i s t a n c e or p r i v a t e pensions, and t h a t d e r i v e d from low-income employment. There are probably txtfo main reasons f o r t h i s . J u s t l y or not, a c e r t a i n amount of stigma i s a t t a c h e d to the n e c e s s i t y of r e l y i n g upon p u b l i c a s s i s t a n c e , and d e s p i t e s o c i a l reform i n many areas i n r e c e n t y e a r s , t h i s sense of " l e s s e l i g i b i l i t y " s t i l l p e r s i s t s i n the minds of many. In a d d i t i o n , many of those i n r e c e i p t of p u b l i c funds secure f r e e m e d i c a l and d e n t a l s e r v i c e s , and a few other bonus a s s e t s , which the x-jorking person would e i t h e r have to pay f o r , or, i n m o s t i n s t a n c e s , do without. Obviously, a s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e r e c i p i e n t does get, as I t were, more value f o r h i s monetary income than a person Independent of p u b l i c funds, earning a s i m i l a r amount of money, but l a c k i n g the p r o v i s i o n of "bonus" s e r v i c e s . The same holds t r u e f o r many pe n s i o n e r s , x^ho, d e s p i t e a small monetary income, r e c e i v e bonus value i n the form 60 of v arious h e a l t h s e r v i c e s . 1 This i s not t o argue, i n applying t h i s data to the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of r e n t a l s i n p u b l i c housing, t h a t those persons dependent upon p u b l i c funds should pay a higher r e n t . Rather, some method might be evolved whereby those people employed but earning marginal incomes could have p r o v i s -i o n made i n t h e i r r e n t a l assessment f o r f a m i l y e x i g e n c i e s , such as i l l n e s s . One of the c r i t e r i a i n d eciding e l i g i b i l i t y f o r S o c i a l Allox-mnce Is the member of the f a m i l y to whom i n c a p a c i t a -t i o n occurs. I f i t i s the breadwinner who i s s t r i c k e n , the fam-i l y , depending on i t s assets, may r e c e i v e S o c i a l Allowance. However, assuming the existence of s i m i l a r a s s e t s , a s i m i l a r 1. Vancouver C i t y S o c i a l Service Department administer S o c i a l Allowance, Old Age A s s i s t a n c e and Supplementary Allowance, Old Age S e c u r i t y , Supplementary Allowances, Disabled Persons' Allowance, and B l i n d Persons' Allowance, on a means' t e s t b a s i s , to those e l i g i b l e . I n a d d i t i o n to f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e , medical, d e n t a l , housekeeper and n u t r i t i o n i s t s e r v i c e s are a v a i l a b l e . The f o l l o w i n g quotations are from a pamphlet.issued by the C i t y of Vancouver S o c i a l Service Department, dated A p r i l 1, I960. " A l l r e c i p i e n t s of allowances granted on a means t e s t b a s i s .in the categories o u t l i n e d , are provided w i t h a medical card, e n t i t l i n g them to the s e r v i c e s of t h e i r own doctor. i n the case of S o c i a l Allowance, there i s a w a i t i n g p e r i o d of 3 months. "Drugs, h o s p i t a l i z a t i o n and s p e c i a l i s t s e r v i c e s , as pre-s c r i b e d by the attending p h y s i c i a n , may a l s o be provided. Where the r e c i p i e n t or h i s f a m i l y i s unable to provide recom-mended appliances such as g l a s s e s , dentures, e t c . , these may be s u p p l i e d through the department." "Dental s e r v i c e s are a v a i l a b l e to the r e c i p i e n t s of a s s i s -tance i n these categories upon a p p l i c a t i o n to the department." "Boarding or nursing home care may be arranged, according . to need and a v a i l a b l e accommodation." "In cases where i t i s advisable f o r an i l l person to remain i n h i s own home, or where c h i l d r e n r e q u i r e temporary care dur-ing i l l n e s s of a parent, housekeeper or homemaker se r v i c e s may be provided." "A M e t r o p o l i t a n Health Committee N u t r i t i o n i s t serves as a consultant to the department, to a s s i s t i n questions of budget-i n g , n u t r i t i o n and s p e c i a l d i e t s . " 61 i l l n e s s , a f f l i c t i n g any other member of the f a m i l y than the breadwinner, would c r e a t e as much expense, which would, i n t h i s i n s t a n c e , have to be assumed independently by the f a m i l y . T h i s whole matter was w e l l summarized by two i n t e r v i e w e e s , •.one of whom s a i d t h a t r e n t a l assessment was f a i r , "only t o those on S o c i a l Allowance"; as the other put i t , i t was "harder on the working people" than on the s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e r e c i p i e n t s . Conversely, i n the upper income groups, d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n i^as a l s o expressed, but the reason f o r these c o m p a r a t i v e l y h i g h r e n -t a l assessments (some set at between $80 and $100 per month) i s obvious i n the very nature of s u b s i d i z e d housing. Ro f a m i l y f i n a n c i a l l y able to r e n t housing i n the p r i v a t e market can r e a l i s -t i c a l l y expect s u b s i d i z a t i o n i n the form of s p e c i a l l y low r e n t . However, no pressure i s a p p l i e d by the Vancouver Housing Autho-r i t y r e g a r d i n g e v i c t i o n of upper income tenants, as o f t e n t h e i r comparatively numerous dependents make adequate housing d i f f i -c u l t to l o c a t e elsewhere. Around mid-1960 , the A u t h o r i t y r a i s e d the maximum as s e s s a b l e f a m i l y Income i n a l l income groups, and i t i s hoped t h a t t h i s move w i l l encourage more "complete" f a m i -l i e s , or h i g h e r income tenants, to move i n t o the p r o j e c t , thus h e l p i n g to balance the " s u b s i d i z a t i o n s c a l e " . N e v e r t h e l e s s , from the p o i n t of view of the h i g h e r income tenant i n s u b s i d i z e d housing, there i s c e r t a i n l y room f o r argu-ment. Aside from the resentment, noted above, d i r e c t e d a g a i n s t those paying lower r e n t s and occupying i d e n t i c a l u n i t s to those of the h i g h e r wage earner, the l a t t e r o f t e n expressed the f e e l i n g that they "can't get ahead" f i n a n c i a l l y , s i n c e h i g h e r income leads to g r e a t e r income tax deductions, to say no t h i n g of i n c r e a s e d r e n t . One tenant s t a t e d that he had r e f u s e d a b e t t e r job, which 6 2 had been o f f e r e d to him, as h i s r e n t would have been r a i s e d to $ 1 2 0 per month. Others a l s o mentioned d i f f i c u l t y i n saving " f o r a house" or " f o r unexpected expenses", and s e v e r a l women s a i d t h a t they had g i v e n up f u l l or pa r t - t i m e jobs, which supplemented t h e i r husband's incomes, because w i t h the cost of day care f o r the c h i l d r e n and the i n c r e a s e i n r e n t , l i t t l e or no p r o f i t was made. Some of t h i s , of course, i s not a matter p r i m a r i l y f o r r e n t adjustment. i<fnether or not m a r r i e d women should work, i s a l s o a matter w i t h which t h i s study Is not p r i m a r i l y concerned, though i t must be s t a t e d t h a t there are two s i d e s to t h i s i s s u e and -considerable d i f f e r e n c e s depending on the k i n d and amount of the work. I t was, of course, never intended t h a t the p r o v i s i o n of s u b s i d i z e d housing would r e s o l v e a l l f i n a n c i a l problems f o r a l l f a m i l i e s , but n e i t h e r should i t r e s u l t i n d i s c o u r a g i n g am-b i t i o n or Immobilizing t h e i r standards of f a m i l y l i v i n g . These are c o n s i d e r a t i o n s i^hich are c e r t a i n l y r e l e v a n t to any f u r t h e r adjustments to the r e n t a l s c a l e i n the f u t u r e . S o c i a l E f f e c t s of R e l o c a t i o n  Home l i f e and f a m i l y r e l a t i o n s I n formation r e g a r d i n g the e f f e c t of r e l o c a t i o n upon f a m i l y l i f e and r e l a t i o n s h i p s was sought at many p o i n t s , as alr e a d y i n d i c a t e d (Chapter I I and above). F a m i l i e s were asked about t h e i r i n t e r e s t i n hobbles or s p o r t s as w e l l as the ease w i t h which they c o u l d be c a r r i e d on at Orchard Park. Seventeen respondents r e p l i e d that these a c t i v i t i e s c o u l d be in d u l g e d i n e a s i l y , whereas a l a r g e r number ( 2 2 ) f e l t t h a t they c o u l d not. Only two f a m i l i e s f e l t t h a t there was no change i n t h e i r a b i l i t y t o s a t i s f y these i n t e r e s t s . Without more i n f o r m a t i o n about the p a r t i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s concerned, t h i s c o u l d not be 63 f u r t h e r e valuated. "Do your f r i e n d s or f a m i l y v i s i t you at your new p l a c e ? " , explored extended f a m i l y and some s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s . A s i z e a b l e m a j o r i t y (I4.3) agreed t h a t v i s i t i n g t h e i r new home was easy enough, but many mentioned the d i f f i c u l t y i n e n t e r t a i n i n g groups of more than two or three people, because of compara-t i v e l y small l i v i n g rooms and of the l a c k of soundproofing. T h i s l a t t e r aspect was co n s i d e r e d e s p e c i a l l y important i n e n t e r -t a i n i n g c h i l d v i s i t o r s , as, "the neighbours might complain". As many as 12 tenants s t a t e d that they c o u l d n o t o r d i d n o t r e c e i v e v i s i t o r s s i n c e moving t o the p r o j e c t - - w h i c h may be a s i g n i f i c a n t index of s o c i a l i s o l a t i o n . Mass p r o p i n q u i t y tends to breed so many s u b s i d i a r y problems, t h a t i t should be almost axiomatic i n apartment d e s i g n f o r p u b l i c housing to c o n s i d e r t h i s s e r i o u s l y . The adequacy of the u n i t s ' soundproofing was, t h e r e f o r e , checked and counter-checked. No tenant should expect t o l i v e i n t o t a l s i l e n c e ; yet the nuisance p o t e n t i a l of neighbours' n o i s e s does vary w i t h both the t o l e r a n c e of the i n d i v i d u a l h e a r i n g them and a l s o the e f f i -cacy of the c o n s t r u c t i o n of the accommodation. Almost 86 per cent of the sample (I4.7 tenants) s t a t e d , e m p h a t i c a l l y i n most cases, t h a t the soundproofing of the u n i t s was inadequate, i n -s u f f i c i e n t , or downright n o n - e x i s t e n t . Many i n apartment b l o c k s e x p l a i n e d t h a t n o i s e d i d not appear t o c a r r y l a t e r a l l y (through the w a l l s ) to any extent, but that v e r t i c a l l y induced n o i s e s (betx^een storeys) were almost completely a u d i b l e . Walking or running upon the s t a i r s of the row houses (of which t h e r e i s a great d e a l , e s p e c i a l l y by c h i l d r e n ) appeared as another source of annoyance, many tenants i n these u n i t s complained that even 6k neighbours ' v o i c e s or t h e i r t e l e v i s i o n s ets c o u l d be heard quite c l e a r l y . A very small p r o p o r t i o n of tenants (7) f e l t t h a t the soundproofing was adequate. The counter-check on nuisance p o t e n t i a l of neighbouring sounds was p r o v i d e d by the query, "Do the neighbours' n o i s e s bother you?", assuming t h a t not a l l sounds p e r c e i v e d by the tenants would be c o n s i d e r e d a g g r a v a t i n g . T h i s q u e s t i o n y i e l d e d a more even s c a t t e r i n responses, w i t h 27 tenants a s s u r i n g the i n t e r v i e w e r that the neighbours 1 noise was bothersome, and 29 tenants s t a t i n g t h a t i t was not. T h i s seems to indicate the need f o r f u r t h e r explora-t i o n because there i s i m p l i c i t i n t h i s q u e s t i o n f o r some people the e x p e c t a t i o n that there w i l l be n o i s e s but that they are the k i n d one "gets used t o " . The subject of " p r i v a c y " , which i s , again, very much a matter of i n d i v i d u a l p r e f e r e n c e , was i n v e s t i g a t e d , and t h i s i n d i v i d u a l v a r i a t i o n p r o b a b l y accounts, as i n the matter of soundproofing, f o r the even d i s t r i b u t i o n of responses. Twenty-one tenants s t a t e d t h a t they had more p r i v a c y than i n t h e i r p revious accommodation, (many adding " i n s i d e , but not o u t s i d e " ) and 2k tenants s a i d that they had l e s s p r i v a c y . Some of the v a r i a b l e s here are the extent to which they enjoyed p r i v a c y i n previous housing; and what i s to be regarded as p r i v a c y . A mother w i t h k c h i l d r e n might be f o r g i v e n : f o r f e e l i n g she has very l i t t l e anywhere. L e i s u r e time and r e c r e a t i o n Assuming that a s a t i s f y i n g use of l e i s u r e time c o n t r i b u t e s to a h a p p i e r p e r s o n a l and f a m i l y l i f e , and t h e r e f o r e , a b e t t e r adjustment to r e l o c a t i o n , tenants• o p i n i o n s on l e i s u r e time f a c i l i t i e s and p u r s u i t s can be very i n d i c a t i v e . Interviewees 65 were asked what f a m i l y r e c r e a t i o n s they i n d u l g e d i n most, on i-jeek-days, week-ends and i n summer time, s t r e s s i n g t h a t these were to be a c t i v i t i e s j o i n e d i n by both parents and c h i l d r e n . No s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s i n types of p u r s u i t s were noted, w i t h a c t i v i t i e s such as going f o r d r i v e s or walks, p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n s p o r t s , a t t e n d i n g church or p i c n i c s , and v i s i t i n g b e i n g most f r e q u e n t l y mentioned i n a l l t h r e e time d i v i s i o n s . I t was d i s -maying t o note t h a t a t o t a l of 35 f a m i l y spokesmen s a i d f l a t l y t h a t , as f a m i l i e s , they had no r e c r e a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s i n common at any of the times s p e c i f i e d . E n q u i r i e s about membership i n e x t r a - f a m i l i a l groups or c l u b s , seemed to r e v e a l t h a t the mothers are s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a c k -i n g i n organized s o c i a l c o n t a c t s . Of the 56 spokesmen i n t e r -viewed, o n l y 19 x«rere f a m i l i e s (approximately 34 Vev cent) whose mothers had group membership, whereas, over 59 per cent of the f a t h e r s were i n some k i n d of c l u b or a s s o c i a t i o n . Twenty fami-l i e s (under 36 per cent) had c h i l d r e n who belonged t o some o r g a n i -z a t i o n — i f anything, a r a t h e r s m a l l p r o p o r t i o n . The sources of most s o c i a l l i f e were noted by the tenants to be l a r g e l y c l u b memberships, church membership, employment and o l d f r i e n d s , w i t h no s i g n i f i c a n t v a r i a t i o n i n d i s t r i b u t i o n . Some spokesmen noted a l l three sources of s o c i a l a c t i v i t y , whereas others noted o n l y one or two of them. Was there a need f o r a workshop or hobby centr e on the p r o j e c t ? About t h r e e - q u a r t e r s of the tenants were i n c l i n e d to p l a c e some p o s i t i v e value upon t h i s suggestion; the r e s t f e l t t h a t such a resource would not be of i n t e r e s t to them p e r s o n a l l y or t h a t l i t t l e g e n e r a l use would be made of i t . T h i s l a t t e r , again, may be an index of s o c i a l i s o l a t i o n . The value p l a c e d on 6 6 a community ce n t r e , club room or h a l l , s p e c i f i c a l l y w i t h i n the p r o j e c t boundaries, was o b v i o u s l y higher—-kk, more than 8 0 per cent, responding f a v o u r a b l y to t h i s , and only 1 0 v o i c i n g nega-t i v e views. A g e n e r a l r e a c t i o n to both these questions was t h a t the c h i l d r e n , e s p e c i a l l y , c o u l d b e n e f i t from c o n s t r u c t i o n of these r e s o u r c e s , although other groups were a l s o suggested as l i k e l y b e n e f i c i a r i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y mothers, p e n s i o n e r s , and. the handicapped. "Would you l i k e t o know your f e l l o w - t e n a n t s b e t t e r ? " , e v i d e n t l y s t r u c k no sympathetic chord. I t was greeted nega-t i v e l y by over 7k per cent of those responding, although r e a c t i o n t o , "Are there t h i n g s you ought to get together about?", was more evenly d i s t r i b u t e d among those i n favour of and those a g a i n s t . Twenty-eight tenants agreed that there were t h i n g s r e q u i r i n g common d i s c u s s i o n . There i s e v i d e n t l y a good d e a l of n e g a t i v e or i n d i f f e r e n t f e e l i n g , whether permanent, or a h e r i t a g e from past i s o l a t e d l i v i n g : about kO per cent saw no reason f o r group tenant d i s c u s s i o n , or f e l t t h a t group d i s c u s s i o n would not be h e l p f u l . In summary, there i s an i n e s c a p a b l e i m p r e s s i o n of impoverishment of s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s on the p a r t of most f a m i l i e s i n the p r o j e c t . T h i s i s probably a t t r i b u t a b l e to two d i f f e r e n t k inds of f a c t o r s , one being the sparse s o c i a l r e s o u r c e s of the g e n e r a l community, and the other, the h i g h percentage of " t r o u b l e d " or d e p r i v e d f a m i l i e s w i t h i n the p r o j e c t i t s e l f . Prom the f i r s t mentioned angle, South Vancouver o f f e r s c o n s i d e r a b l e c h a l l e n g e to those i n t e r e s t e d i n community o r g a n i z a t i o n . I f tenant r e s -ponse to the matter of the need f o r a community centre i s any gauge, there are enough people to make p o s s i b l e a move towards 6 ? a c t i v i t i e s which c o u l d have b e n e f i c i a l r e s u l t s not o n l y f o r the f a m i l i e s i n the p r o j e c t , but i n the d i s t r i c t as w e l l . What of the tenants i n the p r o j e c t who appear to l a c k i n t e r e s t s o u t s i d e t h e i r immediate f a m i l i e s ? Many of these are people who have f o r many years experienced c o n s i d e r a b l e d i f f i -c u l t y i n i n t e r p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , and over a long p e r i o d of time under s t r e s s , have, i n a d d i t i o n , b u i l t up defenses of apathy and m i s t r u s t . The s a t i s f a c t i o n of t h e i r needs i s not compatible w i t h t h e i r a b i l i t i e s , and without dynamic, p r o f e s s i o n a l h e l p i n both the areas of casework and of community o r g a n i z a t i o n , the p r o v i s i o n of adequate s u b s i d i z e d housing, v a l u a b l e as i t i s , a l l e v i a t e s only the s u p e r f i c i a l i t i e s of t h e i r p e r s o n a l s i t u a t i o n . A r e l e v a n t approach to t h i s l a s t o b s e r v a t i o n i s to be found i n the r e s e a r c h c o f the S t . Paul's F a m i l y Centered P r o j e c t , I n which one of the r e s e a r c h team notes, " F u l l y ±5% of the f a m i l i e s l i v e d i n sub-standard housing, but i n c o n t r a s t , some \\$% had f a i r l y adequate housing and some were e x c e l l e n t housekeepers. T h i s suggests that multi-problem f a m i l i e s as a group are not, as o f t e n assumed, people l i v i n g under c o n d i t i o n s of abominable f i l t h and. p h y s i c a l n e g l e c t , at l e a s t i n S t . P a u l . " 1 As "independent" sur-veys show that the two housing p r o j e c t s I n Vancouver are t h i s C i t y ' s most con c e n t r a t e d multi-problem f a m i l y a r e a " 2 , i t becomes obvious t h a t p u b l i c housing i s , Indeed, only a p a r t i a l s o l u t i o n , and c o n v e r s e l y , i n one sense, at l e a s t , i n t e n s i f i e s the s o c i a l c o m p l e x i t i e s of the o v e r - a l l housing problem by the a t t r a c t i o n 1. B e v e r l y Ayres; "The Family Centered P r o j e c t of S t . P a u l . A S e r i e s of Three Seminars on a Demonstration P r o j e c t w i t h M u l t i -Problem F a m i l i e s " . Research Department, Community Chest and C o u n c i l , of the Greater Vancouver area; A p r i l , I960. (Unpublished seminars.) 2. The Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y ; Annual Report I960; page 2. 68 i t provides f o r some of those who need i t most. This i s not to say that a l l the tenants o f Orchard Park have a m u l t i p l i c i t y of emotional and s o c i a l problems. Rather, to elaborate f u r t h e r , the "housing s o l u t i o n " has two f a c e t s -p r o v i s i o n of adequate p h y s i c a l f a c i l i t i e s , but also p r o v i s i o n f o r the s o c i a l and emotional x^elfare of the tenants, many of whom have had greater adjustments to make than those of simple r e l o c a t i o n . The Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y has made a beginning i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n through the i n c l u s i o n of a s o c i a l worker on the s t a f f of the A u t h o r i t y . But the A u t h o r i t y has not provided any f a c i l i t i e s to promote group work,, and, as a consequence, "much of the Family Counsellor's time I s taken up i n r e p e t i t i o u s coun-s e l l i n g to i n d i v i d u a l s r a t h e r than t o groups".^ - As i t i s estima-ted t h a t 35 per cent of a l l f a m i l i e s r e q u i r e d the Counsellor's a t t e n t i o n i n I960, 2 a "family-centered p r o j e c t " i s s t r o n g l y i n d i c a t e d to b e n e f i t the tenants of the A u t h o r i t y . • S o c i a l F a c i l i t i e s : P r o j e c t and Neighbourhood As i n d i c a t e d p r e v i o u s l y , the s o c i a l resources of both the general neighbourhood and al s o the p r o j e c t are i n an extremely undeveloped s t a t e . U n f o r t u n a t e l y , because of f i n a n -c i a l l i m i t a t i o n s , c o n s t r u c t i o n o f Orchard Park u n i t s was achieved without e i t h e r a c e n t r a l h a l l or meeting p l a c e , or without base-ments. These l a t t e r might have conceivably served as a l o c a t i o n f o r tenant o r g a n i z a t i o n s of various kinds (e.g., Sunday School, kinde r g a r t e n , hobby shops, and so f o r t h . ) The s i z e of the l i v -i n g rooms precludes use of them f o r other than f a m i l y purposes. 1. The Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , Annual Report, I 9 6 0 . pages 2 and 3» 2. i b i d , page 2. 69 Much of the m a t e r i a l r e l e v a n t to t h i s subject has already been discussed i n th a t s e c t i o n d e a l i n g w i t h f a c i l i t i e s f o r the handicapped and f o r the c h i l d r e n . However, a few words remain t o be s a i d about tenant r e a c t i o n to r e l o c a t i o n i n t h i s s p e c i f i c d i s t r i c t . Over 85 per cent of those responding to the questions about shopping considered t h a t the m a j o r i t y of these needs could be met at the l o c a l s t o r e s . Many purchased g r o c e r i e s l o c a l l y , but pre-f e r r e d to shop elsewhere f o r c l o t h i n g , s t a p l e s , appliances, e t c . Only the handicapped, aged, or mothers of many pre-school c h i l d -r e n encountered much d i f f i c u l t y i n g e t t i n g t h e i r shopping done. Church attendance f o r the tenants who were i n t e r e s t e d appeared to be c a r r i e d out s a t i s f a c t o r i l y i n the new l o c a t i o n , although 30 per cent of the tenants f o r whom church attendance was important p r e f e r r e d to continue a f f i l i a t i o n s w i t h the church p r e v i o u s l y attended. Some r e l i g i o u s groups send p r i v a t e buses to c o l l e c t c h i l d r e n from the p r o j e c t f o r Sunday School, and t h i s was regarded as a s a t i s f a c t o r y s o l u t i o n by many of the tenants interviewed. "Are there things that you miss i n t h i s d i s t r i c t ? " , was designed to e l i c i t s u b j e c t i v e evaluations by the tenants of com-munity resources around Orchard Park. R e p l i e s v a r i e d , as would be expected, but those most commonly r e c e i v e d might serve as a gauge of both l a c k s i n the present neighbourhood, and also,, of what to emphasise i n planning f u t u r e housing p r o j e c t s . "A back yard", "Sunday School", "a neighbourhood house", "parks", "the beach", "clubs f o r c h i l d r e n " , "kindergarten", "a playground", and a "place to go f o r walks", a l l r e l a t e to the needs of c h i l d -r e n , which many tenants f e l t were inadequately s u p p l i e d by t h e i r 7 0 present l o c a t i o n . "Less t r a f f i c " was a unanimous concern. A d u l t i n t e r e s t s were expressed by such answers as, " p r i v a c y " , "common i n t e r e s t s w i t h the neighbours", "short commuting d i s -tance t o xtfork", "shopping" or "window-shopping", "the garden", "not enough space", and "d i s t a n c e from entertainment". However, i n - t h i s , as i n other aspects of r e l o c a t i o n , the comparison made depends upon the standard of accommodation a t t a i n e d by the tenant p r i o r to his.moving to Orchard Park. "What th i n g s were you g l a d to leave i n the o l d d i s t r i c t ? " , attempted to open up the other s i d e of t h i s comparison. Here, the reasons f o r r e l o c a t i o n became apparent from those tenants who were g l a d t o be i n t h e i r new l o c a t i o n . Such t h i n g s as "crowded c o n d i t i o n s " , " n o i s e " , " t r a f f i c " , " d i r t " , "the low - c l a s s neighbourhood", " f i r e hazards", and "bugs" p a i n t e d a v i v i d p i c t u r e ' o f " l i f e p r i o r to Orchard Park". Tenant suggestions were ob t a i n e d f o r the improvement of t h i s and f u t u r e housing p r o j e c t s . I t should be borne i n mind t h a t many of the people were probably r e l u c t a n t to c r i t i c i z e , perhaps f e e l i n g o b l i g a t e d to the A u t h o r i t y ; and th a t there i s no Tenant C o u n c i l here and no attempt at b u i l d i n g morale or e s p r i t de corps. P o s i t i v e and negative c r i t i c i s m s are grouped a c c o r d i n g l y . In s p i t e of e f f o r t s to do so, i t proved i m p o s s i b l e to separate tenant r e a c t i o n to Orchard Park s p e c i f i c a l l y from tenant r e a c t i o n to Orchard Park i n comparison w i t h previous accommodation. A l -though the q u e s t i o n n a i r e - g u i d e d Interviews asked about the t h i n g s t h a t tenants p r e f e r r e d i n t h e i r new accommodation or l o c a t i o n , as w e l l as the t h i n g s t h a t they would most l i k e t o see improved i n the p r o j e c t , the responses were c o n d i t i o n e d by pre v i o u s 71 experience w i t h housing; i t i s not wise, t h e r e f o r e , t o assume th a t they r e p r e s e n t an o b j e c t i v e assessment of Orchard Park as an experiment ( s t i l l new f o r Vancouver) i n p u b l i c housing. Bea r i n g t h i s f a c t i n mind, the aspects of Orchard Park most f r e q u e n t l y commented upon i n a p o s i t i v e way were the heat-i n g f a c i l i t i e s and the generous supply of hot water, mentioned by 59 per cent (33) of the t e n a n t s . C l e a n l i n e s s and newness r e c e i v e d a f a v o u r a b l e vote from 25 tenants (l|_5 per cent) and b r i g h t n e s s and l i g h t i n g were acclaimed by over 28 per cent. Compactness, convenience or d e s i g n were mentioned by 13 (23 per cent) w i t h p r i v a c y and space r a n k i n g next, each b e i n g mentioned by 10 (l8 per cent of the i n t e r v i e w e e s ) . A f a i r r e n t a l a s s e s s -ment was welcomed, by 9 tenants as the t h i n g f o r which they were most g r a t e f u l . Beyond t h i s p o i n t , there was a wide s c a t t e r of responses, w i t h c l o s e t space ( k ) , bathroom (k ) , neighbourhood (3), the r e f r i g e r a t o r (3), the k i t c h e n (3), neighbours (2), and other items of Importance to the i n d i v i d u a l p i c k e d out as the most welcomed or approved. It was i n t e r e s t i n g to note t h a t only one tenant mentioned " p r o j e c t d e s i g n " as a f a v o u r a b l e as-pect of Orchard Park. Probably few, i f any v i s u a l i z e the pro-j e c t as a whole; and i n d i v i d u a l concern w i t h housing s t i l l accepts t h e " s i n g l e house" image, and sees apartments as a t r a n s i t i o n a l or half-way p r o v i s i o n . The f a c e of Vancouver has changed i n t h i s matter i n the l a s t decade, but l e s s f o r working c l a s s people here than elsewhere. Although s p e c i f i c r e a c t i o n s to the "planned community", or to a r c h i t e c t u r e , e t c . , were not sought, i t appeared from v o l u n t a r y comments that separate i n d i v i d u a l u n i t s on l o t s or w i t h gardens are regarded as more " p r e s t i g e f u l " or more d e s i r a b l e than a d j o i n i n g u n i t s . I t seems 72 f a i r to add t h a t Orchard Park has not gone very f a r i n u t i l i z -i n g court-rtype and row-house grouping, p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r l a r g e f a m i l i e s ; nor i s the v e r y s u c c e s s f u l use of grass p l o t s a sub-s t i t u t e s o l u t i o n f o r p l a y space and enclosed areas designed f o r c h i l d r e n . A r e c e n t , comprehensive d i s c u s s i o n of the problems of urban l i f e , appearing i n Harper's Magazine, has t h i s to say i n r e l a t i o n t o " u n s u c c e s s f u l " neighbourhoods. " . . . . b a s i c t r o u b l e s are not due t o a c r i m i n a l or a d i s c r i m i n a t e d - a g a i n s t or a p o v e r t y - s t r i c k e n popula-t i o n . I t s t r o u b l e s are due t o the fundamental f a c t that i t i s p h y s i c a l l y u n s u i t e d to f u n c t i o n w i t h v i t a -l i t y as a c i t y d i s t r i c t , and so cannot f u n c t i o n s a f e l y . " 1 T h i s author goes on to suggest, among other t h i n g s , t h a t there should be a c l e a r demarcation between p u b l i c and p r i v a t e spaces. "They cannot ooze i n t o each other as they do t y p i c a l l y i n housing p r o j e c t s where s t r e e t s , walks and p l a y areas may seem at f i r s t glance to be open to the p u b l i c but i n e f f e c t are s p e c i a l p r e s e r v e s . " 2 Orchard Park could w e l l have p r o v i d e d the bad example i n mind.' There i s no p r o v i s i o n f o r s a u n t e r i n g , f o r s o c i a l g e t - t o g e t h e r s , f o r " j u s t s i t t i n g " . There i s no c l e a r p r o v i s i o n f o r p l a y grounds. Landscaping i s most welcome and I t i s very s u i t a b l e and s u r e l y a p p r o p r i a t e f o r a c i t y l i k e Vancouver, w i t h a m i l d winter c l i m a t e . But i t i s a f a i l u r e t o f a l l bacir on grass and "lawn" treatment of space, Instead of 1. Jane Jacobs; "Violence i n the C i t y S t r e e t s " . H a r p e r 1 s Magazine; V o l . 2 2 3 ; No. 1 3 3 6 . September 1 9 6 l . page 3 8 . 2 . i b i d , page 3 9 . . { 7 3 p r o f i t i n g from working c l a s s experience, . •available i now i n B r i t a i n , e a s t e r n U n i t e d S t a t e s and. S c a n d i n a v i a . In other words, there has been i n s u f f i c i e n t thought g i v e n t o s o c i a b l e and p r a c t i c a l needs, of a d u l t s and c h i l d r e n a l i k e . Negative aspects of Orchard Park I d e n t i f i c a t i o n s of e x i s t i n g l a c k s or inadequacies i n Orchard Park f a c i l i t i e s were made by the t e n a n t s , suggestions being sought at the same time f o r improvement of the present p r o j e c t and the d e s i g n of f u t u r e p r o j e c t s . Porty-one tenants mentioned improved c h i l d r e n ' s p l a y i n g and. k i n d e r g a r t e n f a c i l i -t i e s , p r e f e r a b l y f e n c e d i n and s u p e r v i s e d , as the item most u r g e n t l y needed. ..Twenty-four saw laundry f a c i l i t i e s as r e q u i r -i n g improvement. The p r i o r i t i e s which a t t a c h t o these have a l r e a d y been i n d i c a t e d . A more complex matter, r e f e r r e d to by 20, i s the i s s u e of s e g r e g a t i n g the aged and f a m i l i e s w i t h c h i l d r e n . Adequate soundproofing, a l s o r e f e r r e d t o above, was l i s t e d ' h i g h e s t i n urgency by 15 t e n a n t s . Larger u n i t s were con s i d e r e d necessary by 7 tenants, w i t h the need f o r a community centre being noted by 6. The need f o r more adequate garbage d i s p o s a l arrangements, p r o t e c t e d both from s i g h t and from young c h i l d r e n , w i t h the a d d i t i o n of i n c i n e r a t o r f a c i l i t i e s f o r com-b u s t i b l e garbage,-1- was mentioned by 5 t e n a n t s . Four i n h a b i t a n t s of the p r o j e c t wished f o r more p r i v a c y , mentioning separate houses as a p o t e n t i a l s o l u t i o n . Each of the f o l l o w i n g c r i t i c i s m s of the p r o j e c t was made by three tenants: too many "through" s t r e e t s w i t h heavy t r a f f i c , 1. No i n c i n e r a t o r f a c i l i t i e s e x i s t at present i n Orchard Park. Ik inconvenience c r e a t e d by n o n - s e p a r a t i o n of k i t c h e n and l i v i n g room, e x t e r n a l inconvenience of the p r o j e c t , need f o r a l a r g e r , more e f f i c i e n t u t i l i t y room, need f o r g r e a t e r storage space, e x i s t e n c e of much waste space or poor i n t e r n a l design, and the h i g h cost of h e a t i n g the row houses.1 Even though each of the f o l l o w i n g were mentioned by o n l y a few persons, they are reproduced because of t h e i r h e l p f u l and t h o u g h t f u l q u a l i t i e s . Suggestions concerning c o n s t r u c t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s were made by 8 tenants, but these and other l i s t e d omissions r e l a t e d i r e c t l y t o a l l "housekeeping" and i t s e f f e c t upon f a m i l y l i f e . Two interviewees commented on the need f o r improved q u a l i t y of con-s t r u c t i o n i n the b u i l d i n g s ; and two would have p r e f e r r e d the a d d i t i o n of w a l l i r o n i n g boards. I n c l u s i o n of p u l l - o u t bread boards would have been more e f f i c i e n t , thought one tenant; as would separate t h e r m o s t a t i c heat c o n t r o l f o r each u n i t , i n order to take i n t o c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n d i v i d u a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n temperature p r e f e r e n c e . A d d i t i o n a l f a c i l i t i e s f o r the handicapped were deemed necessary i n one i n s t a n c e , as was the need f o r l a r g e r m a i l boxes to c o n t a i n b i g g e r a r t i c l e s , such as magazines. Design and neighbourhood p l a n n i n g r e c e i v e d 13 comments. Three tenants complained about the window design, 2 n o t i n g d i f f i c u l t y i n window c l e a n i n g connected w i t h the present outward-opening type, and one x-iishing f o r a d e s i g n that p e r m i t t e d screening 1. Poor T.V. r e c e p t i o n was a l s o mentioned by 3 persons. Although the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y have p e r m i t t e d a com-m e r c i a l f i r m t o i n s t a l l t e l e v i s i o n a e r i a l s at the L i t t l e Mountain Housing P r o j e c t , no such arrangements' have been made f o r the Orchard Park P r o j e c t . The r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n r e g a r d i n g the l a t t e r p r o j e c t i s that t w o - t h i r d s of the tenants would not be able to budget .for the d e p o s i t and monthly f e e i n v o l v e d i n t h i s s e r v i c e . 7 5 t o prevent the entrance o f I n s e c t s . With a p r a c t i c a l eye on " l i f e w i t h c h i l d r e n " , 2 tenants longed f o r be t t e r - w e a r i n g i n -t e r n a l s u r f a c e d e c o r a t i o n , and one f o r the e x c l u s i o n of l i g h t c o l o u r s on w a l l s and f l o o r s . A l o c a t i o n i n c o r p o r a t i n g b e t t e r urban p l a n n i n g was thought necessary by 2 tenants, who were concerned w i t h t r a v e l l i n g d i s t a n c e s t o s o c i a l and c u l t u r a l r e s o u r c e s . One respondent suggested that the apartment b l o c k s should have been designed to i n c l u d e r e a r and f r o n t entrances f o r each u n i t , s i m i l a r t o those of the L i t t l e Mountain p r o j e c t . Entrances claimed f u r t h e r a t t e n t i o n , through the need f o r f r o n t entrance h a l l s i n u n i t s other than apartment b l o c k s , and us a b l e f r o n t entrances f o r pensioner u n i t s , each b e i n g mentioned once. The p r o v i s i o n of g r e a t e r numbers of row houses would have added s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o the p r o j e c t ' s r e s o u r c e s , one tenant thought, as would that of more e x t e r n a l , paved s u r f a c e s . The management-tenant aspect of the p r o j e c t r e c e i v e d some comment. Two respondents suggested the e x c l u s i o n of p a r t i c u l a r l y t r o u b l e d f a m i l i e s by means of more thorough " s c r e e n i n g " proced-u r e s , and one, the e x c l u s i o n of c h i l d r e n from apartment b l o c k s , f o r the sake of both c h i l d r e n and a d u l t tenants. In defence of the e x i s t i n g p r o j e c t f a c i l i t i e s , i t should be remembered t h a t had these same tenants been able t o o b t a i n on the commercial market adequate housing at p r i c e s c u r r e n t l y beyond t h e i r means, the p r o b a b i l i t y of t h e i r l o c a t i n g accommo-d a t i o n i n c l u d i n g a l l the improvements l i s t e d above would be small indeed. But i t i s a l s o incumbent upon housing a u t h o r i t i e s to f o r e s e e c e r t a i n of these d i f f i c u l t i e s . There are now thou-sands of housing p r o j e c t s In the worId--Orchard Park i s no 76 hazardous, u n t r i e d , uncharted experiment. S a t i s f a c t o r y f a m i l y l i v i n g should i n c l u d e , at l e a s t , adequate f a c i l i t i e s f o r c h i l d -r e n and laundry. Lacking these two assets alone, many concomi-tant l i a b i l i t i e s evolve w i t h r e g a r d to group l i v i n g , which, when added t o the presses and s t r e s s e s upon i n d i v i d u a l s , i n c r e a s e the t o t a l unrest p e r c e i v e d keenly throughout much of the p r o j e c t . Chapter IV PUBLIC HOUSING ADMINISTRATION S t r i p p e d to i t s b a s i c elements, a s o c i a l s e r v i c e p r o v i d e s f o r people permanently or t e m p o r a r i l y i n c a p a b l e of p r o v i d i n g f o r themselves. Par too f r e q u e n t l y , p u b l i c housing i s regarded a as^needless embellishment to the community, whereas the com-munity r e a d i l y accepts the n e c e s s i t y f o r many other of i t s s o c i a l s e r v i c e s . T h i s spurious a t t i t u d e negates the whole purpose of w e l f a r e , i n which every f a c e t of tne w e l l - b e i n g of eacn i n d i v i d u a l i s important, e s p e c i a l l y i f the person served i s to r e c i p r o c a t e e v e n t u a l l y w i t h maximum p o t e n t i a l s e r v i c e t o the community. Tne people served are, a f t e r a l l , a c t u a l l y , or at l e a s t p o t e n t i a l l y - - c i t i z e n s . T h i s i s an aspect of w e l f a r e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y which i s s t i l l f a r from b e i n g understood. Per-haps i t has to be admitted there i s as y e t no consensus. Obviously, something as b a s i c as housing Is to any i n d i v i d u a l or f a m i l y , should, t h e r e f o r e , be regarded as worthy of p u b l i c i n t e r e s t and s u b s i d i z a t i o n . Rents and E l i g i b i l i t y In the r e l a t e d w e l f a r e f i e l d s of me d i c a l care, f i n a n c i a l s e c u r i t y i n o l d age, and unemployment i n s u r a n c e , t o i d e n t i f y o n l y a few accepted community needs, c o l l e c t i v i z a t i o n of r i s k and s u b s i d i z a t i o n of the economically disadvantaged i s a v a l i d procedure by which each c i t i z e n can assume some r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the we l f a r e of the t o t a l group. N e i t h e r i s the f a c t of government p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n p l a n n i n g , and r e s p o n s i b i l i t y " . f o r a d m i n i s t e r i n g other s o c i a l s e r v i c e s , so great an i s s u e . 78 I t i s beyond the scope of t h i s study to assess the present s t a t u s of p u b l i c a t t i t u d e s t o s u b s i d i z a t i o n of housing, but the f a c t remains t h a t Vancouver has lagged behind most North American centres of comparable s i z e i n the development of t h i s p a r t i c u l a r r e s o u r c e . 1 Should the c u r r e n t magnitude of t h i s problem con-t i n u e , i t must be a n t i c i p a t e d t h a t the f i n a n c i a l expenditure "saved" by i g n o r i n g the need f o r loi^-income housing, w i l l a c t u a l l y be i n c u r r e d i n other r e l a t e d p u b l i c s e r v i c e s , such as h e a l t h and s a n i t a t i o n , f i r e p r e v e n t i o n or c o n t r o l , prolonged dependency upon p u b l i c a s s i s t a n c e , and so f o r t h . In Vancouver a comprehensive survey has r e c e n t l y been completed, under the sponsorship of the Community Chest and C o u n c i l , of b a s i c r e s e a r c h needs i n the whole f i e l d of w e l f a r e . On housing, a major p o i n t made by the author of the r e p o r t , P r o f e s s o r M i c h a e l Wheeler, of the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia School o f S o c i a l Work, i s the f o l l o w i n g : " Current concern w i t h problems of urban renewal and proposals f o r slum-clearance p r o j e c t s have h e l p e d t o focus a t t e n t i o n on the w e l f a r e i m p l i c a t i o n s of hous-i n g i n a very d i r e c t and urgent way. Slum-clearance means u s u a l l y the displacement of l a r g e , low-income f a m i l i e s , e l d e r l y people and s i n g l e persons who are g e n e r a l l y i n an eco n o m i c a l l y p r e c a r i o u s p o s i t i o n , as 1. In B u l l e t i n of the Vancouver Housing A s s o c i a t i o n , June 19.b0, i t i s noted t h a t the p o p u l a t i o n of Vancouver may be assumed to reach 1,300,000 by 1980, and that p u b l i c housing r e -quirements, by th a t time, w i l l be approximately 13,000 u n i t s . To achieve t h i s l e v e l , an average of 630 u n i t s per year should be c o n s t r u c t e d . Since p u b l i c housing l e g i s l a t i o n was passed, over t e n years ago, onl y 333 p u b l i c housing u n i t s f o r f a m i l i e s have m a t e r i a l i z e d and a b s o l u t e l y no l i m i t e d - d i v i d e n d housing has been b u i l t . Some 280 f u r t h e r u n i t s ( e x c l u s i v e of those f o r aged persons) w i l l s h o r t l y be e r e c t e d to rehouse f a m i l i e s d i s -p l a c e d by urban redevelopment, but these w i l l not enlarge the supply of l o w - r e n t a l housing, inasmuch as more accommodation w i l l be demolished than w i l l be r e p l a c e d . 79 w e l l as members of m i n o r i t y e t h n i c groups. For  these people, the l o s s of accommodation which,  i f perhaps substandard, i s at l e a s t cheap and  w i t h i n t h e i r f i n a n c i a l means, and the s e p a r a t i o n  from t h e i r customary surroundings, pose a v e r y  r e a l economic and p s y c h o l o g i c a l t h r e a t . From the experience of numerous c i t i e s on t h i s c o n t i -nent and i n Great B r i t a i n , a wealth of informa-t i o n i s being accumulated on the s o c i a l i m p l i c a -t i o n s of urban redevelopment, and there i s a p r e s s i n g need f o r s y s t e m a t i c c o l l a t i o n and analy-s i s of t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . From such a review i t should be p o s s i b l e t o d e r i v e g e n e r a l p r i n c i p l e s f o r the guidance of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o l i c i e s and the development of community o r g a n i z a t i o n programs." Housing p o l i c y i s an urgent need, t h e r e f o r e , and the e x p e r i -ence of such beginnings as we have demands a t t e n t i o n . C u r r e n t l y l o c a l p u b l i c housing p o l i c y l i m i t s both the e l i g i b i l i t y of tenants and a l s o the amount of subsidy, thus t h e o r e t i c a l l y e f f e c t i n g a h e a l t h y balance between the demand-supply and the income-expenditure aspects of housing a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Regarding e l i g i b i l i t y , c u r r e n t p o l i c y appears to have been m o d i f i e d by s e v e r a l f a c t o r s . Among these are the g e n e r a l l y r i s i n g income l e v e l s s i n c e the b a s i c s c a l e was e s t a b l i s h e d l o c a l l y i n 1951+, the i n c l u s i o n of the comparatively v e r y low incomes of s i n g l e p e nsioners, and the revenue decrease i n the net o p e r a t i n g budget of the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y . O r i g i n a l l y , i n L i t t l e Mountain, maximum incomes were lower than they are today, and minimum incomes were h i g h e r . The con-v i c t i o n s behind t h i s approach are outlined, below. L i m i t i n g e l i g i b i l i t y to those w i t h at l e a s t a "minimum income" i s i n t e n d e d to keep p u b l i c w e l f a r e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s compartmentalized. That i s , the " s o c i a l allowance" budget should be s u f f i c i e n t t o enable r e c i p i e n t s to r e n t adequate (not luxury) housing from p r i v a t e 1. M i c h a e l Wheeler, A Report on Heeded Research I n Welfare  i n B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver Community Chest and C o u n c i l , 1961. p.187. ( I t a l i c s added). 60 l a n d l o r d s . P u b l i c housing, i n other words, should not have to s u b s i d i z e inadequate " s o c i a l allowance" f i n a n c i n g . (In 1957, the Vancouver C i t y S o c i a l S e r v i c e Department i n i t i a t e d a study which i n d i c a t e d , among other t h i n g s , t h a t r e n t a l s p a i d by no l e s s than 926 s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e cases were i n excess of the amounts nominally allowed f o r housing.)''" To permit i t to do so, confuses two w e l f a r e areas. L i m i t i n g e l i g i b i l i t y to those w i t h not more than a "maximum income" i s intended to r e s t r i c t p u b l i c housing to those who need i t . "Maximum incomes" f o r p u b l i c housing i s thus analogous to "minimum incomes" f o r e l i g i b i l i t y f o r home b u i l d i n g loans guaranteed by CM.H.C. A l s o , keeping minimum and maximum income f a i r l y w e l l up tends to reduce the cost of p u b l i c housing to the taxpayer. The more tenants who pay at l e a s t an "economic r e n t " ( r e n t c a l c u l a t e d as c o v e r i n g the per u n i t share of o p e r a t i n g and c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t s ) , the l e s s the p r o j e c t as a whole makes a d e f i c i t on annual o p e r a t i n g c o s t s . 2 However, changes were needed i n the above, as "maximum" incomes, e s t a b l i s h e d In 1954, n a d n o t kept pace w i t h g e n e r a l l y r i s i n g wages, and t h i s f a c t had both s o c i a l and economic r e p e r c u s s i o n s upon bo t h l o c a l h o using p r o j e c t s . S o c i a l l y , many f a m i l i e s i n urgent need of adequate housing at a f a i r r e n t were co n s i d e r e d i n e l i g i b l e . 3 Subsequent admissions of more "broken" 1. The Adequacy of S o c i a l Allowances Committee; Report to the  Community Chest and C o u n c i l on the Adequacy of S o c i a l A s s i s t a n c e  Allowances i n the C i t y of Vancouver. Vancouver, B.C. September 1958. p.37. 2. E. Promson, J . Hansen, and R. Smith. The L i t t l e Mountain Low R e n t a l Housing P r o j e c t ; M.S.W. T h e s i s , U.B.C, 1959. p.106-107-3. A c c o r d i n g to the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y Annual Report, 1959, 85$ of the a p p l i c a n t s f o r housing i n Orchard Park were r e -j e c t e d f o r "over-income" reasons, most of these being "complete" f a m i l i e s , w i t h s t e a d i l y employed male workers. 81 or lower income f a m i l i e s , i n v o l v e d a decrease i n p r o j e c t income, while there was an i n c r e a s e i n V. H. A. expenditure when i t enlarg e d i t s s t a f f to i n c l u d e a f a m i l y c o u n s e l l o r , due to an i n c r e a s e i n tenant problems.1 Table 6 g i v e s some i n d i c a t i o n of the numbers of f a m i l i e s dependent on income other than employment at the time the s t a t i s t i c a l data was c o l l e c t e d i n December 1 9 5 9 . Table 6 F a m i l i e s dependent on income other than employment, December 1959* Pensions or Allowances Type of Family D i s a -b i l i t y (a) R e t i r e -ment (b) S o c i a l A s s i s t a n c e (c) T o t a l A. Complete F a m i l i e s 1) without c h i l d r e n 2) w i t h c h i l d r e n 6 k 6 6 10 B. Pension couples - 13(d) - 13 C. Broken F a m i l i e s 1) without c h i l d r e n 2) .with c h i l d r e n • 2 2 5 31 2 38 D. S i n g l e persons 3 13 2, 18 T o t a l 17. 31 39 87 (A) I n c l u d i n g Workmen^s Compensation Board, Veterans and B l i n d Pensions. (B) I n c l u d i n g Old Age A s s i s t a n c e , Old Age S e c u r i t y and company pensions. (c) I n c l u d i n g Mother's Allowance. (D) I n c l u d i n g one couple w i t h a dependent grand-daughter. As a r e s u l t of the above f a c t o r s , the " s l i d i n g s c a l e " was extended, wi t h the maximum allowable "net f a m i l y income" being i n c r e a s e d i n I960. (e.g., from $325 per month f o r a f a m i l y o f 1. Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , Annual Report 1 9 5 9 . " 5 b $ of the replacement tenants, were e i t h e r S o c i a l A s s i s t a n c e r e -c i p i e n t s or working mothers." 82 seven members, to $362.50 per month, the s h e l t e r r e n t payable being r a i s e d from $66 to $7k per.month, and s e r v i c e charges remaining at $13 per month.) I t i s hoped by the V. H. A. that t h i s upward e x t e n s i o n w i l l encourage admission of more emotion-a l l y and f i n a n c i a l l y s t a b l e f a m i l i e s to both p r o j e c t s , thus d e c r e a s i n g o p e r a t i n g costs and i n c r e a s i n g income from r e n t a l revenue. Another m o d i f i c a t i o n i n the o r i g i n a l r e n t s c a l e was i t s downward e x t e n s i o n to i n c l u d e i n Orchard Park s i n g l e p e n s i o n e r s , not housed i n L i t t l e Mountain. Current a l l o w a b l e pension incomes range from $50 to $125 per month f o r a s i n g l e p ensioner, of which $20 to $27 per month i s payable as s h e l t e r r e n t , w i t h an a d d i t i o n a l charge of $2 being made f o r s e r v i c e charges. T h i s change a f f e c t s only the 18 " s i n g l e " u n i t s at Orchard Park. The c u r r e n t i n c l u s i o n of s o c i a l allowance f a m i l i e s as replacements f o r many outgoing t e n a n t s , i n v o l v i n g a r e n t a l drop of $1,125 Per month i n the f i r s t ten months of 1959;3" i s due to more than changes i n V. H. A. admissions p o l i c y . P r i m a r i l y , i n 195U-, "the then e x i s t i n g V. H. A. maximum income r e s t r i c t i o n s were more s t r i n g e n t , so that fewer higher-income f a m i l i e s would be e l i g i b l e than at p r e s e n t . Secondly, c u r r e n t s o c i a l allowance r a t e s compare f a v o u r a b l y w i t h those e x i s t i n g i n 195k, when the o r i g i n a l l o c a l r e n t a l s c a l e was drawn up. For example, as of A p r i l 1, 195k» & two-person f a m i l y c o u l d r e c e i v e a maxi-mum of $69.50 per month from C i t y S o c i a l S e r v i c e Department. 2 1. Based on f i g u r e s quoted i n Annual Report 1959, Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y . 2. Warren Wilson, Housing C o n d i t i o n s Among S o c i a l A s s i s t a n c e  F a m i l i e s . M.S.W. T h e s i s , U.B.C, 1955. p. 1 9 . 83 In I960, a f a m i l y of s i m i l a r s i z e c o u l d r e c e i v e a maximum of $103«80 per month from the same source.^ R e l a t i n g these f a c t s to p u b l i c housing p o l i c y , on the p r e v i o u s V.H.A. r e n t a l s c a l e , the minimum "net f a m i l y Income" all o w a b l e f o r a two-member f a m i l y was $75 a month. T h i s amount f o r minimum e l i g i b i l i t y has remained constant I n the i960 r e v i s i o n of the r e n t a l s c a l e . However, w i t h i n c r e a s e d S o c i a l Allowance r a t e s now i n e f f e c t , r e c i p i e n t s of t h i s form of p u b l i c a s s i s t a n c e need no longer be r e j e c t e d as tenants of V.H.A. housing p r o j e c t s . 'Neither need t h e i r c u r r e n t I n c l u s i o n n e c e s s i t a t e so great a degree of sub-s i d i z a t i o n as would have been necessary i n 1954, because or the comparatively l a r g e Increase i n s o c i a l allowance r a t e s . I f a comparison i s made between the amount C i t y S o c i a l S e r v i c e Department a l l o c a t e s f o r s h e l t e r i n s o c i a l allowance g r a n t s , and the amount V.H.A. a l l o c a t e s f o r s h e l t e r r e n t a l , both f i g u r e s being computed on an "income" b a s i s , some d i f f e r e n c e s do come to l i g h t . Por example, the p o r t i o n of a "Group 6" maxi-mum s o c i a l allowance grant ( i . e . , f o r a f a m i l y of 6 persons) t o t a l l i n g $190.20 per month, a l l o c a t e d f o r s h e l t e r i s $55 per month. Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , f o r a f a m i l y of 6 w i t h a maximum "net f a m i l y Income" of $190 per month, a l l o c a t e s #35 per month s h e l t e r r e n t , w i t h an a d d i t i o n a l s e r v i c e charge of $9 per month, making a t o t a l of $kk per month. Lower r e n t a l assessment by Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y i s c o n s i s t e n t throughout. A comparison of s o c i a l allowance r a t e s i n 1951+ and i n i960 i n d i c a t e s the d i v i s i o n suggested by C.S.S.D. f o r support and m i s c e l l a n e o u s expenses, and f o r s h e l t e r expense. 1. I n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i v e d from C.S.S.D. i n September i960. 8k The increased amounts f o r I960 approximate the recommen-dations of the Welfare and Rec r e a t i o n C o u n c i l of the Community Chest and Councils of the Greater Vancouver Area, who s t a t e d i n December 1958, "The b a s i c scale of S o c i a l A s sistance Allow-ances should be increased by at l e a s t 30%.1 Table 7 Comparison of Vancouver C i t y S o c i a l Service S o c i a l Allowance Rates i n 195k and i n i960. A p r i l 1, 195k i960 Persons Support & Support & Included M i s c e l l a - S h e l t e r T o t a l Persons M i s c e l l a - S h e l t e r T o t a l i n Grant neous Expense neous Expense 1 2 3 k 5 6 7 8 $ 30.00 k9.50 58.50 , 67.50 76.50 85.50 9k-5o 103.50 $ 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 1+0.00 k5.oo 50.00 1 i+5.00 69.50 83.50 97.50 111.50 125.50 139.50 153.50 1 2 3 k 5 6 7 8 $ ki-oo 68.80 85. ko 102.00 118.60 135.20 151.80 168.k0 ¥25.00 35-00 1+0.00 45-00 50.00 55-00 60.00 65.00 $66.00 103.80 125.k0 li+7.00 168.60 190.20 211.80 233.k0 Included i s a comparison of V. H. A. s h e l t e r r e n t a l assess-ment based on "net f a m i l y income", of examples chosen to approxi-mate s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e grants and C. S. S. D. " s h e l t e r allowance" f o r s o c i a l allowance r e c i p i e n t s , both on the b a s i s of the number of persons i n c l u d e d i n the f a m i l y group. 1. Community Chest and Councils of the Greater Vancouver Area; "Recommendations Concerning S o c i a l A s s i s t a n c e Rates P a i d i n Greater Vancouver", Study Report on the Adequacy of S o c i a l  A s s istance Allowances. Summary of the Committee's F i n d i n g s . December 10, 1958. 85 Table 8 Comparison of Income and Rental A l l o c a t i o n as set out by Vancou-ver Housing A u t h o r i t y and Van-couver C i t y S o c i a l S ervice De-partment, I960.  Vaneouver Housing A u t h o r i t y C i t y S o c i a l Service Dept. Net Rental Maximum Family S h e l t e r U t i l i - T o t a l Family Family Allow- S o c i a l s i z e Rental t i e s Rent Income s i z e ance Allowance 2 #23.00 $ 2.00 125.00 $105.00 2 $35.00 $103.80 3 26.00 2.00 28.00 125.00 3 40.00 125.40 k 30.00 5.00 35.00 150.00 k 1+5.00 147.00 5 32.00 8.00 40.00 170.00 5 50.00 168.60 6 35.00 9.00 Uk. 00 190.00 6 55.00 190.20 7 . 38.00 10.00 4 8 . 0 0 210.00 7 60.00 211.80 The l a r g e r r e n t a l allowance a l l o c a t e d by C i t y S o c i a l S e r v i c e i s reasonable i n view of the f a c t that the l a t t e r must assume that most of t h e i r f a m i l i e s o b t a i n housing where they can f i n d i t , and w i l l n e c e s s a r i l y pay more than f o r p u b l i c housing. Indeed, according to the Community Chest survey of 1957, "Rents c u r r e n t l y being paid...do not allow f o r the f a c t that much of the e x i s t i n g accommodation i s inadequate. Such an a l l o c a t i o n , i n money terms, i s t h e r e f o r e , l e s s than t h a t necessary to a t t a i n a reasonable standard of s h e l t e r . . . . . S u b s i d i z e d housing could go a long way towards b r i d g i n g t h i s gap."l (Further r a m i f i c a t i o n s of these comparisons w i l l be d i s -cussed l a t e r i n t h i s chapter, under the s e c t i o n i n which the rent scale i s more f u l l y considered.) Apart from the s o c i a l and economic aspects of tenant composition l e a d i n g to the new r e v i s i o n of the Vancouver 1. The Adequacy of S o c i a l Allowances Committee: Report to  the Community.Chest and C o u n c i l on the Adequacy of S o c i a l A s s i s - tance Allowances i n the C i t y of Vancouver. Vancouver, B. C. September 1958. p.i+3. 86 Housing A u t h o r i t y r e n t a l s c a l e , other e x t e r n a l f a c t o r s prob-a b l y account f o r the change In p o l i c y r e f e r r e d t o . Mainten-ance expenses alone have r i s e n from $28,239 i n 1955 to $37,316 i n 1959, due to "the steady i n c r e a s e i n wages, m a t e r i a l s , c o n t r a c t r e p a i r s and the cost of e x t e r i o r p a i n t i n g on a f o u r -year c y c l i c a l basis".1 In t h i s way, p u b l i c housing a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i s a f f e c t e d by economic problems p e r t a i n i n g to the e n t i r e community. Conver-s e l y , the net o p e r a t i n g s u r p l u s has decreased by $12,318 between 1955 and 1959, whereas the amount of subsidy has i n c r e a s e d by the same amount f o r the same p e r i o d of t i m e . 2 T h i s f a c t o r of subsidy i n t r o d u c e s the second aspect of p u b l i c housing p o l i c y , t h a t of l i m i t i n g . s u b s i d i z a t i o n by r e l a t i n g r e n t to income and need, and by a c c e p t i n g upper income ten a n t s . The r e l a t i o n of r e n t to income and need i s p r i m a r i l y judged on the b a s i s o i the " i n s p e c t i o n r e p o r t " (see appendix C), which assesses e l i g i b i l i t y from o b j e c t i v e c r i t e r i a , such, as income l e v e l s , f a m i l y composition, and residence q u a l i f i c a t i o n , and. also from s u b j e c t i v e c r i t e r i a , such as , the a p p l i c a n t ' s s u i t a b i l i t y as a tenant. T h i s i s not an easy matter, however. As one student of the s u b j e c t has s a i d , "These and s i m i l a r c r i t e r i a of s o c i a l d e s i r a b i l i t y are d i f f i c u l t to define i n the f i r s t p l a c e , and r e q u i r e s k i l l e d i n v e s t i g a t i o n f o r t h e i r e q u i t a b l e a p p l i c a t i o n i n each p a r t i c u l a r case; moreover, they r a i s e the whole q u e s t i o n of the o b j e c t i v e s of tenant s e l e c t i o n 1. Annual Report, 1959. Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , p.3. 2. Based on f i g u r e s quoted i n Annual Report, 1959, Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y . 87 practice.""^" In the o r i g i n a l t e n a n t i n g of L i t t l e Mountain, the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y s e l e c t e d only the a p p a r e n t l y most s t a b l e and c r e d i t - w o r t h y of the a p p l i c a n t s . "One i n d i r e c t r e s u l t of t h i s has been t h a t the f a m i l i e s accepted f o r tenancy i n L i t t l e Mountain show a h i g h e r average wage l e v e l than the p r e v a i l i n g l e v e l f o r the sample of u n s u c c e s s f u l a p p l i c a n t s ; t y p i c a l l y $2k0 a month i n the case of the tenants (see Table I I , Appen-d i x D) compared w i t h $229 f o r the sample of two hundred and f o r t y u n s u c c e s s f u l a p p l i c a n t s . " 2 T h i s approach impinged upon a p p l i c a t i o n of Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y housing p o l i c y to Orchard Park t e n a n t i n g , inasmuch as the o r i g i n a l tenants of Orchard Park were drawn l a r g e l y from t h e w a i t i n g l i s t o f d i s a p p o i n t e d L i t t l e Mountain a p p l i c a n t s , i . e . , from those w i t h lower incomes. I t i s of i n t e r e s t to note t h a t , based upon f i g u r e s f o r December, 1959, the median "net f a m i l y income" of Orchard Park tenants i s $l8l.63 per month. F u r t h e r a n a l y s i s shows t h a t the averages are $72.22 f o r " s i n g l e " tenants, $165.69" f o r "broken" f a m i l i e s , and $217.22 f o r "complete" f a m i l i e s . A word of e x p l a n a t i o n i s needed r e g a r d i n g the computation of "net f a m i l y income". T h i s f i g u r e i s 'obtained by adding the gross income of the breadwinner and of h i s w i f e , i f she i s employed, p l u s $75*00 of the income of each c h i l d under the age of 25 years who Is s t i l l i n the home and Is employed. The 1. M i c h a e l Wheeler, E v a l u a t i n g the Need f o r Low-Rental Housing, M. S. W. t h e s i s , U. B. C. 1955. p.100. 2. i b i d . p.99. 88 a s s e s s a b l e Incomes of husband and w i f e Include income tax and pension deductions, as w e l l as income from a l l sources, such as f a m i l y allowances.. Thus, except In the case of employed c h i l d -r e n under age 25, t o t a l e a r nings, r a t h e r than t o t a l r e c e i v e d pay, are used i n computing the r e n t a l assessment. Hence, i t becomes obvious t h a t l i m i t a t i o n of s u b s i d i z a t i o n i s a s s i s t e d g r e a t l y by the i n c l u s i o n of upper-income tenants i n p u b l i c housing p r o j e c t s . C r i t i c i s m of t h i s p o l i c y by the p u b l i c , and by low-income tenants, i s heard f r e q u e n t l y , without com-p l e t e understanding of the f a c t o r s i n v o l v e d , i . e . , the compara-t i v e l y g r e a t e r percentage of income a l l o c a t e d f o r r e n t a l s on b e h a l f of upper-income t e n a n t s , by r e a s o n of the "surcharge" on income earned beyond a c e r t a i n p o i n t In the s l i d i n g s c a l e . For example, as of December 1959, one f a m i l y i n the p r o j e c t r e p o r t e d a "net f a m i l y income" of $k09 per month. Of t h i s amount, $93 was p a i d f o r r e n t a l of a row house, inasmuch as the f a m i l y i n c l u d e d s i x members. Occupying s i m i l a r accommodation, another f a m i l y of s i x , w i t h a "net f a m i l y income" of $93.per month, p a i d $26 i n r e n t . The i m p l i c a t i o n s seem o b v i o u s — t h e l a t t e r f a m i l y ' s r e n t a l assessment of $26 per month does not meet the economic cost to Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y of p r o v i d i n g accom-modation, so that the former f a m i l y , w i t h a g r e a t e r per c a p i t a income, s u b s i d i z e s to some extent t h i s unmet c o s t . Although much more i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and. e d u c a t i o n are r e q u i r e d around t h i s p o l i c y , which can l e a d t o s o c i a l as w e l l as economically based d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n s , i n c l u s i o n of g r e a t e r numbers of higher-income tenants i s one method by which the degree o f s u b s i d i z a t i o n may be l i m i t e d . An important p o l i c y q u e s t i o n , however, i s : how f a r should t h i s go? 89 Admissions P o l i c y and Procedure As a l r e a d y i n d i c a t e d , the Housing A u t h o r i t y admissions p o l i c y has been undergoing c o n s i d e r a b l e change, mainly w i t h r e g a r d to an e x t e n s i o n of upper and lower income l e v e l s now e l i g i b l e f o r housing i n both Vancouver p r o j e c t s . However, except t h a t the A u t h o r i t y ' s s o c i a l worker now does a l l the i n s p e c t i o n s , procedure remains the same as i n previous years, and i s o u t l i n e d c o n c i s e l y i n the o f f i c i a l handbook, The L i t t l e Mountain Low-Rental Housing P r o j e c t , from which the f o l l o w i n g . i s quoted. " A f t e r the a p p l i c a t i o n has been made, an i n s p e c t i o n v i s i t Is made to the a p p l i c a n t ' s home. The home and surroundings are eva l u a t e d i n r e g a r d t o such f a c t o r s as overcrowding, inadequacy of h e a t i n g equipment, absence of safe and s u i t a b l e p l a y space f o r c h i l d r e n , overlong d i s t a n c e i'rom p l a c e of employment, presence of smoke or noise nuisances i n the neighbourhood. The i n s p e c t o r assigns p o i n t s to the d w e l l i n g i n accordance w i t h t h i s e v a l u a t i o n , and i t i s t h i s p o i n t r a t i n g -which p r o v i d e s the most s i g n i f i c a n t c r i t e r i o n f o r entrance e l i g i b i l i t y . " The procedure o f a p p l i c a t i o n , and the e x p l a n a t i o n of how and why vacancies are f i l l e d , i s f u l l y set out: "These a p p l i c a t i o n s , w i t h i n s p e c t i o n r e p o r t s , are cons i d e r e d by the seven-member Board of Housing Autho-r i t y and may be passed onto a w a i t i n g l i s t ! . . . . C r e d i t r a t i n g and e v a l u a t i o n o f housekeeping are a l s o Impor-ta n t c o n s i d e r a t i o n s . When a vacancy occurs, the Hous-ing Manager can c o n s i d e r f o u r or f i v e h i g h - p o i n t f a m i l i e s and i f the a p p l i c a t i o n s are not a year o l d may get a nex*x c r e d i t r a t i n g but omit a r e - i n s p e c t i o n . P r i o r i t y a s s i g n -ment by the Housing A u t h o r i t y i s always done on an imper-sonal b a s i s , a p p l i c a t i o n s and. i n s p e c t i o n r e p o r t s b e i n g i d e n t i f i e d by number only. T h i s r u l e s out the p e r s o n a l , emotional f a c t o r and the n e c e s s i t y f o r Board a c t i o n r e -moves the p o s s i b i l i t y of anyone b r i n g i n g p r essure to bear on the manager or i n d i v i d u a l board member f o r admission of a 'pet f a m i l y ' . " 2 1. As of October, I960, the w a i t i n g l i s t was c l o s e to 900 i n number. 2. E. Promson, J . Hansen and R. Smith. The L i t t l e Mountain  Low-Rental Housing P r o j e c t , M.S.W. t h e s i s , U.B.C. 1959. 90 The Rent S c a l e The aim of the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y i s to o b t a i n the maximum p o s s i b l e income which is commensurate w i t h a decent stand-ard of l i v i n g f o r i t s t e n a nts. These two f a c t o r s of Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y income and. tenant l i v i n g standards are con-t r o l l e d by means of the' Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y ' s "progres-s i v e r e n t s c a l e " . T h i s important matter has been f u l l y d i s c u s s e d In a p r e c e d i n g study; but i s a l s o set out i n Appendix A of the present one. O r i g i n a l l y compiled f o r use at Regent Park i n Toronto,1 the p r o g r e s s i v e s c a l e has been r e v i s e d f o r use by the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y ; and i t i s a second r e v i s i o n which i s i n f o r c e at the moment. T h i s s c a l e a d j u s t s r e n t a c c o r d i n g to "net f a m i l y income" and f a m i l y s i z e , so that f a m i l i e s w i t h h i g h e r income and fewer members pay more r e n t than do f a m i l i e s w i t h lower Income and s i m i l a r s i z e . Recent l o c a l extensions of t h i s s c a l e I n both the upper and lower income l e v e l s have a l r e a d y been d i s -cussed. The s c a l e g e n e r a l l y accepts the premise t h a t the pro-p o r t i o n a l amount a f a m i l y can pay f o r r e n t , without r e d u c i n g i t s standard c f l i v i n g below a "decent and h e a l t h f u l " l e v e l , i s about 20 per cent of income. T h i s p r o p o r t i o n changes s l i g h t l y i n the extreme l i m i t s , so that comparatively h i g h e r income, fewer member f a m i l i e s , may be r e q u i r e d to pay a h i g h e r percentage of income f o r accommodation. For example, a seven-member f a m i l y w i t h "net f a m i l y income" of $362.50 pays $74 r e n t and $13 s e r v i c e charge, which makes a t o t a l accommodation cost of 2k per cent of "net f a m i l y Income". However, a two-member f a m i l y w i t h "net 1. The Carver-Hopwood s c a l e i s r e l a t e d to a Canadian standard of l i v i n g study, p r i m a r i l y computed i n Toronto. 9 1 f a m i l y income" of $327.50 pays $76 r e n t , p l u s $13 s e r v i c e charge, or 27*7 per cent of "net f a m i l y income" i n accommodation expense. The converse i s true i n the lower r e g i s t e r s of the r e n t a l s c a l e , where single-member, low-income tenants pay a gr e a t e r percentage of "net f a m i l y income" i n accommodation c o s t s , than do l a r g e r s i z e , low-income f a m i l i e s . . For example, a " s i n g l e " pensioner, w i t h "net f a m i l y income" of $125, pays $27 r e n t , p l u s $2 s e r v i c e charge, or 23.2 per cent o f "net f a m i l y income" i n accommodation c o s t s . On the other hand, a seven-member f a m i l y w i t h "net f a m i l y income" of $155, pays $25 r e n t and $5 s e r v i c e charge, or 19.35 per cent of "net f a m i l y income" i n t o t a l cost of accommodation. The h y p o t h e t i c a l Orchard Park tenant w i t h average "net f a m i l y income" ( f o r December, 1959) of $181.63 would, t h e r e f o r e , pay s e r v i c e charges of $9 per month, and r e n t s of approximately $1|1, $39, $37, $35, $33 or $31 (range between two-member and seven-member f a m i l i e s ) , or from 28.5 per cent to 21.9 per cent of "net f a m i l y income". "Service charges" and " u t i l i t y charges" are f i n a n c i a l a r -rangements made between Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y and I t s tenants, r e q u i r i n g some e x p l a n a t i o n . " S e r v i c e charges", a d d i -t i o n a l to b a s i c s h e l t e r r e n t , are made to each tenant f o r whom heat and hot water are s u p p l i e d by Vancouver' Housing A u t h o r i t y , and not b i l l e d d i r e c t l y : by the B. C. E l e c t r i c Company, (the Vancouver power and l i g h t u t i l i t y . ) " U t i l i t i e s " are charged to any tenant f o r whom Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y s u p p l i e s gas or e l e c t r i c i t y f o r cooking, or e l e c t r i c i t y f o r l i g h t i n g , as opposed t o d i r e c t b i l l i n g by the B. C. E l e c t r i c Company. The o n l y separate gas meters i n Orchard Park are connected w i t h 92 row houses, but both row houses and apartment u n i t s have separate e l e c t r i c meters. In the case of the p ension u n i t s , a f l a t r a t e f o r " u t i l i t i e s " i s charged. ($2 per month f o r those cooking w i t h gas, i n c l u d i n g e l e c t r i c i t y f o r l i g h t i n g ; $2 .50 f o r " s i n g l e pensioners u s i n g e l e c t r i c i t y f o r both cooking and l i g h t i n g ; and $k f o r couples u s i n g the same arrangements.) In the row houses, each tenant has h i s own gas and e l e c t r i c meters, and costs connected w i t h e l e c t r i c i t y , gas furnaces and gas water heaters are b i l l e d d i r e c t l y to the tenant by the B. C. E l e c t r i c Company. In a d d i t i o n , Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y obtains from each row house tenant a nominal monthly f e e of $l.k0 (about to be Increased) to cover the per u n i t share cX-water r a t e s p a i d d i r e c t l y by the A u t h o r i t y to the C i t y of Vancouver. T h i s per u n i t charge f o r water r a t e s i s i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o the " s e r v i c e charge" p e r t a i n i n g to tenants i n apartment bl o c k s or pensioner u n i t s . Thus, row houses are l i k e i n d i v i d u a l p r i v a t e homes, i ^ i t h p r i v a t e , i n d i v i d u a l b i l l i n g d i r e c t from the B.C. E l e c t r i c Com-pany, whereas the A u t h o r i t y s u p p l i e s gas, e l e c t r i c i t y , hot water and heat f o r apartment b l o c k s , and' b i l l s f o r these s e r -v i c e s and u t i l i t i e s at a f l a t r a t e , computed on a p e r - u n i t b a s i s from the o v e r a l l cost to Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y . Having computed the "net f a m i l y income", which i s then a l i g n e d w i t h set " s e r v i c e charges" f o r each income group, the A u t h o r i t y must, i n the case of f a m i l i e s whose income has r i s e n above the maximum l i m i t s of the r e n t s c a l e s i n c e admission to the p r o j e c t , give c o n s i d e r a t i o n to the " sur charge'.1. T h i s sur-charge i s g r a f t e d onto the maximum l i m i t s of the p r o g r e s s i v e 93 r e n t s c a l e , and c o n s t i t u t e s 30 per cent of the "over-income", which amount i s a p p l i e d to the f a m i l y ' s r e n t a l assessment. The maximum entrance income v a r i e s from $325 a month f o r a two-person f a m i l y , to $3&2.50 a month f o r a seven-person f a m i l y . The surcharge does not apply to pensioners, whose incomes are v i r t u a l l y f i x e d . Admission i s r e f u s e d , as i n a l l cases, i f income exceeds the maximum l i m i t s . (Maximum income, f o r " s i n g l e " pensioners i s $125, and f o r pension couples $175«) The surcharge i s based on the assumption that the f a m i l y w i t h over-maximum income i s able to a f f o r d commercial accommodation or, perhaps, home purchase; and i s a l s o i n t e n d e d t o persuade these f a m i l i e s t o move out of p u b l i c housing. T h i s premise i s , perhaps, spurious inasmuch as many circumstances might make i t d e s i r a b l e f o r a f a m i l y to continue to r e n t , even when i t s income Increases. However, some " c e i l i n g " must be s e t and t h i s problem has been r e s o l v e d l o c a l l y by means of the sur-charge device. A d m i n i s t r a t i v e D i f f i c u l t i e s Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y i s confronted w i t h the c h a l l e n g e of combining business and "welfare", two p h i l o s o p h i -c a l l y d i v e r g e n t yet r e a l i s t i c a l l y u n i t e d f a c e t s of p u b l i c hous-i n g a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . For purposes of d i s c u s s i o n , these d i f f i c u l t i e s may be grouped i n t o i n t e r n a l problems, p e r t i n e n t to the p r o j e c t e x c l u s i v e l y , and e x t e r n a l problems, r e l a t i n g t o the " p u b l i c image" of low-Income housing. I n t e r n a l l y , the tenant d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n s c r e a t e d by unequal r e n t s f o r equal accommodation have been c i t e d , and flow i n e i t h e r d i r e c t i o n . The high-income tenant complains of the d i f f i c u l t y i n " g e t t i n g ahead" f i n a n c i a l l y , owing to the surchar 9k or of h i s a l l e g e d l y double s u b s i d i z a t i o n of the low-income tenants (rent and taxes).-'- The low-income tenant complains of the i n c l u s i o n of "people who don't r e a l l y need to be here", or "who can a f f o r d a c a r " . N e i t h e r complainant f a c e s the t o t a l problem; but i f the complaints continue, they, i n themselves, p o i n t up the need f o r b e t t e r d i s s e m i n a t i o n of i n f o r m a t i o n and c o u n s e l l i n g s e r v i c e from the A u t h o r i t y . A c t u a l l y , the c o m p a r a t i v e l y h i g h earners i n the p r o j e c t f r e q u e n t l y have l a r g e numbers of dependents,2 are students, or are i n occupations w i t h only seasonal employment. Cars may be r e q u i r e d i n o r d e r ' t o h o l d c e r t a i n kinds of jobs, or i n order to commute long d i s t a n c e s to employment. On the other hand, even the h i g h e r r e n t s g e n e r a l l y compare f a v o u r a b l y w i t h those i n e f f e c t i n p r i v a t e housing, where both c o s t l i n e s s of accom-modation and d i f f i c u l t y i n l o c a t i n g l a n d l o r d s who w i l l t o l e r a t e c h i l d r e n are the r u l e . Moreover, a lox^-income tenant does not p r o v i d e a r e n t a l which pays h i s u n i t ' s share of c o s t s ; and, although no q u e s t i o n e x i s t s r e g a r d i n g the need f o r low-Income housing, p r a c t i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n must be g i v e n , however, to means designed t o l i m i t the amount of s u b s i d i z a t i o n n e c e s s i -t a t e d . T h e r e f o r e , the "Canadian formula" c u r r e n t l y p r o v i d e s housing f o r both comparative extremes, as need e x i s t s i n both, and as the upper l i m i t s p r o v i d e income more c l o s e l y a p p r o x i -mating economic r e n t s or the a c t u a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e cost of p r o v i d i n g accommodation. 1. T h i s i s - . a c t u a l l y a spurious argument, as r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r taxes a p p l i e s to everybody. (e.g., every c i t i z e n pays school taxes r e g a r d l e s s of whether or not, he has c h i l d r e n i n school.) 2. I f so, t h i s puts them i n the p o s i t i o n where other c i t i z e n s w i t h small f a m i l i e s or none are h e l p i n g to pay t h e i r f a m i l y allowances. 9 5 Another aspect of the tenant income c o n f l i c t i s the f a c t that i n e q u a l i t i e s appear to e x i s t between the "income v a l u e " of those r e c e i v i n g p u b l i c assistance and the earnings of low-income tenants g a i n f u l l y employed. C e r t a i n l y , the p r o v i s i o n of p u b l i c housing i s of inestimable value to e i t h e r group, as both s u f f e r most g r e a t l y i n the search f o r decent housing on the p r i v a t e market. However, medical, de n t a l and other "bonus" s e r v i c e s are added to the cash incomes of those dependent upon p u b l i c assistance ( r e f e r r e d t o In Chapter I I I ) , whereas, the marginal wage earner n e i t h e r r e c e i v e s these s e r v i c e s nor any a i d i n budgeting f o r them by means of a reduced V.H.A. r e n t a l assessment. This i s a matter to which m u n i c i p a l a u t h o r i t i e s should give some c o n s i d e r a t i o n , as t h i s survey encountered e v i -dence suggesting t h a t many independent, low-income f a m i l i e s are experiencing r e a l hardship i n meeting the cost of f a m i l y medical and dental needs.^ A t h i r d c o n t r i b u t o r to " i n t e r n a l " d i f f i c u l t i e s i s the apparently poor system of communication e x i s t i n g between the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and the tenants. This survey encountered con-siderable confusion or misunderstanding r e l a t i n g to admission and r e n t a l assessment p r a c t i c e s , and perhaps an i n t e n s i f i e d e f f o r t might be made by the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y t o provide f o r i t s tenants a comprehensive and comprehensible i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of p o l i c y and procedure. Por example, s e v e r a l charges were made of a l l e g e d f a v o u r i t i s m i n r e l a t i o n to tenant "screening", and many tenants were r e l u c t a n t to have f a m i l y 1. There i s now an Advisory Committee on Welfare r e p o r t i n g to the Mayor,(Vancouver C i t y ) , who might w e l l place t h i s matter on t h e i r agenda. 96 allowances t r e a t e d as a s s e s s i b l e income. More e f f e c t i v e d i s -t r i b u t i o n of a d m i n i s t r a t i v e i n f o r m a t i o n c o u l d d i s s i p a t e t h i s problem, although complete or t o t a l r e c e p t i o n i n communication depends, i n p a r t , upon the c a p a c i t y or m o t i v a t i o n of the r e c e i -ver, and not only upon the c l a r i t y of the t r a n s m i s s i o n . But i t should be p o i n t e d out t h a t e f f i c i e n t d i s s e m i n a t i o n i s concomi-t a n t upon more e f f e c t i v e f u n c t i o n i n g power f o r the A u t h o r i t y i t s e l f . Without an i n c r e a s e i n s t a f f , more care at " i n t a k e " ( r e g i s t r a t i o n ) , and an a p p r o p r i a t i o n f o r mimeographed b u l l e t i n s , to o f f e r but a few s u g g e s t i o n s , i m p e d i m e n t s to e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s are bound to c o n t i n u e . A Tenant A s s o c i a t i o n and a group worker c o u l d a l s o a i d g r e a t l y the e f f i c a c y of the communi-c a t i o n p r o c e s s . Perhaps the most g l a r i n g l y u n r e s o l v e d e x t e r n a l a d m i n i s t r a -t i v e d i f f i c u l t y i s t h a t of e d u c a t i o n a l work d i r e c t e d not to the tenants alone, but to the g e n e r a l p u b l i c . R e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r t h i s n e c e s s i t y can not r e s t s o l e l y upon the shoulders of the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , which i s undoubtedly hampered by the delayed adoption of p u b l i c housing as a s o c i a l resource i n Canada. This i s a matter f o r the c i t y : even f o r the p r o v i n c e . I t i s r e l a t e d t o the need f o r r e l o c a t i o n s e r v i c e , and the p o s s i -b i l i t i e s of "community redevelopment", e t c . , which should be organized with the c o - o p e r a t i o n of the P l a n n i n g Department. Research i s needed r e g a r d i n g p u b l i c concepts of p u b l i c housing; and the a l l e g e d neighbourhood d i s c r i m i n a t i o n a g a i n s t the tenants of Orchard Park ( d e s c r i b e d i n Chapter II) would provide one I n t e r e s t i n g avenue of enquiry. Although i t i s w i d e l y r e c o g n i z e d today t h a t a great many f o r c e s , some of them beyond the a f f e c t e d i n d i v i d u a l ' s i n f l u e n c e , determine the a b i l i t y of the f a m i l y head 97 to provide f o r h i s f a m i l y , t h i s f a c t i s f r e q u e n t l y a p p l i e d t o a l l areas of "welfare" except t h a t of housing. As the study preceding the present one put i t , " P u b l i c understanding of p u b l i c housing needs to be f u r t h e r e d so that i t i s w i d e l y understood t h a t the housing shortage and the h i g h c o s t of housing are as important In the s u b s i d i z e d b u i l d i n g of housing as i s lowness of income."-'- The need f o r the comparatively high-income tenant as w e l l as h i s own i n d i v i d u a l needs i n r e l a -t i o n to p u b l i c housing, i s an important example of the r e q u i r e d i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Undoubtedly, a more e f f e c t i v e system of p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s c o u l d do much to ease the s o c i a l p r e s s u r e s exerted by the "haves", e x t e r n a l to the p r o j e c t , upon the "have nots" w i t h i n . Perhaps i t might convince them t h a t they have some i n t e r e s t s i n common. La n d l o r d and Tenant R e l a t i o n s P u b l i c housing, l i k e commercial housing, r e q u i r e s both a tenant and. a l a n d l o r d , and t h e r e are r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s on both s i d e s . The Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y , under i t s able and c o n s c i e n t i o u s manager who has been w i t h the p r o j e c t s i n c e i t s i n c e p t i o n , i s the l a n d l o r d to the tenants of Orchard Park. With the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y o f f i c e s i t u a t e d n e a r l y two and a h a l f m i l e s away i n the L i t t l e Mountain Housing p r o j e c t , minimal problems arose, r e l a t e d to a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d i s t a n c e of both a g e o g r a p h i c a l , and, inasmuch as p u b l i c housing management assumes a more p a t e r n a l i n t e r e s t i n tenant w e l f a r e than does th a t of p r i v a t e commercial housing, a p s y c h o l o g i c a l nature. As 1. E. Fromson, J. Hansen and. R. Smith, The L i t t l e Mountain  Low-Rental Housing P r o j e c t ; M.S.W.thesis, U . B . C , 1959. p.108. 98 the F a m i l y C o u n s e l l o r found i t necessary to spend most of her time at Orchard Park, an o f f i c e on the p r o j e c t was pr o v i d e d by the A u t h o r i t y , who recog n i z e t h a t the f a c i l i t a t i o n of d i r e c t tenant contact w i t h an a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e i s essen-t i a l . 1 Presupposing mutual acceptance of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r both g i v i n g accurate a p p l i c a t i o n i n f o r m a t i o n and i m p a r t i a l , e f f e c -t i v e " s creening", the t e n a n t - l a n d l o r d a s s o c i a t i o n i s l e g a l l y r e i n f o r c e d by means of the l e a s e , which d e f i n e s i n d e t a i l the r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of each p a r t y , and r e q u i r e s the s i g n a t u r e s of both the tenant and the r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the A u t h o r i t y . Included i n the l e a s e are cl a u s e s r e l a t i n g to t e r m i n a t i o n of the lease by e i t h e r p a r t y , a l l o c a t i o n of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t o each p a r t y f o r s p e c i f i c types of d e p r e c i a t i o n , and r e s t r i c t i o n of tenant p r i v i l e g e . Among the l a t t e r are d e n i a l of p e r m i s s i o n to the tenant to s u b l e t any p o r t i o n of h i s d w e l l i n g or to accommodate lodgers or roomers; t o make a l t e r a t i o n s or improve-ments; to keep dogs or c a t s , 2 and t o i n s t a l l e x t e r n a l t e l e -v i s i o n antennae.3 To give s a n c t i o n to a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r u l i n g s , the Vancouver 1. The d u t i e s of the V.H.A. s o c i a l worker i n v o l v e s r e s p o n s i -b i l i t y (a) f o r " s c r e e n i n g " a p p l i c a n t s , p r i m a r i l y by means of a home v i s i t ; (b) f o r f i l l i n g vacancies as they a r i s e , (c) f o r me d i a t i o n i n any tenant s o c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s ; and .(d) f o r main-t a i n i n g a baby c l o t h i n g centre f o r those i n need of t h i s s er-v i c e . The manager p a r t i c i p a t e s In p l a n n i n g , and no a u t h o r i t a -t i v e a c t i o n r e g a r d i n g such matters as e v i c t i o n , f o r example, i s undertaken without h i s app r o v a l . The V.H.A. 's aim i n a l l I t s s o c i a l p l a n n i n g has been to encourage the te n a n t s ' own i n v o l v e -ment i n a c h i e v i n g r e s p e c t a b l e and p l e a s a n t housing c o n d i t i o n s . 2. I t should be noted i n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n t h a t some housing p r o j e c t s , f o r example, the S e a t t l e Housing A u t h o r i t y , accept p e t s , p r o v i d e d that c i t y ordinances are observed. 3. Please r e f e r to s e c t i o n on l e i s u r e time and r e c r e a t i o n , Chapter I I I . 99 Housing A u t h o r i t y c o l l e c t s a d e p o s i t from new t e n a n t s . When n o t i c e of t e r m i n a t i o n of tenancy i s r e c e i v e d , i n s p e c t i o n of the u n i t f o l l o w s , and i f I t has not been abused other than through normal wear and t e a r , the d e p o s i t i s r e t u r n e d to the tenant. V a r y i n g w i t h the degree of abnormal abuse, some p o r t i o n of the d e p o s i t may be r e t a i n e d by the A u t h o r i t y . P r o j e c t maintenance and appearance, however, should be seen as two mutual aspects of l a n d l o r d - t e n a n t a s s o c i a t i o n . Pub-l i c housing experience i n B r i t a i n and the U n i t e d S t a t e s has v a r i e d over a wide range. Maintenance of the grounds i s at present handled by the maintenance crew, on permanent s t a f f , w i t h tenant involvement v a r y i n g between i n d i v i d u a l s and r e l a t e d mainly to the immediate u n i t surroundings. The same ho l d s t r u e f o r i n -t e r n a l maintenance, i n which the row house and pensioner u n i t occupants take t o t a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r "housekeeping", whereas the p u b l i c hallways, basements and s t a i r s of the apartment b l o c k s are swept, scrubbed and waxed at scheduled times by the mainten-ance crew. Repairs to h e a t i n g and r e f r i g e r a t i o n u n i t s , plumbing, l i g h t i n g , windows, l o c k s , and hot water tanks are w i t h i n the area of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of the Vancouver Housing A u t h o r i t y r e s i d e n t c a r e t a k e r . V a c a t i n g arrangements and e v i c t i o n s round out the p i c t u r e of l a n d l o r d and tenant r e l a t i o n s . The r a t e of v o l u n t a r y vaca-t i n g has somewhat i n c r e a s e d i n r e c e n t y e a r s . The i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h i s t r e n d , have not been f u l l y explored, but i t i s hoped t h a t f o r some tenants, p e r s o n a l c o n d i t i o n s improved s u f f i c i e n t l y so t h a t they no longer r e q u i r e d p u b l i c housing. For some o t h e r s , d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h the e x i s t i n g r e s o u r c e s seem to have been the impetus to leave the p r o j e c t . The r a t e of e v i c t i o n s of 100 t r o u b l e d and troublesome f a m i l i e s appears h i g h e r f o r Orchard Park than f o r L i t t l e Mountain. I t i s not h i g h f o r the t o t a l p o p u l a t i o n ; but i t i s never a matter to be minimized. A study of e v i c t i o n s (and perhaps the outcomes) would be very d e s i r a b l e i n the f u t u r e . Some of the o u t s t a n d i n g i n d i c a t i o n s from the present survey, and they echo the recommendations made by the authors of the preceding L i t t l e Mountain study, i s (a) the need to explore the p o s s i b i l i t i e s of a tenant a s s o c i a t i o n and (b) the value of a group worker as a member of the permanent s t a f f . These are r e -sources which c o u l d both f a c i l i t a t e and s t i m u l a t e communication, and a l s o u t i l i z e more e f f e c t i v e l y the human resources e x i s t i n g on both l e v e l s . They would meet some of the most obvious p r e s -sures and resentments which show themselves at p r e s e n t . Perhaps n e i t h e r c o u l d be r e a l i s t i c a l l y u t i l i z e d without a b a s i c p h y s i c a l p r o v i s i o n — t h a t of a "community c e n t r e " or meeting p l a c e (which must be f a r more than one room or a basement make-shift) f o r the p r o j e c t . I m p l i c a t i o n s of Survey F i n d i n g s T h i s survey of a very small area i l l u s t r a t e s i n d e t a i l the w e l f a r e r e p e r c u s s i o n s of a housing measure, of r e l o c a t i n g people, of a b e g i n n i n g i n b e t t e r urban p l a n n i n g . Housing i s not merely on a par w i t h schools or community centres--which Vancouver does r e c o g n i z e ; i t i s more than them, because i t i s p e o p l e — c h i l d r e n , f a m i l i e s , — c i t i z e n s . E r e c t e d i n a r e s o u r c e -l e s s geographic area, and c u r t a i l e d i n scope by superimposed f i n a n c i a l l i m i t a t i o n s , Orchard Park has both p r o v i d e d f o r and overlooked some of the b a s i c needs of i t s t e n a n t s . Without 101 m i n i m i z i n g the v i t a l comparison of "before" and " a f t e r " rehousing, i t i s e s s e n t i a l to q u e s t i o n the e f f i c a c y of a new resource i f i t only p a r t i a l l y meets the needs of the new r e s i d e n t s ; and the economic and s o c i a l v a l i d i t y of the approach must a l s o be viewed "whole". Has t h i s example of p u b l i c housing r e s o l v e d or c r e a t e d more problems? Do the t r i - g o v e r n m e n t a l budget r e s t r i c t i o n s y i e l d the most durable and t h e r e f o r e most f i n a n c i a l l y e f f e c t i v e types of c o n s t r u c t i o n ? Has compromise or i n s u f f i c i e n t thought weakened the design? Does the omission of a community c e n t r e , clubrooms, or c h i l d r e n ' s p l a y f a c i l i t i e s save money i n the long run, or does i t merely generate new s o c i a l problems? Does the omission of such t h i n g s as playgrounds and k i n d e r g a r t e n s , which are "economies" i n one sphere, get " p a i d f o r " l a t e r i n the more unwelcome form of J u v e n i l e Courts, mental h e a l t h s e r v i c e s , s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e , etc.? I t i s not onl y the parents who must be con-s i d e r e d . P u b l i c housing p r o j e c t s are f u l l of c h i l d r e n . Por t h i s g e n e r a t i o n r e a c h i n g m a t u r i t y , neighbourhoods and neighbours w i l l mean much i n t h e i r chance to "do b e t t e r " . T h i s i s not meant to be a p u r e l y c r i t i c a l a p p r a i s a l , of course. The asse t s of Orchard Park have been r e s t a t e d , along w i t h the d e f e c t s . But e x p l o r a t i o n and i d e n t i f i c a t i o n should l e a d to a c t i o n . V a l u a b l e human re s o u r c e s e x i s t , on both the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and the tenant l e v e l s . T h i s experiment i n p u b l i c housing can expand i t s scope and i n f l u e n c e c o n s t r u c t i v e l y i f the p r a c t i c e of continuous a p p r a i s a l i s f o l l o w e d x^ith good w i l l , and i f the lessons of experience are l e a r n e d from s i m i l a r p r o j e c t s elsewhere. 102 \ Appendix A THE VANCOUVER HOUSING AUTHORITY I Monthly PROGRESSIVE RENT SCALE Net Shelter Rent According to Number of Persons In Family. Service Charges Family Income 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Maximum for Entry 327.50 332.50 342.50 352.50 357.50 362.50 $ 360 355 350 76 75 74 74 73 72 345 74 72 70 340 335 75 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 330 75 73 71 69 67 325 320 315 76 74 73 74 72 71 72 70 69 70 68 67 68 66 65 66 64 63 $13 310 72 70 68 66 64 '62 305 71 69 67 65 63 61 300 70 68 66 64 62 60 295 68 66 64 62 60 58 290 67 65 63 61 59 57 285 66 64 62 60 58 56 280 65 63 61 59 57 55 275 64 62 60 58 56 54 270 62 60 58 56 54 52 265 61 59 57 55 53 51 260 60 58 56 54 52 50 12 255 59 57 55 53 51 49 250 58 56 54' 52 50 48 245 56 54 52 50 48 46 240 55 53 51 49 47 45 235 54 52 50 48 46 44 11 230 53 51 49 47 45 43 225 52 50 48 46 44 42 220 50 48 46 44 42 40 215 49 47 45 43 41 39 210 48 46 44 42 40 38 10 205 47 45 43 41 39 37 200 46 44 42 40 38 36 195 44 42 40 38 36 34 190 43 41 39 37 35 33 185 (P ension 42 40 38 36 34 32 9 180 (Couple 41 39 37 35 33 31 175-(Limit 40 38 36 34 32 30 170 38 36 34 32 30 28 8 165 37 35 33 31 29 27 6 160 36 34 32 30 28 26 6 103 THE VANCOUVER HOUSING AUTHORITY Monthly PROGRESSIVE RENT SCALE (continued) Net Shelter Rent According to Number of Persons i n Family. Family Q ervic e Income 1 2 3 4 5 .6 7 Charges $ 155 35 33 31 29 27 25 5 150 34 32 30 28 26 5 145 32 30 28 26 24 4 140 31 29 27 25 23 4 135 30 28 26 24 3 130 29 27 25 23 3 125-(Single pensioner lim i t ) 27 28 26 24 22 120 27 26 24 22 20 115 26 25 23 21 2 110 25 24 22 20 105 24 23 21 20 100 23 22 20 95 22 21 20 90 21 20 20 85 20 20 80 20 20 75 20 20 65 20 50 20 (Scale in use as of mid-1961) 10k Appendix B ORCHARD PARK HOUSING SURVEY Please be assured that a l l information i s confidential and nobody w i l l be quoted  by name. This study i s being conducted by Social Work students from the University, and i s not an o f f i c i a l study of the Vancouver Housing Authority, or of the Central Mortgage. (a) LIVING ACCOMMODATION (YOUR SUITE) F i r s t of a l l , we want to know what you think about your new place, and how i t com-pares with what you were l i v i n g i n before you came here. 1. More space than before? Enough for everybody? 2. What things do you l i k e best about i t ? (e.g., cleanliness, colour, l i g h t , well-heated, space, etc.) 3. What took the most "getting used to"? 4 . Are there s t i l l some things you find strange? 5 . How did things work out about furniture? Also curtains, kitchen equipment etc.? . . . 6. Special points about: (Compared with other place) (1) Cooking (stove etc.) (2) Food storage (and re f r i g . ) (3) Meal preparation (4 ) Eating space . ( 5 ) Hot water (washing, bathing) (6) Bathroom, t o i l e t etc (7) Bedrooms (8) House cleaning (9) Storage. . (10) Other Do you f e e l you can r e a l l y take pride i n the place? 1 0 5 -2-(b) FAMILY LIVING M (a) Recreation, Hobbies, Entertaining, etc. (in your Apartment, or Within the Project) 1. Any special hobbies or sports in your family? (a) Adults (b) Youngsters .• 2. Can they be carried on here easily or not? Better than before?. . . . . . .(a) Adults (b) Youngsters 3. Do your friends or family visit you at your new place? (a) Adults (b) Youngsters (yours? other peoples ) 4. Much radio? record player T.V 5. Do neighbour's noises bother you? How soundproof are the units? . . 6. Do you have more privacy here than in the previous place(s)? . . Do you like i t , or do you feel a bit "cut off"? (b) Social Activities Outside the House 1. What recreations do you most do together (parents and children) Weekdays . . . . . . . weekends . . . . . . . summer . . . . . . (N.B.: other than T.V.) 2. Do you belong to any clubs, groups etc.: (a) Mother (b) Father • (c) youngsters . . » • • « » . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Do you get much of your social contacts through these clubs or Church . . . . . . or other (old friends; work, etc.) . , 4. Could you do with a workshop or hobby centre, etc.,, . . . . Y/here? (in the basement, or a separate unit?) • < 5. Is theri' a need for a coiamunity centre or club room or a hall, here? . . . . Any particular groups? Need for a P.T.A.? . . . . . . . Would you like to join? • , 6. Would you like to know your fellow-tenants better (e.g., other mothers, working w i v e s ) (Are there things you ought to get together about?) 1 0 6 -3-(c) The Children 1. Do they spend more time at home than at the former place(s) . . . . . . . . . or less 2. Do they get more attention from mother father Comments? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Any differences in school? . Like it better? . . . . less. . . • Different school mates? . . . . . . . . . . . Other comments . . . . . . . . . 4. Any differences in homework? • • • • 5. Xoung children: how do you manage when shopping, etc Any "baby sitting" problems? . 6. Is there enough play space for young children? . . . . . . Where do they play? • • « • Problems? 7. Do the school-age children get enough sports etc., through school, Scouts, etc.? 8. Would an organized playground (e.g. with sandbox, "jungle gym", etc.) be well used here? » 9. What about a volunteers' cooperative play-group, or day-care group? . . . . . M _F C (c) NEIGHBOURHOOD AND DISTRICT Present Facilities 1. Are the schools convenient? Elementary High Nursery, kindergarten? 2. Whereabouts do you do most of your grocery shopping? Is i t far? Convenient? 3. Other kinds of shopping? 4. How do you get on for church?  5. Any transportation problems? Father: work other Mother? Children? Comparisons a. Which districts did you live in (Vancouver) before coming.Jiere? . . . . . b. Did you live in apt., rooms, house, other lo Are there things you miss in this (L.M.) district? 2. What things were you glad to leave in the old district (if any)? 3. Do you go back to the old district much? 4. Did you have many friends there? , if so, do they visit you here? , . often? 5. Do the children like this district? or have any complaints? 6. Would you say you feel part of a new neighbourhood here? Or that you belong mostly to the project?. (Would you call i t a "community"?) , 1 v a M THE BUDGET  Family and Earnings: (a) Size of your family . . . . . . . . . (b) Any earners besides (yourself) (husband) . (c) Occupation of breadwinner(s) . ...'*< (full time, part-time, or irregular) . . (d) Like better employment, i f feasible? . . . . . . . . . . (e) Unemployment or non-wage—earner (SA) etc. Budget Situation: 1. Is your rent higher or lower than you paid before? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Does i t make i t harder or easier to balance the budget (make both ends meet) 3. What would you say is your biggest or most d i f f i c u l t budget item (apart from rent)? -.. 4» Did you have special problems with furniture, credit purchase etc. (or have now) which makes your budget situation a bad one? . . . . . . . . . . • » Rent and Income 1, Do you consider the rent scale here (so far as you understand i t ) fair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . or not? (how) . 2* Do you think your rent should be higher i f your income goes up? . . . . . . . < 3« Do you understand why the income check-up for tenants is necessary? . . . . . . . .Do you feel i t is conducted reasonably? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Have you ever been able to consider buying a house? . . . Could you have managed a down payment (say at least $500)? ,, . /. u u u * . . . . . Monthly payments (how much would be a maximum for you?) . . . . . . *.«. ...,«. « «,..«..*.-•. • «'«••«• . . . . . 109 ^5. Any r e a s o n s a g a i n s t home p u r c h a s e i n y o u r case? ( E . g . , apartment more c o n -v e n i e n t ? Not a b l e t o cope w i t h maintenance Work not alv/ays i n one p l a c e ? P r e v i o u s a d v e r s e e x p e r i e n c e ? . . . 6. Do you t h i n k i t i s t r u e t h a t t e n a n t s a r e h a r d e r on p r o p e r t i e s than owners? What i s y o u r e x p e r i e n c e w i t h m a i n t e n a n c e , r e p a i r s , e t c . h e r e ? GENERAL 1. What t h i n g s would you most l i k e t o see improved i n t h i s p r o j e c t ? 2. Have you any s u g g e s t i o n s which you would l i k e t o make f o r any new p r o j e c t s i m i l a r to O r c h a r d P a r k , i n the f u t u r e ? 3. Would you l i k e t o see more g r a s s , t r e e s , s h e l t e r e d w a l k s , or hedges e t c . ? gardens p l a c e s t o s i t i n the open ( i n summer)? or do you t h i n k e v e r y t h i n g i s f i n e as i t i s ? 4. A r e you s a t i s f i e d w i t h the g e n e r a l appearance o f the p r o j e c t ? C o u l d i t be more p l e a s a n t ? t i d i e r ? . . More s h e l t e r e d or p r o t e c t e d ? Do you t h i n k everybody would c o o p e r a t e and take a p r i d e i n the p l a c e ? . . . 5. Do you t h i n k an " O r c h a r d P a r k S o c i a l C l u b " would be a good i d e a ? Perhaps w i t h a b u l l e t i n b o a r d , c l u b room c o f f e e b a r , " d o - i t - y o u r s e l f " newspaper? . . . . Or do you l i k e the i d e a o f a Community C e n t r e " s e r v i n g the e n t i r e  d i s t r i c t , not j u s t O r c h a r d Park t e n a n t s ? 6. Do you t h i n k the p u b l i c knows enough about h o u s i n g p r o j e c t s o f t h i s k i n d ? 7. Do you t h i n k t h e r e s h o u l d be more such p r o j e c t s as O r c h a r d P a r k ? (Do you t h i n k t h e y s h o u l d be d i s t r i b u t e d around the c i t y , perhaps even i n the suburbs?) (Or i n the o l d e s t d i s t r i c t s to r e p l a c e some o f the slums?) 110 THE VANCOUVER HOUSING AUTHORITY I N S P E C T I O N R E P O R T PRESENT HOUSING Name of Applicant...„ ...„„..,., = ...... Address. .... .. Number of persons i n household,..... . Phone Complete one copy and attach to a p p l i c a t i o n . When a re-check i s made complete a new form and mark p r i o r report can-c e l l e d . SUITABILITY AS A TENANT; (See paragraph 4-1 of the Administration manual) Comments are to be recorded on the reverse side of t h i s page. DEFECTS OF PRESENT HOUSING (bad conditions get high marks, see over) F A C T O R S D E S C R I P T I O N - MAX. POINTS SCORE 1; Overcrowding 6 2. Disrepair r e s u l t i n g i n hazards 5 ^ Kitchen f a c i l i t i e s inadequate . or lack of private kitchen 5 . Bathroom f a c i l i t i e s inadequate or not private.; laundry overtaxed 5 Heating f a c i l i t i e s inadequate 5= or unsafe 3 ^ Inadequate natural l i g h t or v e n t i l a t i o n 3 r, Lack of safe children's play space 2 8:. Location f a r from employment 2 9< Other unsatisfactory conditions 2 TOTAL 33 Rooms i n Dwelling; f o r t h i s family only?,.. K l t c h e n shared with others? fo r t h i s family only? ,, Bathroom shared with others?: ...... L i v i n g Room? < i . . . . . . . Dining Room (Separate) ?.„•„.. ..... Check Bedrooms? 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 ( c i r c l e f o r correct number of bedrooms) R E M A R K S (a) Suitability; (evidence of unsuitability such as unrealiability in payment of debts, or instability as reflected in intemperence and family trouble, will disqualify the applicant) ..... • • o • • 0 0 0 0 9 1 (b) Present Conditions; (including impressions of housekeeping, health of family, owner-ship of furniture, or any other special f e a t u r e s ) . . . 0 . „ „ . , . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . « . . . . . O « • O O O • 1 Inspection Date...... ,.,...,.,..,.,..,..19...... PRESENT HOUSING: SCORING PROCEDURE It is suggested that the Inspector make notes in the description column during each in-spection but not try to mark the score in a l l respects until he has completed several or a l l inspections, and can sort the applicants into groups on each factor according to the relative severity of the defects observed. The most severe shall be given the maximum points in the table. The following will serve as a guide to scoring certain of the factors; (the numbers shown herein refer to the listed factors in the table) 1. Overcrowding occurs unless there is a bedroom for each two persons in the household, plus enough bedrooms so that no dependents of opposite sexes over 10 years old must share a room. 5. Score i f heating equipment is unable to maintain comfortable temperatures or liable to fire hazard i f over-taxed. 6. Do not give f u l l marks i f conditions are easy to rectify; include inspection of base-ment or attic i f any. 7. Score i f there is neither a back yard nor play lot that is easy and safe to go to. 8. Score i f journey to place of employment by public transit takes more than 30 minutes, or costs a zone fare plus the standard fare for the system. 9. Score for unsatisfactory conditions, such as harmful surroundings, special atmospheric'^ and noise hazards, etc. I l l Appendix D T H E V A N C O U V E R H O U S I N G A U T H O R I T Y FAMILY INCOME FORM (Mr.) Name of Family Head (Mrs.). (Miss) (Last Name) (First Name) (Other Names) Present Address. .Since Telephone No. (Date) (Street and Number) Marital Status of Family Head: Married ( ) Widow ( ) Widower ( ) Separated ( ) Divorced ( ) Single ( ) Date. ... 19. FAMILY COMPOSITION INFORMATION OF EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY OF FAMILY INCOME MONTHLY NET INCOME Verified Names of Persons to Reside in the Accommodation Relation to Head Date of Birth Name and Address of Employer (If school child, give school) Occupation Gross Wages or Salary Other Income (ii) Source of Other Income TOTAL MONTHLY INCOME Verified Relation to Head week(i) month Verified H E A D H E A D 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Notes: (i) For method of computing (ii) Other income includes Family Al- (iii) Total Assets $ monthly income from weekly lowances, Welfare Assistance, Pensions, Include Savings, Real Estate, Stocks earnings, see Part III of Admin- Funds from Relatives or others, Tips, and Bonds, and all other assets, istration Manual. Alimony, Bonus Monies, Life Insurance, etc. (see Part III of Administration Manual). Is baby expected?. When? Monthly Net Family Income ?. Number in Family Monthly Rent: Shelter $. Other Charges $.. Total Monthly Payment Effective Date: 112 Appendix E BIBLIOGRAPHY Books: Bradley B u e l l and associ a t e s , Community Planning f o r Human Services. Columbia U n i v e r s i t y Press, New York, 1952. Jerome K. Myers, and Bertram H. Roberts, Family and Class Dynamics i n  Mental I l l n e s s . John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1959. A l b e r t Rose, Regent Park, A Study i n Slum Clearance. Toronto U n i v e r s i t y Press, Toronto, 1958. Harold L. Wilensky and Charles N. Lebeaux, I n d u s t r i a l Society and  S o c i a l Welfare. R u s s e l l Sage Foundation, New York, 1958. A r t i c l e s ; " C i t i z e n s ' Forum—Resolved That: We Need More Subsidized P u b l i c Housing". Pamphlet 12, February I960. Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Adult Education. "Housing and L i f e " , Canadian Welfare, Volume XXVIII, No.6, December 15,1952. Jane Jacobs, "Violence i n the C i t y S t r e e t s " , Harper's Magazine, Vol.223, No.1336. September 1961. Theses: E. Fromson, J . Hansen and R. Smith, The L i t t l e Mountain Low-Rental Hous- ing P r o j e c t . Master of S o c i a l Work 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, 1959. Michael Wheeler, Evaluating the Need f o r Low-Rental Housing, Master of So c i a l Work 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, 1955. Warren A. Wilson, Housing Conditions among S o c i a l Assistance F a m i l i e s . Master of S o c i a l Work 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, 1955. Reports and Studies: The Adequacy of S o c i a l Allowances Committee, Report to the Community  Chest and Council on the Adequacy of S o c i a l Assistance Allowances i n  the C i t y of Vancouver. Vancouver, B r i t i s h Columbia, September 1958. Beverly Ayres, The Family Centered P r o j e c t of St. Paul. A Series of Three Seminars on a Demonstration P r o j e c t with Multi-Problem F a m i l i e s . Research Department, Community Chest and Council of the Greater Van-couver Area, A p r i l I960. (Unpublished seminars) Community Chest and Councils of the Greater Vancouver Area, "Recommenda-ti o n s Concerning S o c i a l Assistance Rates Paid i n Greater Vancouver", Study Report on the Adequacy of S o c i a l Assistance Allowances. Summary of the Committee's Findings. December 10, 1958. 113 Department of National Revenue, Taxation D i v i s i o n , I960 Taxation  S t a t i s t i c s . The Queen's P r i n t e r , Ottawa. Leonard C. Marsh, Rebuilding a Neighbourhood. The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Vancouver 1950. Vancouver Housing Au t h o r i t y , Annual Report 1959« Vancouver. Vancouver Housing Au t h o r i t y , Annual Report I960. Vancouver. Vancouver Housing A s s o c i a t i o n , B u l l e t i n #34. Vancouver, February, 19 Vancouver Housing A s s o c i a t i o n , B u l l e t i n #40. Vancouver, October, 1959 Vancouver Housing A s s o c i a t i o n , B u l l e t i n #43. Vancouver, June, I960. "Vancouver Sun" Research D i v i s i o n , Factual Inventory of B r i t i s h  Columbia. Michael Wheeler, A Report on Needed Research i n Welfare i n B r i t i s h  Columbia, Vancouver Community Chest and Council, 1961. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0302582/manifest

Comment

Related Items