Liveability and sustainable design in higher density inner urban housing in

Mamun Rashid

A thesis submitted in fulfilment

of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Faculty of the Built Environment

University of New South Wales

March 2011 ii 1 December 2011 1 December 2011

1 December 2011 Abstract The wider context for this study is the premise that higher density living has been viewed relatively unfavourably in Australia - given the small proportion of urban populations living in denser inner urban areas. In Sydney it is however apparent from census data that more people now chose to live in inner city areas than before, and that recently the rate of residential development is usually higher in these areas than for the as a whole. This research investigates sustainable design and liveability factors in a representative inner urban setting, taking into consideration both the approaches of architects responsible for the design of the Victoria Park, Sydney precinct and user’s experiences, preferences and satisfactions living there. At question, is: liveability experience in medium density inner city forms and precincts which have been conceived according to environmentally sustainable design principles. The sustainable design literature appears to be polarised around arguments for architectural solutions that are climatically responsive and/or engineered to make efficient uses of all building resources. While liveability factors have been studied in housing generally, medium-high density inner urban housing has not been given due consideration (including the neighbourhood setting). It is argued here that comprehending this gap in the literature, and better relating theory to application, requires a better understanding of user perceptions in these settings. A representative range of residential buildings in Victoria Park was selected as case studies - since this development is considered a model of a successful transformation of a neglected inner city precinct. Moreover, the varied range of multi-storied buildings also allows for an evaluation of a central theme in this work: the affect of height and formal arrangement of buildings on user experience. Specifics include issues of thermal comfort indoors and the appropriateness of outdoor spaces, as well as reflections on ecological and energy-efficiency design elements, and the influence of both pro-environmental beliefs and past experiences on the selection of housing. The varying height & size of building complexes in the precinct allow for a thorough investigation of the potential effect of this parameter. These goals were addressed through a multi-dimensional methodology: via observation of temporal behaviours in the common spaces (and photographic recordings) of the setting, analysis of the envelope form of buildings and the layout of complex clusters of buildings, occupant surveys, and interviews with architect designers. The overall results suggest that where architect design intentions have sustainability in mind, the socio-psychological experience of users in such a setting is generally positive. The importance of design features such as dwelling layout is validated. Since outdoor/neighbourhood evaluations stand out prominently, it can be hypothesised that if the relationship between the inside and outside increases the physical and psychological connectivity between the two it can increase the satisfaction of higher density living. What is more salient to the specific purpose of this study is the relative insignificance of living on a different floor level or in a different form of building complex to overall satisfaction with higher density inner-urban housing that has been designed with sustainability in mind. It is always possible that some people have preselected the format that better suits them in the first place. Yet overall this signifies that attempts made to design the context around buildings eco-sensitively and integrate greenery into the setting, as well as to introduce variety in building height and layout, would be likely to satisfy a wide range of users - and be socially sustainable as a form of dense urban living.

iii iv Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements are due first and foremost to my family and friends for their patience, tolerance and good humour throughout the journey.

This dissertation would not have been possible if not for the guidance and support of my supervisor, Robert Samuels. I would also like to thank him for his sound advice whenever it was needed, and careful reading of this manuscript. I would also like to thank Bruce Judd for sharing his housing expertise and thought-provoking discussions.

Special mention here of Simon Pinnegar at City Futures Research Centre, University of New South Wales (UNSW), who shared with me his thoughts and past experience; Andrew Tice also at City Futures Research, who helped me with some of the statistical analysis; Nancy Marshall at UNSW, who helped me with the questionnaire; Harry Margalit, Head, , for his encouragement; Catherine de Lorenzo & Christine Steinmetz, Director of Postgraduate Research, Faculty of the Built Environment, UNSW, for their support during the review process and in the final submission stage; Gina Schien Administrative Assistant from the Graduate Research School, for her great helpfulness all through the process.

I owe a debt also to the individuals at Landcom, who granted me access to some of their records, drawings and freely answered my queries, particularly Armineh Mardirossian, Director, Sustainability & Policy, Landcom; Robert Kennedy, Director, Victoria Park; Mike Williams, Development assistant , Victoria Park.

A special acknowledgment is necessary for all the respondents of the research survey who took time to fill up the lengthy questionnaire. Thanks also go to the architects who showed their support and cooperation. Special mention here, of architect Kevin Driver at Turner Associates, who provided me with the plans and who talked me through their projects at Victoria Park; architect Bolles Wilson, whose work I have admired since my student years in architectural school; Chris Johnson, ex-NSW Government architect, for his stimulating discussion.

Finally, this research has benefited tremendously from the prestigious UNSW Global Scholarship, awarded to me by the University of New South Wales (UNSW).

v vi Table of contents Abstract iii Acknowledgements v Table of contents vii List of Tables xii List of Figures xiii List of Appendices xviii

Chapter 1 : Introduction

1.1. Background history and development of the research idea 1

1.2. Research rationale 4

1.3. Liveability and sustainable design: briefly defined 6

1.4. Aim, research questions and objectives 7

1.5. Research methods and site selection 8

1.6. Limitations 10

1.7. Thesis structure and chapter outline 11

Chapter 2 : Review of literature and background

2.1. Understanding the context in time and place 13 2.1.1. Back to the city trend and re-popularity of the inner city 14 2.1.2. The restructuring of the economy 17 2.1.3. Changes in socio-demographics of inner areas 19 2.1.4. Disillusion with suburbia and dual aspirations 21 2.1.5. Changing form of aesthetics 24 2.1.6. Environmental sustainability, inner city dwelling, lifestyle, 28 and pro-environmental values 2.1.7. Conclusion 43

vii 2.2. Overview- the changing nature of housing and dwelling form 45 in inner areas

2.2.1. Shifting views - form to place based cognition 46 2.2.2. Emergence of ESD, liveability and pro-design issues in 55 strategies and policy discourses 2.2.3. Forms of higher density dwellings 69 2.2.4. Uplifting ‘good design’ through legislation 72 2.2.5. Summing up - implications of higher density city living 80

2.3. Conceptions of ‘good’ urban form, aspects of liveability and sustainable design 87 2.3.1. Functionalities of urban block and spaces 88 2.3.2. Social attributes of urban dwelling form and liveability 98 2.3.3. Sustainable design practices and perimeter block 104 2.3.4. Sustainable design of green open space in higher density 107 setting 2.3.5. Position taken in this research on deterministic 121 approaches 2.3.6. Conclusion 126

Chapter 3 : Design and methodology of the study 127

3.1. Study area 127 3.1.1. Justification for the study area selection 127 3.1.2. History of the place 132 3.1.3. Aspects of the master plan scheme 132 3.1.4. Phase strategy 133 3.1.5. Energy-efficiency and passive design features 135 3.1.6. Courtyards, outdoor spaces & greenery in the scheme 137 3.1.7. Perimeter block scheme – orientation, appearance & 140 potentials viii 3.1.8. Explanation of the groups 141

3.2. Research philosophy, strategy & methods 145

3.3. Observation - exploratory & systematic 147 3.3.1. Methods & error reductions 149 3.3.2. Utilising observation data 153

3.4. Interview 153 3.4.1. Aim & structure 154 3.4.2. Conducting the Interview 154 3.4.3. Utilising the Interview 154

3.5. Survey methodology 155 3.5.1. Population and sample 155 3.5.2. Standardised survey questionnaire 156 3.5.3. Survey method & questionnaire design 157 3.5.4. Questionnaire structure and specific aim of the questions 161

3.6. Analytic design for questionnaire 162 3.6.1. Predictors of overall residential satisfaction - regression 163 analysis & factor analysis 3.6.2. Meeting Assumptions - factor analysis & regression 163 analysis 3.6.3. Relationships between groups - chi-square tests & t-tests 166 3.6.4. Environmental Fit (EF) 168

3.7. Ethical considerations 170

Chapter 4 : Results, analyses and discussions 173

4.1. Description of survey respondents and their housing related 173 characteristics 4.1.1. Descriptive characteristics - Socio-demographic-economic 174 data 4.1.2. Difference in characteristics relative to height and 183 complex groups

ix 4.1.3. Occupancy patterns of housing 191 4.1.4. Difference in occupancy patterns relative to height & 196 complex 4.1.5. Housing experiences 200 4.1.6. Differences in housing experiences relative to height & 202 complex

4.2. Predictors of overall residential satisfaction - results, analysis, and discussion 208 4.2.1. Preparation of dependent and independent variables 208 4.2.2. Regression analysis 212 4.2.3. Discussion 216

4.3. Residents perceptions of aspects related to dwelling - results, analyses, and discussions 219 4.3.1. Satisfaction with dwelling spaces - relationships with 219 height / complex groups & interpreting mean scores

4.3.1.1 Comparing mean scores of dwelling height groups 220

4.3.1.2 Interpreting mean scores in dwelling height groups 221

4.3.1.3 Comparing mean scores dwelling complex groups 229

4.3.1.4 Interpreting mean scores in dwelling complex 232 groups

4.3.1.5 Shared perceptions across height and complex 237 groups

4.3.2. View aspects - preferences & impact of view types 243

4.3.2.1 Preferences of views 243

4.3.2.2 Impact of view types on levels of satisfaction with 245 views 4.3.3. Balcony aspects - activities & height group / complex 248 group relationships

4.3.3.1 Balcony aspects - activities 249

4.3.3.2 Balcony use and relationship with dwelling height or 252 x complex type

4.4. Environmental experiences of outdoor spaces - results, analyses, and discussions 257 4.4.1. Evaluation of environmental experience 257

4.4.1.1. Importance of parks and courts 258

4.4.1.2. Satisfaction of parks & court - relationship with 258 height & complex groups

4.4.1.3. Use of parks and court - relationship with the height 260 & complex groups

4.4.1.4. Environmental Fit (EF) - relationship with the height 262 & complex groups

4.5. Pro-environment activities - results, analysis, and discussion 267

4.5.1. Introduction 267

4.5.2. Importance & satisfaction 268

4.5.3. Environmental Fit (EF) of pro-environmental behaviors 269

Chapter 5 : Conclusions 273 5.1. Key findings - implications

5.2. Implications for policymakers and practitioners

5.3. Future directions

References 285

xi List of Tables

Table 3.5.1: Population sampled in the precinct 155

Table 3.6.1: Environmental fit (EF) score calculation 169

Table 4.1.1: Proportion of respondents by living environment in the Victoria Park 175

Table 4.1.2: Chi-square tests examining the effects of dwelling height on socio- 185 demographic-economic characteristics

Table 4.1.3: Chi-square tests examining the effects of dwelling complex on socio- 186 demographic-economic characteristics

Table 4.1.4: Chi-square tests examining the effects of dwelling complex/height on 195 occupancy pattern.

Table 4.1.5: Chi-square tests examining the effects of dwelling complex/height on 207 housing experience.

Table 4.2.1: Factor analysis results for DV - overall residential satisfaction 210

Table 4.2.2: Factor analysis results for Factor 1 - security, management & facilities 211

Table 4.2.3: Factor analysis results for Factor 2 - neighbourhood features 211

Table 4.2.4: Factor Analysis Results for Factor 3 - dwelling design 212

Table 4.2.5: Matrix of explanatory Variables 213

Table 4.2.6: Significant predictors of overall residential satisfaction - hierarchical 216 regression analysis results

Table 4.3.1: T-test results, relationship between dwelling height typology with 241 satisfaction of aspects of dwelling design

Table 4.3.2: T-test results, relationship between dwelling complex typology with 242 satisfaction of aspects of dwelling design

xii List of Figures

Figure 2.1.1: On left a view of Skyline of Sydney CBD from the Harbour bridge. On 16 right a view from an inner area

Figure 2.1.2: Harbour front amenities near and Harbour 16 Bridge add to the desirability of Sydney inner areas

Figure 2.1.3: Advancing high-rises as family friendly by developers considering the 19 current trend for inner city lifestyle aspiration of families

Figure 2.1.4: Having an outdoor seating for coffee shops is common characteristics 23 of Inner areas

Figure 2.1.5: Top & below on left. In Victoria Park, greenness of neighbourhood is 27 highlighted in advertisements

Figure 2.1.6: Who Cares about the Environment in 2006? - A survey of NSW 32 population’s environmental knowledge, attitudes and behaviours

Figure 2.1.7: Energy requirement and energy intensity as a function of annual per- 39 capita income

Figure 2.1.8: Australian greenhouse gas emissions, (Left) production and (Right) 41 consumption categories

Figure 2.2.1: A section of Sydney’s ‘global arc’ 48

Figure 2.2.2: There goes the neighbourhood 52

Figure 2.2.3: Towering forms of apartment buildings hovering disproportionately over 53 lower density inner neighbourhoods

Figure 2.2.4: Top. The Sydney Opera House highlighted in the cover of current 61 strategy for Sydney, City of Metropolitan Strategy

Figure 2.2.5: Existing housing density in Sydney city. Map showing dwelling density 63

Figure 2.2.6: Existing housing density and future trends in Sydney city 64

Figure 2.2.7: Vertical villages in the city, a feature in a local daily on the recent 67 surge in the development of higher density apartments in Sydney

Figure 2.2.8: Selected dwelling forms of Inner Sydney. 71

Figure 2.2.9: Resources by NSW Department of illustrating good design 75 practices

Figure 2.2.10: Pages from Improving Flat Design: a progress report 76

xiii Figure 2.2.11: Effects of density can be reduced skilfully by design 82

Figure 2.3.1: Paris example of courts and urban form 89

Figure 2.3.2: Aerial views of close knit urban blocks and courts 89

Figure2.3.3: Perimeter blocks in Rotterdam 92

Figure 2.3.4: ’s idea of a contemporary city & overall view of stand- 94 alone forms of Pruitt-Igoe in St. Louis and its demolition in 1972

Figure 2.3.5: Architect’s conception of communal corridor and the actual vandalised 95 conditions of Pruitt-Igoe project

Figure 2.3.6: Le Corbusier’s Unité d'Habitation block in Marseille 97

Figure 2.3.7: A section (page 12) from Residential Flat Design Code, indicating 106 courtyard apartment (perimeter block) variations

Figure 3.1.1: The design scheme has been featured in the popular media even 129 before it was completed

Figure 3.1.2: With continued reuse over the century even before Landcom took over 131 the site, it can be considered a classic brownfield development example in an inner

Figure 3.2.1: Methods used in the research 156

Figure 3.1.3: The Victoria Park master plan 132-i

Figure 3.1.4: Aerial view of Victoria Park showing the three types of complexes, 142-i greenery in the parks, courts and in street landscaping

Figure 3.1.5: Top & middle. Forms of high-rise complexes as experienced from the 142-ii streets and parks

Figure 3.1.6: Top. View of mid-rise forms from the streets and parks 142-iii

Figure 3.1.7: Top. View of low-rise complexes as experienced from the streets and 142-iv parks

Figure 3.2.1: Methods used in the research 147

Figure 4.1.1: Percentage of respondents by gender & age groups 177

Figure 4.1.2: Comparing the number of respondents by age 178

Figure 4.1.3: Household composition 179

Figure 4.1.4: Respondent’s occupation 179

Figure 4.1.5: Respondent’s place of birth 180

Figure 4.1.6: Household income groups 181 xiv Figure 4.1.7: Household income across three complex groups 187

Figure 4.1.8: Expected length of dwelling occupancy 192

Figure 4.1.9: Respondents’ dwelling size- number of bedrooms 193

Figure 4.1.10: Travel mode to dwellings by height groups 196

Figure 4.1.11: Proportion of tenancy by complex groups 197

Figure 4.1.12: Travel mode to dwellings by complex groups. 197

Figure 4.1.13: Years want to live by complex groups 198

Figure 4.1.14: Experiences of locality, respondents by previous locality 200

Figure 4.1.15: Experiences of dwelling type, respondents by previous dwelling type 200

Figure 4.1.16: Respondents’ dwelling preferences 201

Figure 4.1.17: Dwelling preferences in height groups 201

Figure 4.1.18: Experiences of locality across height groups 202

Figure 4.1.19: Future preference for dwelling forms in complex groups 203

Figure 4.3.1: Percentage of satisfaction by height groups of entry corridor and 222 storage

Figure 4.3.1 (i): Top. Design variation of corridors in the low-rise and mid-rise 222-i buildings

Figure 4.3.2: Percentage of satisfaction by height groups of living comfortable 225 condition

Figure 4.3.3: Percentage of satisfaction of kitchen ventilation 226

Figure 4.3.4: Percentage of satisfaction by height groups of bedroom comfortable 227 conditions

Figure 4.3.5: Percentage of satisfaction by height groups of balcony protection and 228 privacy

Figure 4.3.6: Percentage of satisfaction by complex groups of storage 232

Figure 4.3.7: Percentage of satisfaction by complex groups of living comfortable 233 conditions

Figure 4.3.8: Percentage of satisfaction by complex groups of kitchen ventilation 234

Figure 4.3.9: Percentage of satisfaction by complex groups of bedroom comfortable 235 conditions

Figure 4.3.10: Percentage of satisfaction by complex groups of kitchen ventilation 236

xv Figure 4.3.11: Overview of perceptions across the subgroups of dwelling aspects by 242-i complex groups and height groups

Figure 4.3.12: Similarity of internal layout crossover scheme of Le Corbusier’s Unité 242-ii d'Habitation apartment with Airia in Victoria Park

Figure 4.3.2.1: Preferred views from dwelling 244

Figure 4.3.2.2: Means plot of view satisfaction showing difference between view 246 types

Figure 4.3.2.3: Percentage of responses by view types 247

Figure 4.3.3.1: Balcony activities 250

Figure 4.3.3.2: Balcony use by height groups 252

Figure 4.3.3.3: Louvre use in balcony by height groups 253

Figure 4.3.3.4: Balcony use by complex groups 255

Figure 4.3.3.5: Louvre use in balcony by complex groups 255

Figure 4.3.3.6: Various types of movable devices are used for environmental control 256-i in the balconies

Figure 4.4.1: Parks & court - satisfaction by height groups 259

Figure 4.4.2: Parks & courts - satisfaction by complex groups 260

Figure 4.4.3: Use of parks & courts by height groups 261

Figure 4.4.4: Use of parks & courts by complex groups 269

Figure 4.4.5: Experience evaluations across groups 263

Figure 4.4.6: EF scores in percentage by height groups 264

Figure 4.4.7: EF scores in percentage by complex groups 264

Figure 4.4.8: Top. View of internal courtyards in low-rise complexes 264-i

Figure 4.4.9: Outdoor activities during late afternoon, near the recycled stormwater 264-ii sculpture in the central park.

Figure 4.4.10: Lifestyle aspect: residents and their pets enjoying the outdoor spaces 264-iii a common feature in the precinct.

Figure 4.4.11: Outdoor activities indicate presence of families with children in the 264-iv precinct

Figure 4.4.12: BBQ gatherings on weekends, in the southern part of central park 264-v indicate social contact between residents

Figure 4.5.1: Attitudes change since moving to the area 268 xvi Figure 4.5.2: Satisfaction of behaviours related to recycling 268

Figure 4.5.3: Satisfaction of behaviours related to energy saving measures 269

Figure 4.5.4: Satisfaction of behaviours related to water saving measures 269

Figure 4.5.5: EF scores of recycling behaviour in percentage. 270

Figure 4.5.6: EF scores of energy saving behaviour in percentage 270

Figure 4.5.7: EF scores in percentage of water saving behaviour 270

xvii Appendices

Apendix 1 : List of published conference papers relating to this research, 2005- 2009. Conference paper attached: Reassessing ‘people and residential environment’: socio-spatial aspects of built forms. Conference paper attached: Where is the sustainable buzz? : design and liveability of higher density urban housing in inner Sydney.

Apendix 2 : Study area Map of Sydney showing CBD & study area Layouts of selected complexes

Apendix 3 : Survey and interview HREA (Human research ethics advisory) approval Cover letter from Landcom Project information statement Consent letter Survey questionnaire Interview questions

Apendix 4 : Statistical Analyses (SPSS) Factor analysis Regression analysis

xviii Chapter 1 : Introduction

1.1. Background history and development of the research idea

Sydney, one of the earliest cities of Australia, boomed when gold was discovered in 1851. The however was established much earlier, in 1842. People began pouring into the city, not only from Europe and California, but from China as well. At present the Sydney Metropolitan area is seen as one of the largest cities in the world in terms of area; at more than 4,000 square kilometres it is equal in size to London and almost twice that of New York City (City of Sydney, 2011). Today, the Sydney Metropolitan area is home to about 4 million people. In terms of cultural amalgamation, Sydney has emerged as a hybrid multicultural city with people from 180 nations, speaking 140 languages (City of Sydney, 2011; Tourism New South Wales, 2010).

Presently, the inner city areas present a unique opportunity for a sustainable and liveability housing evaluation study since this residential fabric portrays a transitional phase of morphological development. It is also evident from census data that more people now live in inner city areas than before and that recently the rate of residential development has usually been higher in inner city areas than for metropolitan areas as a whole (ABS, 1996, 2005). Moreover, inner city areas contain a mix of dwelling types: separate houses, row and terrace houses, and low, medium and high-rise apartments. Old buildings are renovated; and new constructions are on-going. Given the contemporary focus on sustainable housing solutions to cater to different socio- economic and socio cultural groups, understanding the spatial dynamics and living experiences of residents in the inner city is a vital area of interest.

With this holistic understanding and the idealistic notion that smaller systems, here smaller buildings and communities, are “both more efficient and more humane” (Sale, 1980: 18), the research started essentially as an evaluation into the social sustainability of dwellings of inner areas of Sydney. Within this general notion the study then elaborated the idea that lower-rise apartment forms (or separate houses) might be more sustainable than other larger forms of inner urban dwellings.

However, prior to the formation of any theoretical and methodological constructs for this present research, an extensive reconnaissance exploration of the dwelling forms in many Sydney inner areas was made. Other than concentrated older with their characteristic historical terraces, extensive changes in housing form were observed.

Chapter 1 | 1 Clearly, a common feature of inner city housing is the low proportion of separate houses in comparison to dwellings in higher-rise apartment blocks. Moreover, the presence of large tracts of now disused industrial land has presented the unique opportunity for the brownfield of such inner areas with a range of mid- rise, high-rise and higher density structures. The census data too has indicated a continued sharp rise in trends toward residential buildings of four or more storeys (ABS, 1996, 1999, 2006). High-rise apartment living is now in vogue in areas near the CBD - as evident in the advertisements by developers.

Consequently, a present-day understanding is that instead of searching for one definitive sustainable urban form, the emphasis should be on how to determine which forms are suitable in any given locality. Similarly, concentrating solely on urban scale solutions offer only a partial solution to the understanding. Thus different scales, from the house, through to the block, the neighbourhood, the district, city and region all need to be considered (Frey, 1999; Jenks, Burton, & Williams, 1996; Lawrence, 2000). Sustainability of urban form discourses has also shifted away from the formalistic approach of finding a sustainable form to studying the effects of urban forms on ecology, natural resources, social conditions, behaviour and economic well-being (Blowers, 1993; Elkin, McLaren, Hillman, & Friends of the Earth., 1991; Williams, Burton, & Jenks, 2000).

Liveability of ‘place’ is increasingly considered as equally important to the formal aspects of architectural sustainability, as observed by Elkin et al. (1991:12), ‘in terms not only of its form and energy-efficiency, but also its function, as a place for living’. The generic understanding is that the focus therefore has to be not only on the efficient design of architectural and urban form (whether high-rise/low-rise/detached) but on lifestyle aspirations and expectations. Education and knowledge transfer to dwelling users, and incentives to live sustainably - and ultimately on understandings of how to satisfy deep-rooted liveability and complex habitability factors without taking away the same opportunities for later generations are also to be considered.

The continued sustenance of varied forms of multi-storied dwellings is reliant on increasing acceptability and changes in lifestyle aspirations of users in the inner areas. Distinction in aspiration of urbanites of inner areas with that of the general population, evolving over the years, is now being noted by both developers and academics (Bounds & Morris, 2006; SMH, 2003; D. P. Smith & Butler, 2007).

Chapter 1 | 2 Therefore, there is a need for a paradigm shift or extension in current urban housing solutions. With the shifting trend (as exhibited in the inner areas of Sydney towards low to high-rise forms) and focusing on the concept of sustainable design it is appropriate now to investigate - from the residents' perspectives and experiences - the success of this mix of forms of housing in such neighbourhood settings.

Simply stated, the issue motivating this present research is the apparent gap in our holistic understanding of ‘sustainable design’. The sustainable design literature appears to be polarised around arguments for architectural solutions that are climatically responsive and/or engineered to make efficient uses of all building resources (Mendler, Odell, Hellmuth Obata & Kassabaum., 2000; P. F. Smith, 2001; Szokolay, 2004; Turrent, 2007). This is also obvious in architectural practice, where sustainable design is generally construed as being ‘ecologically sustainable’, or designated as green design. But sustainable design is not only about physical and spatial features. Many misconceptions exist that have created barriers to its wide acceptance (Wittmann, 1997). On the other hand, while liveability factors have been studied with respect to residential environments generally, medium-high density inner urban housing (including the neighbourhood setting) has not been given due consideration (Abraham, Fisher, Hessmann, & Schmitz-Guenther, 1999; Mikellides, 1980; Moore, Trulsson, & Moore, 2001; Sassi, 2005; Williams, 2007). However, some studies conducted on the medium density tend be more prescriptive and to some extent deterministic hinging on designers point of view (Marcus & Sarkissian, 1983, 1986; Zeisel& Griffin, 1975). Moreover, past studies focused on Sydney suburbs or housing did not attempt to transcend and extend socio-psychological issues to the important aspect of sustainability (King, 1971; Roseth & Auster, 1983; Thorne, 1983; Troy, 1971; Young, 1976). Given the recent trends toward inner area revival in Sydney, the form and design issues of housing appear to be little studied, which is disconcerting. However, from the planning point of view there is an emergence of current studies which now include liveability aspects of apartments, and issues concerning strata developments (Easthope& Judd, 2010; Easthope, Tice, & Randolph, 2009).

Housing, as a comprehensive field of study, needs to encompass more than the building, or even the neighbourhood setting. A satisfactory definition of housing must include the expectations, experiences and post-occupancy evaluations of the people who live in the buildings and their psychosocial needs and interactions.

Chapter 1 | 3 It is argued here that comprehending the liveability of sustainably designed buildings and complexes requires a better understanding of users' perceptions and experiences in these settings.

1.2. Research rationale

NSW planning strategies and policies over the last three decades have slowly taken up the idea of urban consolidation for existing areas of Sydney in conjunction with issues of environmental sustainability (Searle, 2004, 2007). Regions surrounding the case study location (Victoria Park in Zetland) (i.e. South Sydney, East, Inner West, and Sydney City) will have approximately 50% of the 190,000 new dwellings expected to be built by 2013 (Department of Planning, 2005). It is therefore expected that Sydney City and other inner city areas are going to accommodate a significant portion of the new dwellings in brownfields of rezoned industrial areas, similar to the study area.

There is, however, a lack of studies on inner city master planned higher density brownfield developments (McGuirk & Dowling, 2007). Major Australian works to date have focused almost entirely on sustainability outcomes of outer suburban greenfield planned settlements (Blair et al., 2003). Others, in their explanatory attempt to comprehend planned settlements, noted that the particular case study area, Victoria Park, cannot be analysed by grouping it in any of the typical categories, given its complexity and its exclusive characteristics (Dowling & McGuirk, 2005).

With this premise this present research investigates higher density housing in inner Sydney taking user satisfaction, liveability and sustainable design issues as the major points of investigation.

Currently the on-going competition for land in inner city areas has increasingly favoured the development of dwellings solely in high-rise forms. The planning approach to build beyond walk-up range, universally, within all types of urban settlement patterns, without assessing the viability in a total context: environmental, social, physical and economic, may create problems with long term viability (Searle, 2004). Now is thus a critical period to assess the nature of emerging residential areas that will play a part in the issues of social and spatial sustainable environments.

However, given the current trend towards higher density environments in inner areas in Australian cities, the solutions these settings offer have not been tested considering both subjective and objective features of these complex housing environments.

Chapter 1 | 4 Some researchers have argued that the scale and density of residential redevelopment has social limits, and that there are limitations on the capacity of the urban fabric to accommodate higher densities (Randolph, 2006; Searle, 2004). These concerns are also shared by this research.

All these aspects together have contributed to the rationale for embarking on this study on an inner area residential development which has evolved as a consequence of urban consolidation. It is arguable whether the growth of such dwellings can be maintained sustainably all over the Sydney City subregion without compromising liveability aspects.

Specifically, in the designs for Victoria Park buildings and landscaping, environmentally sustainable aspects were given great importance, yet any comprehensive research on the residents’ liveability fostered by the sustainable designs remain elusive. Clearly the awards and recognitions vested on the Victoria Park designs have generated greater public interest in such designs (AILA, 2004; Architecture Australia, 2003; Hassell, 2002; Stanisic Associates Architects, 2006). But does this popular perception have bearing in users’ perceptions of the design and spaces? Most importantly, can the ideas projected here be considered as socially and environmentally sustainable design ideas for inner areas, in general?

Intended to remove the scourge of so-called ‘ugly flat syndrome’ (AAP & SMH, 2002; Delaney, 2002) from Sydney, New South Wales legislation was promulgated in 2002 in the form of the special State Policy No. 65, (SEPP 65) with the intention of elevating design and ensuring the role of architects in the design of the higher density forms (NSW DIPNR, 2004; NSW DUAP, 2001; NSW Legislation, 2008). Consequent outcomes were: a Design Pattern book (a tool to show developers and designers examples of better designed apartment buildings); a Model Code (that gives clear advice and assistance on how to design the key elements of better designed flats) and the establishment of new Design Review Panels (to support Councils in the development approval process). Therefore, it becomes important to see whether these formulations have any effect on users’ approval in practice.

Designs from Victoria Park are exemplified as ‘good design’ in the pattern book and others publications from the NSW Department of Planning - from the point of view of sustainable design (essentially passive design aspects), and ecologically sensitive landscaping. The aspects which reflect on lived-in, day-to-day experiences, of the buildings in their context, however, require investigation; a further rationale for this

Chapter 1 | 5 present research. In other words, once issues of built form, architectural design and environmental aspects are taken care of, it is opportune to question the social sustainability (liveability) of the housing solutions after SEPP 65 became effective. This research therefore attempts to comprehend the preferences and attitudes of this growing population of inner city residents and to shed light on future sustainable dwelling designs in such areas.

Moreover, these publications focused on various formal articulations. However, the perimeter block was not explicitly supported. The studied precinct is a unique design paradigm where all the complexes were arranged in perimeter block configuration. This work, therefore, re-establishes the effectiveness of the perimeter form of configuration that has prevailed sustainably for centuries in the European contexts.

In the field of architecture, expert opinion, naturally, takes precedence over lay notions (Gifford, Hine, Muller-Clemm, Reynolds, & Shaw, 2000; Gifford, Hine, Muller-Clemm, & Shaw, 2002). But, many have argued that architects tend to generally ignore social – psychological issues and rarely utilise post-occupancy information in new projects(Lang, 1974; Lawson, 2006; Perin, 1970: 108; Sommer, 1983: 9-18). In the context of multi dwelling higher density designs in particular, the users are not present when the design process starts and the projects are generally commissioned by clients who are not users. The broad theoretical framework elaborated in this present research, and described in the author’s publication (see Appendix 1) has proceeded on the understanding that users have to be included, taking the ‘User – Architect’ and Built Form Interface as the basis for ensuring liveability experiences in sustainable designs.

1.3. Liveability and sustainable design: briefly defined

The word liveability has multivalent meanings and has come to reflect various user subjectivities and values (Newman, 1999; Pacione, 1990; Veenhoven, 1996:7-9; 2000). However some generalities can be made about the term that assists in operationalizing it to meet the daily life needs of residents in place.

Many studies use the city, sometimes the region, as the subject of liveability measurement (Kamp, Leidelmeijer, Marsmana, & Hollander, 2003). The understanding is that, liveability, at its roots, is about living. If a place is inhabited satisfactorily it must be to some extent liveable. Moreover, if liveability is about daily life satisfactions (access to daily services, transport and social activities, security, access to the outdoors, thermal comfort, visual pleasure, satisfactory accommodation, pride in place,

Chapter 1 | 6 sense of place and of community etc.), the argument made here is: the subject of measurement of ‘social sustainability’ and life quality should be at scale where people actually do most of their living - at dwelling and neighbourhood level.

In sustainability terms, the three pillars of sustainability are environmental (natural patterns and flows), economic (financial patterns and equity), and social (human, cultural, and spiritual). The goal of sustainable design is to find architectural solutions that guarantee the well-being and coexistence of these three constituent groups. According to the American Institute of Architects Committee on the Environment,

Sustainable design is a collaborative process that involves thinking ecologically —studying systems, relationships, and interactions—in order to design in ways that remove from rather than contribute to stress from systems (AIA COTE, 2009).

For this present study the term refers holistically to the understanding that,

Sustainable design is the philosophical basis of a growing movement of individuals and organizations that literally seeks to redefine how buildings are designed, built and operated to be more responsible to the environment and responsive to people (McLennan, 2004: 4).

In many ways, sustainable design is simply expanding the definition of ‘good design’ to include a wider set of issues (Broadbent, 1973; CABE, 2009; Vitruvius, Rowland, Dewar, & Howe, 1999).

History has shown, ‘that dwellings that are loved [and] enjoyed…become part of the community’s own culture, have long lives and are economically sustainable as well’ (Sassi, 2005: 8). Buildings should make a positive contribution to the social environment they inhabit, by accommodating user needs and psychological and physical well-being, while simultaneously enhancing and protecting their surrounding physical and spatial environments.

1.4. Aim, research questions and objectives

This thesis takes as its foundation the proposition that there is a mutual relationship between humans and their environment. Continuing on that theme, evaluation of multiple dwellings as a sustainable and liveable form involves taking into consideration the user’s and the architect’s viewpoints in a single platform.

Chapter 1 | 7 Within that framework, the research then adopts perceptual approach to liveability, reflecting on satisfaction and preferences to determine if a given place, designed sustainably, is also fulfilling expectations, meeting personal needs and providing degrees of contentment. The approach also reflects past empirical research regarding quality of life in other settings (Larice, 2005; Myers, 1988). The specific objective is to understand and measure the extent of life satisfactions, as a consequence of given sustainable design efforts and thus better comprehend the liveability experience of such dwelling settings.

As a place-based and evidence-based approach, it also aims to incorporate a variety of methods to produce triangulated results and avoid the validity problems of single method subjectivity of both researchers and respondents.

The following three exploratory research questions provide the conceptual framework:

To what extent do the height and building complex design in a higher density inner city residential precinct affect liveability experiences?

Are the sustainably designed aspects of such places also experienced as liveable?

To what extent do designers/architects of the study area consider social sustainability vis-à-vis users in their intent?

1.5. Research methods and site selection

In the reconnaissance phase of this study a visual survey of inner areas and their residential forms was made, and eventually, 5km from Sydney CBD, the Victoria Park precinct in Zetland, developed on derelict industrial land was selected. However, it is not only the aspects of integrated open spaces and the design features of the builtform which made this precinct a suitable study area but other environmental approaches associated with the history of the place (brownfield design, recycling building materials, passive design approaches, ecologically sensitive landscape and water sensitivity) which made it an appropriate subject matter. However, it must be clearly stated that the buildings are not overtly ‘green’ and do not have the typical physical features of sustainable architecture. But, from archival records and publications, it is apparent that a sustainable design vision was subtly at play both in the master plan and at individual design level. Systematic observation of the precinct prior to the design and

Chapter 1 | 8 methodology of the study revealed that the range and clusters of multi-storied buildings would allow for an evaluation of a central theme in the current work: the affect of height and formal arrangements in residential buildings on liveability. Moreover, Victoria Park was selected as the case study area since this development is considered a model of a successful transformation of a neglected inner city precinct.

Sustainable design aspects which were considered were related to orientation, layout, setting and most essentially the issue of built form. The formal aspects of the builtform were then approached in two modes; firstly relating to height and secondly relating to the building complex. By building complex the research refers to, a whole structure made up of interconnected or related structures set in a perimeter block formation around an internal court. The approach to height of builtform is widely studied in different context in different discipline, however, the building complex typology pursued in this research in the context of inner city was found to be absent (Conway, 1977).

An inter disciplinary methodological approach using convergent methods was necessary for the research, given the complex problem of assessing, eliciting and measuring user perceptions (preferences & satisfactions) with built forms and neighbourhood. Consequently, the combination of a review of pertinent literature, heuristic and professional experience, cross-disciplinary theoretical frameworks, an observational study of the area, and an extensive statistical analytic approach - have shaped the methodological framework.

Given the limitations of accessibility, and those inherent in doctoral research, a postal survey of users was given priority over other potential methods - given its effectiveness in eliciting information.

This study is not intended to test a single hypothesis of a cause-and-effect relationship between variables but to develop an accurate description and/or exploration of a situation and of relationships between variables. The affect of height and formal arrangements in a complex of residential buildings (in an integrated internal courtyard and extensive public open-space setting) on liveability were the main focus of the research design.

The research is set in the general background of studies which examined the relationships between resident’s satisfaction and physical and social aspects of the residential environments. Weidemann and Anderson, for instance, extended the model proposed by Marans and Spreckelmeyer for understanding residents’ responses especially satisfaction, to include behavioural intentions, behaviour and social aspects

Chapter 1 | 9 of the residential environment as well (cited in Amérigo & Aragonés, 1997; Galster, 1987). Here the focus is extended to inner city multi-family low-medium-high rise dwellings (higher density) in a sensitively designed landscape environment. In questionnaire design past studies have been consulted to identify the variables that are classically found to be important for dwelling evaluations, in addition to the ones on dwelling design related features which were theoretically necessary and heuristically salient for this research (Becker, 1974; Carson, 1975, Francescato, 1975,1974; Lawrence, 1987).

1.6. Limitations

One limitation of this study is its confinement to the inner area Sydney context. However, the aspects identified in this study are likely to be similar in other precincts and even other cities of Australia, with similar urbanisation patterns and lifestyles.

It must also be mentioned that this work represents attitudes, values and perceptions elicited in 2006, which are open to change since interpretations and understandings alter and evolve with time and changing circumstances, particularly regarding the salience of environmental features. At the time the survey was conducted, (2006 - 2007), the national political climate was not particularly conducive for discussions and other pro-environmental actions. Notwithstanding, in Australian states and at local level, initiatives were going on without government patronisation. In 2008 after the change of Federal Government environmental issues came to prominence. One of the symbolic actions occurred within nine days after being elected, namely: the government ratified and signed the Kyoto Protocol aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Since then, a fractious debate over carbon pricing and emission controls is on-going. Therefore, the environmental attitudes that have been reflected here can be expected to be evolving now.

Another limitation of this study concerns the selection of the sample population and its size. The study data was thus compared with recently published Australian Census Data 2006 for Zetland area and Australia as a whole (NSW data, where available). Though the sample allowed for meaningful analyses thus, the comparison was nonetheless necessary to raise the quality of the collected data, and thereby make it more reliable. This supporting data also helps to theoretically generalise the sample data. On the other hand the comparison with national data (Australia and NSW)

Chapter 1 | 10 highlights the uniqueness of inner-city resident characteristics (inner areas & Zetland specifically) which are different from the average national population.

The study area, is a special case scenario, designed with sustainable landscaping and territorial enclosure in mind, etc. These results thus should not be generalized to other high or low rise buildings which are not part of a comprehensively designed complex. However, the results can be generalised to similar designed setting with close proximity to greenery in inner area edges.

1.7. Thesis structure & chapter outline

The research comprises the following substantive stages:

Critically reviewing and adaptation of material from secondary sources to establish a rigorous conceptual framework as support in the analysis of urban dwelling form (Chapter 2);

Derivation of an analytical methodology to support the evaluation of higher density dwelling forms (Chapter 3);

Empirical testing of the methodology and analysis of the results. Synthesizing the survey results with that of literature, interviews with architects and heuristic experiences, to derive conclusions concerning the evaluation and design issues of dwelling forms (Chapter 4).

Chapter outline The structure of the thesis follows the three stages of the research listed above. However, the theoretical understanding that has been developed prior to the study is outlined in the refereed paper and is not repeated here (see Appendix1).

Following establishment of the context, rationale, research questions, objectives, methodology in this introductory chapter, Chapter 2, addresses the conceptual base of the project – urban dwelling form, the context in terms of urbanites and the social dynamics.

Chapter 2, in the first section argues that the dynamic, changing quality of human- environment relations need to be considered and reflect on practitioner and researcher tendencies to act as if their designs and knowledge were fixed and unchanging through time. As exemplified here, in the context of Sydney with inner-city multi-unit dwellings,

Chapter 1 | 11 what was previously seen as a negative is now an accepted form of dwelling. The chapter then looks into possible advantages of inner areas (higher density forms) in terms of environmental aspects and thereby seeks to endorse the importance of social aspects (e.g. lifestyle issues and associated attitudes and behaviours) in achieving sustainability. The second section, within the context of consolidation policies, makes an effort to comprehend the design issues for higher density housing that have come to the forefront in the discourses and are salient for this study. It studies the role of architects in the planning process and the subsequent growing role of legislation in fostering good design as sustainable design. The third section elucidates the ‘good city’ and ‘good form’ attributes of social, environmental and spatial/formal properties elaborated by many other theorists and thinkers, having found its way into current thinking on sustainability of urban form. Ideas of form which were inspired from traditional (pre-modern) cities and were adapted for the contemporary city in their current settings, were explored to set the argument for the appropriateness of the Victoria Park precinct scheme.

Chapter 3, first, identifies the study area. The major aspects considered in this section are the rationale for the study area selection, history of the place, design strategies, ESD features, sustainable design aspects which effect users and the nature of the built forms. The two modes of typology, firstly relating to height and secondly relating to the building complex, as approached in the analyses were then explained in detail. These findings overall had distinct methodological implications for the research. The second part of Chapter 3 describes in detail the research philosophy, strategy, methods, and analytical techniques employed.

Chapter 4 presents the results, analyses and discussions. Discussions have been interwoven at the end of each section following the results and analysis. The discussions delve into the problem and associate the results to specific design aspects. Architects observations elicited from the interviews were also synthesized into the discussions to comprehend the findings from the survey.

Chapter 5 concludes by briefly recapitulating the major findings, drawing conclusions, and making recommendations.

Chapter 1 | 12 Chapter 2 : Review of literature and background

2.1. Understanding the context in time and place

Most attempts to explain human-environment relationships revolve only around experiential congruence, where the desired activity could be accommodated by the given design. Mental congruence exists if an individual thinks that a particular environment will successfully accommodate his or her personal characteristics and style of life. Both types of congruence are essential to understanding the fruitfulness or lack of it in the built environment (see paper by author in Appendix 1, reassessing ‘people and residential environment’: socio-spatial aspects of built forms). Within mental congruence, lifestyle can be understood as a choice process with a suggestive potential link with housing and its setting.

The survey in this research deals solely with the experiential side, which is concerned with how well the environment actually accommodates the characteristics and behaviour of people. But a comprehensive understanding of mental congruence helps to isolate aspects to be used in the questionnaire. For example, as the following sections reveal it is no longer essential to compare the conditions of higher density dwellings with that of suburban dwelling. Or, as in the past, higher density living is no longer associated automatically with socio-psychological pathology. As opposed to public high-rise housing when people have little choice in selecting their living environment, mental congruence becomes an important issue. The questions that arise now are: What makes people associate themselves with the inner areas? What attracts people to these areas and to live in these diverse house forms? What do they expect from the dwellings in inner areas? The following sections attempt to explain these questions.

Practitioners and researchers often tend to act as if their designs and knowledge were fixed and unchanging through time. The dynamic, changing quality of human- environment relations needs to be considered. As exemplified in the context of Sydney with multiunit dwellings what was seen as a negative now is an accepted form of dwelling to the users. It may well be that multiple dwellings do not provide the physical opportunity for active and noisy recreational pursuits, but one cannot conclude that we have a situation of experiential incongruence when there is evidence of a change in behaviour; the occupants of such dwellings may prefer not to be involved with such

Chapter 2 | 13 pursuits. Moreover shared public spaces in these settlements can accommodate other needs which a single separate house in outer suburb cannot.

The following sections deal with inner city revival and factors associated with it. A number of theories and explanations have been offered for the much-mythologized inner city turnaround. What spurred this turnaround is hard to pinpoint; however several simultaneously acting and interrelated factors can be identified to help explain it. The identified factors are seen as relevant to this study in explaining people’s attitudes toward inner city living, lifestyle aspirations and the associated impact on the development of higher density housing forms. In addition, arguments for differentiating the inner city edge lifestyle from the core city are made. The attempt is to gain knowledge of an area (not known or experienced) by extrapolating from studies and observations.

The last section briefly reviews some of the Australian studies which investigate the sustainability of higher density settlements from an ecological perspective. Moreover it looks into possible advantages of inner areas (higher density forms) in terms of environmental aspects and thereby seeks to endorse the importance of social aspects (e.g. lifestyle issues and associated attitudes and behaviours) in achieving sustainability.

2.1.1. Back to the city trend and re-popularity of the inner city From the 1920s onwards, Inner Sydney was characterised by a continual decline in its population. However, 1990s saw a reversal of this long trend with the inner city population increasing, with an accompanying shift in housing preferences and development patterns. The 1996 Census revealed this dramatic shift in the long-term growth trend of Inner Sydney. It was evident from census data that the rate of residential development was higher in these areas than for metropolitan areas as a whole (Daly, 1998). This revival was assumed to be permanent and planning - by the variety of state government departments and instrumentalities that have played a part in determining the form and functionality of the metropolitan area - has operated accordingly. Since the early 1990s, the NSW State government, by seeking to contain suburban sprawl, has furthered its urban consolidation policies as the main instrument of Ecologically or ESD (Searle, 2004b). One consequence of this was the consolidation policies which were aimed at housing the growing population in the inner areas (McGuirk & O'Neill, 2002). A combination of market-led development and a state-led policy of urban consolidation took a strong grip of suburban development in Sydney. Alongside the natural shifts in demand, with an

Chapter 2 | 14 ageing population seeking accommodation closer to services and amenities, the 1990s policies of urban consolidation have provided the means by which denser living can be achieved (McGuirk & O'Neill, 2002). Despite various theories to the contrary (as argued in a later section), this has been straightforwardly achieved in the inner areas in the past. At present the turnaround and its implications on housing has become more complex than ever. This present research on inner city housing design is salient given the housing developments taking place on inner city edges.

In academic circles and popular media the attention and publicity of the shift ‘downtown’ has got to the point that it would appear many Australians are enthusiastically taking to the trendy inner city domains. Nevertheless, these new urbanites are notably a small proportion of the many who continue to choose suburbia over denser urban conditions.

A cautionary review of the figures puts this trend into perspective. The large majority of people (59 percent) still choose to live in the middle and outer suburbs of Australian capital cities. As observed by academics, suburban aspirations still remain strong among the population (Freestone, 2000; Salt, 2003; Patrick N. Troy, 1996a).

Moreover, there has been some criticism, both within the policy and academic community, that the consolidation policy is not achieving its objectives (Lewis, 1999; Searle, 2004a), and that it can be too quickly appropriated as a universal remedy for urban problems (Bunker, Holloway, & Randolph, 2005b). Concerns have also been raised on issues of increased pressure on human services in areas where consolidation has occurred (Gooding, 1990), and about the longer term implications of consolidation policies as the number of suitable development sites decline (Bunker, Gleeson, Holloway, & Randolph, 2002) especially in the inner areas of Sydney.

Recently available census data further indicates that the population growth rate for all Australian capital cities combined in 2006-07 was the highest recorded for several years (ABS, 2008). It is thus not surprising that both suburbanization and inner city densification are occurring simultaneously. However, there is no current study on the local impact of these policies and possible implications especially on the inner city housing field. A clear gap in our knowledge of the impacts of consolidation at the local level in Sydney is apparent. This present study on a master planned residential development in a southern edge inner city comes at a time when further development is planned along this economic growth corridor.

Chapter 2 | 15 Figure 2.1.1: On left a view of Skyline of Sydney CBD from the Harbour bridge. On right a view from an inner area suburb. View of CBD reaffirms closeness of nearby suburbs to the city, where city views are also marketed as ‘stunning’ by real estate agents. Source: Rashid, 2007.

Figure 2.1.2: Harbour front amenities near Harbour Bridge add to the desirability of Sydney inner areas. Source: Rashid, 2007.

Chapter 2 | 16 2.1.2. The restructuring of the economy The restructuring of the economy in the 1980s and 90s can be seen as one of the factors in explaining the re-popularity of the city. By the end of the 1980s, the economic base and class structure of Sydney had fundamentally altered. The manufacturing sector had declined considerably and the retail, service, recreation, finance and information economy had become the driving forces of the city’s economy (Fagan, 2000; Murphy & Watson, 1997; Searle & Bounds, 1999). At the close of the 1980s the Darling Harbour entertainment precinct was developed in a former port-side wasteland which is an evidence of this shift in thinking. Inner Sydney has such a vast store of facilities and attractions that it continues to grow. It is the major centre for arts and entertainment, has the greatest variety and concentration of scenic and recreational attractions, provides jobs, and pays high salaries and wages (Daly, 1998). The City of Sydney accounts for 20% of all national employment in the financial sector, 22.4% of jobs in legal services and 12.4% in accountancy (McGuirk & O'Neill, 2002, 246).

This has had huge impacts both on the office market of the CBD (and North Sydney) and on the housing market, not least to house the metropolitan area’s rapidly increasing population. In 2001 the census indicated that the area with the highest concentration of residents living in high-rise housing was located within or adjoining its capital city's CBD, possibly reflecting the employment opportunities and lifestyle amenities in those areas (ABS, 2006a).

Besides the residential expansion there has also been a major expansion of business activity in the area, much of it linked to the new economy. In Sydney, as in other global cities around the world, the explosion of the information and service sectors has created neighbourhoods where a good deal of economic activity is connected to communication and information technology. Pyrmont Ultimo is in the forefront of this phenomenon (Bounds & Morris, 2006). As reported in Sydney Morning Herald,

“...Many high profile companies in the media, telecommunications, internet, advertising and marketing have in recent years moved their corporate homes to Pyrmont, establishing the area as a dynamic and growing commercial precinct. These include Foxtel, Nokia, the Ten Network, Optus@Home, 2SM, Quicken and News Interactive” (cited in Bounds & Morris, 2006, 107).

There are also the combined man-made and natural assets of the harbour and beaches of the inner areas, which cannot be replicated in the rest of the city. Such is the iconic ‘visuality’ of Sydney harbour and its city form that it is projected in virtually

Chapter 2 | 17 every form of event or activity happening anywhere in Sydney. Sydney’s Olympic Games in 2000 were intensively mediated with the panoramic images of Sydney CBD and its harbour. Sydney harbour foreshore and skyline were repeatedly linked with segments and events and provided attractive locations - establishing backdrops to the myriad telecasts even though the stadium for the Games was located far away from CBD on a former industrial site of Auburn (Mcneill, Dowling, & Fagan, 2005).

This unique and iconic setting is celebrated on every New Year’s eve with firework displays on the Harbour Bridge (almost the first to be televised around the world). The social events along the harbour draw thousands of people. Sydney Harbour, along with New York’s Times Square, have become equally important symbols and a part of global celebration of New Year events. Farther from the harbour the high-rise apartments’ dwellers of inner Sydney can view the stupendous fireworks from their balcony without joining the crowds.

Crucially, the iconic impact of the skyline can be felt even in the distant inner areas of Zetland (study area). Here city-views are bracketed as ‘stunning views’ in the advertisement for high-rise dwellings by developers and real estate agents. A long serving Mayor of Sydney City Frank Sartor, reasserts the iconic status,

...the brand ‘Sydney’ is much stronger than the brand ‘New South Wales’ . . . this became very apparent during the Sydney Olympic bid in the early 1990s. As I participated in the bid process I became aware of how many people knew Sydney, but did not know NSW.

... while a lot of activity does happen on Sydney harbour, because it is our No.1 natural asset, events such as New Year’s Eve are conducted for all of Sydney. Families come from near and far to be part of the event - and two million watch it on television because it is an event which belongs to all Sydneysiders. Just as Bondi or Manly residents feel ownership of the Blue Mountains, so too the residents of Penrith or Blacktown, Liverpool or Campbelltown should feel that the beaches and harbour are theirs (Sartor,2001,cited in Mcneill et al., 2005, 941-942).

Being so close to the harbour side waterfront as well as 30-minutes away from the Eastern city beaches makes Sydney city a very attractive location for new urbanites. In several States, the desirability of being close to water may have been a factor in the location of high-rise apartment blocks constructed over this period. In 2001, 42% of all high-rise residents in Australia lived in harbour-side local government areas in Sydney

Chapter 2 | 18 (an increase from 35% in 1981), while a further 18% lived in other Sydney beachside or waterfront local government areas (up from 13% in 1981) (ABS, 2004). In turn, these shifts are consistent with the location of high-rise units in often revitalised inner-city areas close to jobs and these city and CBD attractions.

Figure 2.1.3: Advancing high-rises as family friendly by developers considering the current trend for inner city lifestyle aspiration of families. Common assumptions that cities are not suitable for children are changing. Source: Sydney Morning Herald, 2008.

2.1.3. Changes in socio-demographics in inner areas Along with structural changes of the city’s features, changes in socio-demographic characteristics contributed to the revival and growth. The seemingly irresistible march to the fringe was a product of the Baby Boomers' progression through the family forming years, alongside the high levels of immigration since the 1950s (Daly, 1998). Now the prospect is for a slower growth-rate of families, accompanied by a steady upward shift in the median age. This section of population will not need the space (both land and housing) that the expanding families of the past have demanded. The varied housing options of the inner city appear to suit their family needs better now.

It has been predicted that Sydney’s average household size will drop from 2.65 to 2.36 people per private dwelling. Sydney City already has the smallest household size, with 1.9 people per household on average. This has implications for the quantity and nature of dwellings that are in demand. Over 100,000 dwellings have been required in Sydney

Chapter 2 | 19 in the last 20 years just to meet the need created by the reduced household size. Currently, 22 per cent of all households in Sydney are occupied by one person. By 2031, there are likely to be an additional 300,000 single person households in Sydney, representing 30 per cent of all households (DOP, 2005). Families with children are already a minority of all households. Over the next 15 years the fastest growing household types will be 'couple only' and 'lone person' households. They are expected to increase by more than 400,000 in this period. Together they would represent 54% of total households in 2031, while families with children would be only 32%. These households are concentrated in the older (over 50) and younger (under 30) age groups.

Randolph observes that planning decisions on house form have not been suitable for families with children. He observes, ‘In the process, it’s almost as if the family is being painted out of the vision of our new cities – or packed off to the fringe’ (Randolph, 2006; 2009, p: 2). Household types differ across the Sydney City subregion; however the subregion has a relatively low proportion of family households and relatively higher proportions of lone person and group households. Similarly with respect to family types within the subregion, families without children are more common than families with children. However, as anticipated within the Sydney subregion, Zetland (case study area) had a different formation of household than that of areas near Sydney’s CBD. In the 2006 Census half of the households in Zetland were family households compared with just over one-quarter (29%) in the areas near Sydney CBD (Sydney SLA). The proportion of families with children was also much higher in Zetland (28%) compared to areas near CBD (19%).

Overall the trend to smaller households is driven by the ageing of the population, increasing longevity and the slower rate of younger people forming couples. Also the increased divorce rate drives a demand for smaller housing as couples separate. However, Sydney City has a relatively younger population and a much higher income level than the State wide population.

These changes in household type and therefore occupancy rates mean that total demand for housing will be greater than population growth and a wider mix of housing types will be required. Assumptions that cities are not suitable for children are changing as well. As observed, within the Sydney City region itself, there is a sizeable variation, which means making broad base assumptions will not suffice. The housing types mix required for inner Sydney would be quite different from the ones near the CBD (within

Chapter 2 | 20 Sydney City subregion) or for the middle suburbs. Much detailed area-wise (individual suburb or local council) investigation is therefore needed.

People living in inner city areas do so for many reasons, such as being close to work and places of entertainment, living near friends or relatives, or simply having a preference for the ambience of inner city living. Various indicators in earlier censuses reinforce the popular stereotype that many inner city residents are relatively young and financially advantaged (ABS, 1996). It is likely that the high costs associated with inner city housing, and the general preferences for families with children to live in suburbs, would lead to differences between the socio-economic characteristics of inner city residents and residents of metropolitan areas generally. However, the current data (ABS 2006) indicates that there is a variation of socio-demographic profile even within inner areas which is an important indicator of lifestyle preference variation.

2.1.4. Disillusion with suburbia and dual aspirations This factor involves a slowly developing dissatisfaction with the suburban dream and negative externalities of sprawl. Many dissatisfied urbanites have made the move from suburbia to the city. By the beginning of the 1990s, there had been a significant cultural shift in terms of what was defined as a desirable residential location in Sydney. In academic language, this movement can be seen both as a “push” factor with regard to decreasing preferences for suburban living, as well as “pull” factor reflective of the amenities and qualities desired in more ‘authentic’ urban environments at the centre.

In an excerpt from Larice’s work on the liveability of urban North American neighbourhoods, he narrates from his personal childhood experience of suburban living which echoes the slowly increasing discontent:

“... As kids, we played in the streets – our front yards were only for “show” and parks were too far from home. Otherwise we watched a lot of afternoon television. Suburban insularity provided little opportunity for real-world discovery and personal growth. When we went to college, we all went our separate ways and voluntarily escaped suburbia for the city” (Larice, 2005, p:9).

In Ley’s (1996: 82) work this sensibility is described as ‘‘a common structure of feeling’’ for the inner city. This sensibility is also reflected in Caulfield’s (1989) work, which captured the gentry’s preference for valuing the inner city and denigrating suburbia. In the latter work, this is linked to the idea of gentrified areas as emancipator spaces, with ‘gentrifiers’ developing meaning oriented to an alternative urban future and lifestyle, while suburbs are viewed as bland, homogeneous, hierarchical and conservative (cited

Chapter 2 | 21 in Bounds & Morris, 2006, p:100). Writing 30 years ago, Gouldner (1979) prophetically identified the distinctive characteristic of the new urban middle class as its ‘cosmopolitanism’ (cited in Bridge, 2001). Others have picked up this identity and portray the global Sydney resident as a cosmopolite (Wark, 1999; Macken, 2002b), a figure who, equipped with various class and taste capacities, performs ‘worldliness’ through consumption. It has been described that the urbane resident of global Sydney embraces and accepts willingly the challenge of new media flows, whereas Sydney’s suburban culture ‘is a museum of past modes of urbanity, filtered of anything too frivolous or hare-brained, but denuded too of a certain complexity and innovative spirit’ (Wark, 1999: 152). As journalist and academic Craig McGregor (1999) writes in the Sydney Morning Herald :

Sydney, the is a sprawling slums-and-citadels which is divided against itself: between the underclass Infoproles, the new information proletariat which has been locked out of the century by lack of the skills/education/resources that the new era demands, and the Global Surfers, the techno-elite who surf the internet, the computer world and post-industrial society with consummate ease. (cited in Mcneill et al., 2005: 938)

To comprehend inner urbanite evolving preferences for dwelling and associated changes in lifestyle it was necessary to study the process of gentrification, since the inner city turnaround started in ‘working class’ neighbourhoods. With the shifts in industrial and manufacturing bases towards the outer suburbs, in the inner suburbs which housed the working class, class dynamics of neighbourhoods began to change - involving working-class displacement or voluntary departure. A substantial proportion of Sydney’s population either desired or was prepared to live in newly designed higher density developments in the inner city. Suburban living was no longer viewed as necessarily a superior option (Bounds & Morris, 2006).

Later as the revival gained momentum higher density residential developments in the form of isolated apartment buildings and large complexes took shape. With continued pressure as the inner core was ‘condensed’ large brownfield areas were converted into residential developments in and around the inner city edges.

However, all inner areas of the city should not be seen as one single entity in terms of character of urban form and lifestyle. Distinctions between the dense core and lower density surrounding areas became more visible. Two decades ago Joel Garreau, a reporter by profession and chronicler, based on his exploration observed the

Chapter 2 | 22 distinctiveness of similar types of edge spaces in cities in America in his book ‘Edge City: Life on the New Frontier’ (Garreau, 1992; The Garreau Group, 2008),

How many people in America, after all, live right in the old downtown? Fewer than live within sight of that Edge City landmark...... At the same time, Edge City often does not meet the expectations of traditional suburbanites, either...... It is the creation of a new world, being shaped by the free in a constantly reinvented land.

In similar vein, Architect Chris Johnson (Johnson, 2002a), formerly Executive Director of (NSW) contends that there is a differentiation of people’s preferences for dwellings between inner areas. He implicates mixed lifestyles with aspirations of suburbia and the city. He suggests that people in the very centre may prefer garden-less apartments, while an increasing number are looking to combine a small suburban garden with an urban lifestyle.

The following sections will therefore make an attempt to understand the disconnection between the lifestyles of people of core areas and areas near to it. However, the discourses are limited to the effect of lifestyle on their aspiration for their form of living.

Figure 2.1.4: Having an outdoor seating for coffee shops is common characteristic of Inner areas. Sydney inner urbanites take pleasure in outdoor seating, whether it is in large public space or in a small street corner coffee shop. Source: Rashid, 2007.

Chapter 2 | 23 2.1.5. Changing form of gentrification aesthetics Suburbs which are very close to the core city were most desirable in the early stage of inner city revival. Districts in inner Sydney— Balmain, Rozelle, Glebe, Paddington and Newtown which consisted of Victorian and Edwardian terraces and detached houses, some with their characteristic iron-lace balconies - went through a process of gentrification (Bridge, 2001).

In the early days, gentrification was carried out by lower paid professionals (teachers, academics, nurses, writers, creative staff in advertising or managers) and involved modest upgrading of the property (Zukin, 1982). In his article, Jager pulls together the links between social class, aesthetics and housing form (Jager, 1986). It points to tension between economic capital and social representation. It is originally thought to arise from the desire for certain sections of the new middle class to achieve social distinction. They have insufficient material capital to do so through obvious displays of wealth (considerable wealth is its own social marker). The new middle class mark themselves out through a cultural strategy that involves displays of discernment and ‘good taste’. This cultural strategy relies on the deployment of cultural capital. Many of them were interested in good food and arts – the type of cultural construction that came with gentrification. It made inner urban neighbourhoods interesting again to a broad section of middle class.

Sydney is ever talking of Sydney: its food, fashion, football, news, style, architecture, language, film, schooling, health, books, religion, sexuality, drugs, music. This talk is propelled in and around the conversation creators and leaders: electronic media presenters, articulate popular politicians, business leaders, community activists, newspaper columnists and those that run the arts. These are the agents of inner Sydney’s creation and re-creation as a spatial community of practice . . . (O’Neill and McGuirk, 2002: 248).

Moreover, to transform working-class houses into a display of bourgeois ‘good taste’ involved emphasizing the historical qualities of the house by stripping back to the original and renovating the interior according to their contemporary modern ‘taste’. Jager observes: ‘In this way the retrieval of history becomes an instance of modernity’ (Jager, 1986, 88). This new-romanticism of urban conservation incorporates the most modern functional elements.

Bridge (2001) in his qualitative research conducted in three districts in Sydney’s inner west — Balmain/ Rozelle, Glebe and Newtown - narrates some of the observations as

Chapter 2 | 24 made by real estate agents involved in dealing with gentrified properties and the reasons for these alterations:

In their original form, in these Victorian terraces status was seclusion, now status means opening up the home to the outside and the appropriation of the outside world within the home. Several agents talked about the importance of skylights to ‘open up’ the house.

There has been a move from seclusion to display by relocating the kitchen inside as opposed to a traditional layout where it was hidden in the back. As mentioned by one estate agent ‘. . . but now kitchens are on display . . . aromas or whatever, it doesn’t matter if they fill the house now, that’s part of it (Bridge, 2001: 96).

The highest status inclusion of the outside in Sydney is a harbour bridge or city skyline view. The structure of the Victorian terrace may undergo considerable structural renovation to capture this asset.

Finally, the greater informality in contemporary living of middle classes means that separate dining and living rooms are unnecessary. Furthermore, the open-plan living space leading into a courtyard or veranda captures most of the sunlight, ‘to bring the outdoors in’, as one agent put it. Whereas the original design and cultural resonances of Victoriana emphasised privacy, the contemporary gentrification aesthetic in Sydney seeks to capitalize on the natural resource of the Australian sun and open up the house to light. Internally they used primary colours in interior walls to highlight or to focus on some spaces. Most of the interiors were done in the modernistic way of having light colours and straight line fixtures and furnishings.

Interestingly, the modernization activity of the gentrified properties involving alterations made to the traditional forms and plans were in response to their cultural needs and climatic reasons to suit Australian conditions. These actions of passive design of bringing natural light can be seen as a tenet of sustainable design (Szokolay, 2004). These alterations are based on a modernist design rational as exemplified by the residential works of modern masters like Corbusier and Aalto. They rejected the modern planning tradition of repetitive forms of suburbs and modern aspects of architecture helped shape their cultural aspirations in house form.

In Bridge’s (2001) study the agents claimed that the resistance to 1960s and 1970s mass-produced fittings and its effect on the perception of the value of the house even extends to investment properties (ones bought to rent out rather than occupy).

Chapter 2 | 25 Gentrifiers buying investment properties do not want to be associated (even as landlords) with 1960s and 1970s tastes. Gentrifiers’ dislike of the alterations and fittings of the 1970s has been further noted in Ley’s work. Ley (1996) argues that 1970s fittings represent mass production and homogeneity. For Ley this extends to the nature of location. The suburbs were mass produced and homogenous. The gentrified inner urban neighbourhood stands apart from the suburbs and symbolizes particularity and authenticity. In Bourdieu’s language it represents distinction, a setting apart from the conformity of the middle-class suburbs (Ley, 1996). Since the gentrifiers are seen as trendsetters it is assumed that these ideas and preferences have found their way into new residential buildings of later developments (Bridge, 2001). These issues are indicated by agents in their marketing advertisements of apartments in the inner areas and in the case study area.

However, as gentrification evolves, these social groups have been increasingly excluded and the wealthier professionals have bought into the aesthetic where ‘taste’ has been converted into ‘price’ (Bridge, 2001:93). As the process consolidates, higher paid professionals are attracted. Bridge (2001) in his study of the gentrification of three Sydney inner neighbourhoods found that the socio-demographic profile of the incomers was now overwhelmingly professionals involved in business, bank or engineering firms. Another study on the Sydney inner areas of Pyrmont and Ultimo has shown that gentrification no longer invariably means the displacement of an industrial working class and its replacement by a wealthy, young middle class who restore the traditionally working class housing. Rather, it is now a multi-class phenomenon and the accommodation offered is often in apartment blocks built by major developers that differ significantly in quality, prestige and view (Bounds & Morris, 2006).

Now gentrification can take a variety of forms including 'the construction of new condominium towers' near the CBD as observed by Smith (1996:39) in North American cities. The process is also more ‘commodified’, involving investors with local builders turning over properties in a gentrified style. When the core city neighbourhood was fully ‘established’, side by side large developers got involved in converting large former industrial or commercial land to new inner-city residential communities. When the States became involved larger and larger amounts of capital followed the gentrification aesthetic. Several inter-related factors lie behind this transformation, including economic restructuring; urban consolidation or policies; State intervention in the development of brownfield sites using principally the housing demand of the new middle class; the rent gap of rust belt zones and the windfall profits of private

Chapter 2 | 26 developers who restructure and redevelop inner-city areas (Bounds & Morris, 2006). Rather than the process being driven by the gentrifiers themselves, urban regeneration at this stage has been driven by influential construction companies cum-property developers in collaboration with the Federal government, the NSW State government and the Sydney City Council. As articulated in Smith’s rent gap hypothesis this renewed type of gentrification is driven mostly by economic forces as opposed to cultural process (Smith, 1996:51–91). Bounds and Morris (2006) have defined it as ‘second wave gentrification’. Appealing to the ‘second wave’ middle class taste in inner city edges, developers and estate agent promote apartment living lifestyle along with ‘green’ environmental ideals.

Figure 2.1.5:Top & below on left. In Victoria Park, greenness of neighbourhood is highlighted in advertisements. Below on right. Apartment living being promoted as lifestyle aspect in a current development in the precinct. Source: Rashid, 2007.

Chapter 2 | 27 What these studies show is that there is a need to reconsider the definition of gentrification in the contemporary context — as Smith and Butler (2007) argue, it has now moved beyond its origins in which one could identify a place (the inner city) and a specific class process (working-class displacement). They argued that the term gentrification should not be extended 'to embrace such forms of development', since this 'stretches it beyond the point at which it retains utility or meaning' (2007:4). Instead of displacement it has become a question of inclusion.

2.1.6. Environmental sustainability, lifestyle, and pro-environmental values The question of the ecological sustainability of suburban lifestyles is a global issue with distinct local ramifications. In the Sydney context, these environmental factors pose many challenges, among the most pressing being the need for water conservation, the need to reduce the reliance on fossil fuels, and the benefits or disbenefits of medium- high density housing.

The act of moving back into the inner-city is in itself a direct form of sustainable action. The reuse of inner-city houses and the subsequent revival of other disused industrial areas have made brownfield development a major component of sustainable development of cities. Consequently urban consolidation is seen as a major force in resisting suburban sprawl, since using pristine greenfields is seen as unsustainable in current planning strategies. For example, in Sydney, it is planned that up to 70 per cent of future development will be within the existing urban area through higher density developments. This indicates a big saving in new land and associated infrastructure that would have otherwise be used for new development. In most state capital cities in Australia (Sydney, Adelaide, Brisbane, Melbourne) increasing residential densities especially in inner areas are presently the major form of urban development being pursued through metropolitan policies. Again, whether such strategies achieve the results envisaged is still a matter of debate (Birrell, O'Connor, Rapson, & Healy, 2005; Fay, Lamb, & Holland, 2002; Gray, Gleeson, & Burke, 2008; Searle, 2006).

The urban revival which was a consequence of the process of moving back to the city has become a planned development strategy resulting in pull factors as described in an earlier section (see Section 2.2.1). This section briefly reviews some of the Australian studies which investigate the sustainability of higher density settlements from an ecological perspective. Moreover it looks into possible advantages of inner areas (higher density forms) in terms of environmental aspects and thereby seeks to endorse the importance of social aspects (e.g. lifestyle issues and associated attitudes and behaviours) in achieving sustainability.

Chapter 2 | 28 Sustainability of higher density settlements. Let us consider some of the arguments over the nature and form of sustainable inner-city higher density housing in Australia. During the 1990s, a number of urban researchers searching for sustainable forms of settlement concluded that urban form could have a significant effect on urban energy use, air pollution, and greenhouse gas emissions (Moriarty, 2002; Newton, 1997). Some urban form changes, such as higher density development in the outer suburbs, or ‘urban villages’ formed by redevelopment near public transport stops, were found to result in reduced transport and domestic energy use, and lead to lower greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, only a minor part of the savings resulted from changes in location (e.g. inner areas) or increases in residential density (e.g. high-rise, mid-rise or low-rise developments). Undoubtedly the greater part of the calculated transport savings came from a better mix of land uses, with a higher level of local retail and job opportunities than is otherwise the case. Domestic energy savings came mainly from the better thermal performance of buildings, as measured by energy ratings, which can be greatly improved for all building types, since it is largely independent of housing density, or location.

More recently, Holloway & Bunker (2006) in their attempt to bring together recent research in Australia on energy use in different forms of housing, observed that there is a limited amount of information available to model the impacts of residential developments as well as information about the perceived environmental benefits of pursuing initiatives aimed at increasing residential densities. In moving towards more sustainable urban forms the ability to model how different kinds of urban development might perform in terms of land, energy, water and other resource use would be a significant tool in enhancing sustainability. This is a complex and extensive task as there are a number of considerations including transport, infrastructure, water, the operational (day-to-day) energy consumption of households, as well as the energy embodied in the housing structure itself. Since no complete study on Sydney has yet been conducted, to get at the whole picture, the following section looks at current studies (and data) which cover specific resource use individually. Moreover, despite sustainability becoming a central concern of in recent years, few estimates have been made of the per capita use of water or energy by dwelling type.

Resource use in Inner City opposed to Outer Suburbs. Inner urban residents are also less likely to live in separate housing than the overall metropolitan population. Nonetheless, their higher density living does obviously mean that they require less residential land, road space, and water per capita (see water use section, later) than

Chapter 2 | 29 the average resident. A clear link seems evident in that residential densities are much higher, and public transport use is greater in the inner areas (Newman & Kenworthy, 1999).

Within the large cities themselves, inner area households at present use less domestic and travel energy, and water, than households of similar size and income in the outer area of the same city (Moriarty, 2002). For the largest and densest cities of Australia, Sydney and Melbourne, these differences appear most striking. Moriarty analysed land, road space, water and energy use in the inner and outer rings of the five major cities (State capital cities), other urban areas and rural areas, and contends that:

... inner urban residents directly consume less than the city-wide average of inputs such as energy and water, when adjusted for income. However, when indirect inputs are considered, the differences are small (Moriarty, 2002: 233).

The main finding of this study was that although alteration of the relative location and density of populations will usually produce only minor benefits for future sustainability, such changes can afford significant reductions in urban transport oil use and resulting air pollution. Paradoxically, when direct and indirect requirements are combined, they reveal that the more affluent suburbs, typically close to the CBD, have almost twice the per-capita energy requirement of the less affluent suburbs, usually in outer areas. Most studies on cities only consider direct or end-user energy consumption. Indirect energy use in cities, or energy embodied in the consumption of goods and services by its residents can be regarded as being as important as direct energy use. However, physical models of cities are extremely complex and there have been difficulties in dealing with boundary issues, and hence with indirect resource requirements and take- out.

The following section attempts to unravel this paradox by looking at each resource use in the inner city as opposed to outer areas.

Per Capita road provision. One definite benefit of the higher population densities of the inner city is the need for much lower per capita road provision. Per capita provision of road space is presently much higher in the non-urban areas of Australia than in the cities (Berry & Kneebone, 1997; Newman & Kenworthy, 1999). Highways in rural areas are not only used by the local population, but Victorian data show that even when only local government-controlled roads are considered, per capita provision is still several times higher than in large cities (ABS, 2001).

Chapter 2 | 30 Water use. Lower water use per capita is another benefit of higher density living. Although complete data are not available, residents of separate houses probably use more outside water per capita because of bigger gardens (front and back) to water. Outside use is a significant share of the total; it varies from 30% (Sydney) to 56 per cent (Adelaide) of total household water consumption (State of the Environment Advisory Council-SEAC, 1996 cited in Moriarty, 2002). The inner area residents of Sydney, a high proportion of them flat dwellers, do use less water overall per dollar income than those living in the outer suburbs (ABS, 2002).

Reworking the published IPART data by Troy, et al. (2005) indicates that there was effectively no difference between the per capita consumption of those who live in separate houses compared with those who live in flats, once allowance is made for the number of occupants. But, simultaneously, household morphology data from the study indicates that, on average, people in separate houses consume 304 kilolitres (kL) per year compared with 211 kL for those in semi detached dwellings or town houses, 192 kL for those in low rise flats and 148 kL for those in high rise flats. For instance, the study also shows that people living in high-rise flats consume less than half those in houses.

The savings would have very little effect on overall water usage given that the direct use of water in households in quite small compared to other indirect uses. In 1996–97, Australia used 18,767 gigalitres of water, of which only 11% (2,108 gigalitres) was used directly by households— whereas use in agriculture is six times greater – 65% (12,191 gigalitres) (National Water Commission, 2005). Interestingly, household water use has decreased by 8% in 2004-05. Sixteen per cent of households were reusing or recycling household water, representing a significant increase from 11% in 2000–01. Sydney had the lowest per capita water use among the capital cities.

Since 1997 inflows to the water storages of Australia’s five largest cities was cut in half. Sydney’s dams had received 43 per cent of long-term average inflows (DECC, 2009). Increase in the frequency and severity of drought, declining water flows into the Murray-Darling Basin, reduced rainfall across eastern and far south west Australia – all of these are probably having greater effects on Australians than other concerns of the environment (In 2010-2011, in contrast, there have been floods and over-abundant rainfall in Sydney). In 2006 in a sample in NSW (see Figure 2.1.6) it was found that people value the environment highly and almost 90% are concerned about environmental problems, with water related issues - water supply, conservation,

Chapter 2 | 31 management and drought - being the top environmental issues, with climate change and energy issues growing rapidly in importance (DECC, 2006b).

Figure 2.1.6: Who Cares about the Environment in 2006? - A survey of NSW population’s environmental knowledge, attitudes and behaviours. Source: DECC, 2006.

Domestic energy use - operational and embodied. The Australian Building Codes Board (ABCB) estimates that energy used in all buildings accounts for almost 27 per cent of all energy-related greenhouse gas emissions (EcoLibrium, 2005). Therefore one of the critical issues associated with sustainability, including urban sustainability, is how to reduce use of energy and therefore greenhouse gas emissions. However, in NSW, when it comes to the environmental issues people are concerned with, energy lags in fifth position. Some of the studies on this foremost issue of energy use (direct & indirect) are presented here.

Moriarty’s (2002) study on five state capital cities found that domestic energy use per capita in Australia overall is only 10 percent less for higher density houses (flats/units/apartments) than for detached houses. Consequently, the marked housing type differences between the inner and outer areas in Sydney and Melbourne seem to result in little difference in domestic energy use. The inner Melbourne SSD had real domestic energy costs per capita (i.e. net of the fixed charges in gas and electricity bills) that were only about 3 per cent less than for Melbourne overall (ABS, 2000, cited in Moriarty, 2002). These differences in real energy costs translate directly into similar differences in actual energy use. Nevertheless, Moriarty was able to conclude that domestic energy use per dollar of total expenditure was lower in the inner suburbs.

Chapter 2 | 32 In another study in 2003, the NSW Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART 2004, cited in Holloway & Bunker, 2006) surveyed 2604 households across the greater Sydney area to collect information about household energy requirements. Households that lived in houses (detached houses/ semi-detached dwellings/town houses) used 74 per cent more electricity than those in multi-unit dwellings. The study contends that this is mainly due to the larger household sizes in houses. Nonetheless, on a per capita basis IPART found that houses use 18 per cent more electricity than multi-unit dwellings (3086 kWh for houses compared to 2608 kWh for units).

Recently in 2005 the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (SSROC, cited in Holloway & Bunker, 2006) contend that houses produce more greenhouse gas emissions. They surveyed 4572 households in the southern and eastern areas of Sydney (Canterbury, Hurstville, Kogarah, Rockdale, Waverley and Woollahra local government areas) and concluded that detached houses should be targeted by initiatives and strategies that encourage lower energy use by these households. In their calculation of greenhouse gas emissions and energy costs they found that:

Houses produced 15.9 tonnes of greenhouse gases compared to 12.0 tonnes for multi-unit developments. Average annual household greenhouse gas emissions were 16.1 tonnes compared to a national average of 15 tonnes.

Households in Hurstville (approx.15 tonnes) produced more greenhouse gas emissions than those from Kogarah or Rockdale (around 14 tonnes). Since Kogarah and Rockdale have larger number of higher density houses than Hurstville, these data support the higher density-lower energy-use thesis.

However, if the indirect energy use in lifts and shared space lighting in foyers, halls, gymnasia, car-parking and heated swimming pools for higher density housing is considered, the savings are likely to be smaller.

Some studies show mixed results if energy per person is calculated instead of per dwelling. Pears (2005), supported by work by NSW Department of Planning, Infrastructure and Natural Resources (DIPNR), maintains that there is evidence to suggest that when energy per person is calculated instead of energy per dwelling, high- rise apartments can generate above average energy consumption per capita if total energy is used. He contends that a number of factors can lead to increased energy consumption in higher density dwellings. This includes, but is not limited to, the use of lifts, inefficiencies in equipment (including centralised systems, reticulated air conditioning and appliances, and the thermal performance of the building envelope). To

Chapter 2 | 33 balance these factors to some extent, higher density housing leads to a reduction per dwelling in some aspects of infrastructural energy use, such as street lighting; and insulate each other against the weather due to their contiguity.

The results of a pilot study comprising six case study areas (including Adelaide City) in Adelaide by Troy et al. (2002, 2003) also reflected on the mixed influence of built form and household characteristics on the use of energy, with socio-economic factors influencing consumption patterns (cited in Holloway & Bunker, 2006). It used the operational and embodied energy used in these areas and the primary energy needed to produce the different forms of energy— vehicle fuel, electricity and gas as a basis for estimates. Embodied energy includes not only that used in the dwellings but in the supporting local infrastructure and vehicles. It shows that on a per capita basis (instead of household basis) the differences in operational energy use are less significant. However there have been some arguments regarding this study, for instance that,

...‘the calculations of transport life cycle energy/emissions are rather too reliant on averages of averages’ (Perkins, 2003:283).

It seems logical that higher density dwellings might reduce the amount of emissions and energy needed for the construction of dwellings and associated infrastructure. However, Fay and others (Fay et al., 2002) in their study have also shown that compressed living does not necessarily mean reduced embodied energy use. They found that as the house size decreases the proportional benefit decreases, if embodied energy is considered. Although the calculations have shown that separate houses are the highest, the townhouses are intermediate, and the semi-detached the lowest in embodied energy, this variation becomes negligible when it is calculated in terms of usable space.

Again, it is important to understand that embodied energy is only a small fraction of operational energy, which is user dependent, and accumulates energy all through the life of a residential building. Australian Commonwealth Scientific and Research Organization (CSIRO) has found that,

...the average household contains about 1,000 GJ of energy embodied in the materials used in its construction. This is equivalent to about 15 years of normal operational energy use. For a house that lasts 100 years this is over 10 percent of the energy used in its life (Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, 2010).

Chapter 2 | 34 A popular lifestyle preference of inner-city dwellers is eating out. Household members, therefore, can freely choose to eat at home or at a restaurant, for example. Eating out saves domestic energy, but increases commercial energy use. Electricity use by service industries such as accommodation, cafes and restaurants, education, and real estate is higher in inner areas (Lenzen, Dey, & Foran, 2004) than those located in outer areas.

Transport energy use. The densest metropolis, Sydney, has per capita public transport levels three times those of Adelaide and Perth (Newman & Kenworthy, 1999). Moreover, given that higher income households are increasingly to be found in the inner suburbs, travel per dollar income there is still lower than the city-wide average (Moriarty, 2002).

However, for the important case of urban transport energy at least, much of the difference between inner and outer travel energy per unit of expenditure cannot be wholly credited to inner high density living or lifestyle. When considering transport energy use for inner area residents, we need to take into account that this calculation should also include travel energy consumed outside that urbanized area itself.

In a research paper Lenzen et al. (2004) used input–output analysis and detailed household expenditure data to yield comprehensive energy use breakdowns for the 14 Statistical Subdivisions of Sydney. Multivariate regression and structural path analysis (SPA) were used to interpret the results. With comparable household expenditure the following observations on inner and outer SSDs are made:

Energy expenditure and energy use on all forms of public transport including air travel is considerable higher for the inner SSDs.

For transport, the most significant difference is the very large expenditure of the outer SSDs on cars;

The Inner Sydney and Eastern Suburbs households are much more likely to not use a car to travel to work, than are the households in Fairfield–Liverpool and Outer South-Western Sydney. (Lenzen et al., 2004: 375- 399)

These results show that even with similar total expenditure, household lifestyles in inner and outer areas of Sydney can vary significantly in their energy requirements.

Chapter 2 | 35 Inner area residents on average are seemingly likely to use more energy for air travel than outer area residents. Because they live in the higher density inner city area, it is also at least possible that inner area residents are more likely to buy holiday homes away from the city, and thus travel by air for holidays (or drive, presumably). Data in a study from a European city shows that extreme densities statistically correlate with high energy use for long-distance leisure-time travel. On the other hand, it showed that increased densities lead to low energy use for both housing and everyday travel (Holden & Norland, 2005).

In terms of car ownership, ABS (1996) data shows Inner Sydney SSD residents had fewer vehicles per capita than the city-wide average. Since the inner city residents use public transport more, this trend is probably continuing. Inner-city residents have the advantage of using bicycles, walking or public transport (train/tram/bus) which together significantly lower the emissions of CO2. It is commonly understood that using trains instead of cars reduces travel emissions.

Domestic waste disposal. Per capita domestic waste disposal is, on average, lower in the capital cities than in the non-metropolitan areas of the state. For example, in 1989, Adelaide produced 307kg per capita, the rest of SA 407kg per capita. Moreover, in spite of their higher waste output, non-metropolitan councils are far less likely to have domestic waste recycling programmes (Moriarty, 2002).

Sydney residents consider water conservation and air quality or pollution as two of the most important environmental issues for action by the NSW Government. Those who said that in the past year they had often taken steps to reduce their fuel consumption and air pollution (by for example driving a smaller/more fuel efficient car, carpooling, using public transport, walking or cycling) increased by 10% from 38% in 2003 to 48% in 2006. While this behaviour ultimately results in cleaner air, saving money was the most common reason given (by 51%) for starting to do this (DECC, 2006b).

The above studies reveal that there is no clear-cut advantage (quantitatively) in inner city architectural forms (separated from users) when the most important issue of energy is considered; while there is clear evidence from both intra and inter-city comparisons that higher density, transit-oriented cities have lower per-capita transport energy use. Logically, by virtue of higher density living, inner area residents tend to share more open space, infrastructure and transport, a clearly sustainable system.

Troy’s (1991) assertions that the gardens in houses were seen as aesthetically pleasing, a source of food, an expression of status, a source of recreation and a secure

Chapter 2 | 36 place for children to grow and experience contact with nature are however not shared by everybody. Larice (2005), for instance, we have seen, disagrees: ...‘As kids, we played in the streets – our front yards were only for 'show' and parks were too far from home', which also points to the inefficient use of outdoor spaces and public spaces in suburban environments. Any one driving through outer suburban neighbourhoods might easily identify that front yards of detached houses are often on display, as a “show”, and largely unused, while however the backyard is likely to be used much more, for laundry drying and animals and a kids play area, and on weekends as a barbecue space.

The outdoor garden areas, nonetheless, are rarely used for growing food, contradicting Troy’s assumptions of sustainable gardening practice at home (Troy, 1996b). Where major areas of the front yard and back yard are grassed, besides the higher water maintenance, mowing probably contributes to higher fuel consumption in detached houses in outer suburbs. Only thirty per cent of Australian households saved water in the garden by using grey water (ABS, 2007). Very recently it has been acknowledged,

...suburbanisation of Australian cities carried with it the seeds of the present crisis in urban water consumption (Randolph & Troy, 2008:442) .

Moreover gardening, if seen as a traditional lifestyle activity (Troy, 1996b), can be partly satisfied in higher density precincts by large balconies as detailed by ex- Government Architect Chris Johnson (2003) in his garden apartment concepts, which can use recycled grey water. Similarly, though comparative data is not available it can also be assumed that public parks, playfields etc. are used more in higher density areas than outer areas (e.g. Hyde Park, Sydney CBD) indicating the effective/ efficient use of urban spaces. It can be assumed that maintenance for the public spaces can be done more efficiently in higher density areas.

Importance of attitudes toward pro-environment lifestyle. The previous ambivalent section findings show that urban researchers favouring higher density living can find ample evidence that average per-dwelling energy use is lower there, while others arguing against increasing density can find ample evidence that average per-capita energy use is lower in detached dwellings. By relying on summary average statistics, and selecting the basis for comparison (per capita, per unit area, per dwelling, etc.), researchers can find the particular ‘evidence’ they need to support a particular position.

To begin to answer the question ‘what is the most sustainable urban dwelling form’, simplistically we need to redefine the strategy to include lifestyle approaches and

Chapter 2 | 37 liveability factors relating to these forms as a whole, or holistically. For the environmental management of households in Sydney, it is apparent that a policy focus on reducing the direct component of energy use, while praiseworthy, is probably inappropriately addressed since direct energy use in buildings constitutes a remarkably small portion of the total energy requirement over a range of incomes. For example, application of renewable energy technologies, energy conservation and solar architecture, energy efficiency standards for housing and reconstruction projects are all focused towards reducing/meeting only direct energy use in both higher density and detached houses.

This is also indicated in the ABS (1999) where it is apparent that despite homes becoming more energy efficient, Australians are using increasing amounts of energy in the home: 20GJ per person in 1999 compared with 18GJ per person in 1980. Current residential energy efficiency measures are projected to only slow the rate at which this residential energy consumption increases. The ABS (ABS, 1998) notes,

Increasing per capita energy consumption in the home may be related to the trend towards smaller households with larger houses.

Another factor may be the increasing standard of material wellbeing enjoyed by most Australians, reflected in the plethora of electrical appliances on shop shelves.

In a similar vein, Lenzen et al. (2004) explain in a generic sense, the combined direct and indirect requirements for energy increasing steadily with per capita income, as shown for total energy requirement in Figure 2.1.7. The per-capita energy requirement (direct and total) and energy intensity as a function of annual per capita income for all Sydney households in the Household Expenditure Survey (1998–1999 HES, ABS 2000, cited in Lenzen et al., 2004) is shown in the Figure 2.1.7. The power law curve fit shows the important trends.

Direct energy requirements are inelastic with income—the main driver for the increase in total energy requirement with income results from indirect energy required for goods and services.

The second important result is that the energy intensity diminishes towards higher incomes, reflecting the fact that wealthier households purchase proportionally more services, which are characterised by lower energy.

Chapter 2 | 38 Figure 2.1.7: Energy requirement and energy intensity as a function of annual per-capita income. Source: Lenzen et al., 2004.

Moreover, IPART also contended that higher income households use more electricity than lower income households but suggested that this is due more to the larger number of household appliances in their dwellings. Since both the inner areas and outer areas have their share of higher income households who enjoy the benefits of a higher standard of living it is probable that they consume more energy than others in the same area.

Interestingly, almost twenty years ago, an in-depth evaluation of energy efficient houses in four capital Australian cities indicated that ‘prescriptive design solutions and standards do not necessarily lead to the consequences expected’ (Ballinger, Samuels, & ERDC, 1991:139). For instance, many ‘standard’ houses performed better energy- wise than architect designed solar efficient homes, because of the lifestyle factors that distinguish them. Findings from the study reinforce the notion that the household as well as the house should be foci of attention in promoting energy efficiency. Accordingly noted:

Energy efficiency seems more likely to be consequence of a thermally comfortable and amenable house inhabited by energy-literate and ecologically responsible individuals, than a driving force in its own right (Ballinger et al., 1991:6).

Lenzin et al. have the same opinion as Ballinger et al. where they made similar conclusions by stressing that,

Chapter 2 | 39 ‘The real challenge lies with ‘‘wants’’ rather than ‘‘needs’’ or in the progressive dematerialisation of the ‘‘wants’’ of city residents’ (Lenzen et al., 2004).

Similarly Perkins notes,

‘...[bringing] into focus the bigger philosophical issue of over- consumption...there is the potential to better inform people of the sustainability implications of lifestyles’ (Perkins, 2003: 284).

The majority of approaches aiming at easing environmental pressures exerted in cities concentrate on direct effects, such as domestic energy consumption and local transport, which can be misdirected. What has been shown for energy can similarly be applicable for other resources: water, land and infrastructure. Whatever benefits might be reaped by efficient design can be neutralised by lifestyle changes based on consumption philosophies which drive the modern economy. With higher incomes comes increased affordability and desire for consuming goods and materials, whether it is electrical energy consuming appliances or furniture or clothes.

Australians spend over $10.5 billion annually on goods and services that are never or hardly ever used (DECC, 2006a). The consumption of goods and services by Australians and other industrialised countries is the largest single driving force for both the current level and the increase of global greenhouse gas emissions (Lenzen & Smith, 1999).

It has been shown by Lenzen & Smith (1999) that breakdowns of Australian emissions into production and consumption categories differ markedly (Figure 2.1.8). Of all the produced greenhouse gases, 54% (575 Mt CO2-e) are due to fossil energy use in factories, vehicles, homes, offices and shops, of which only 10% is in homes. Another 39% comes from changes and enteric fermentation in animals, while the remainder of 7% is from landfills and non-energy industrial processes. However the results of an input-output analysis of consumption categories show a different picture of household emissions. The emissions occurring in production can be traced according to the inter-industrial flow of the produced commodities, and allocated to final consumption categories. This procedure is often expressed using the view that emissions become 'embodied' in consumer products. Embodied emissions can be calculated using an economic technique called input-output analysis, which employs national statistical data on inter-industrial transactions and on emissions of industry sectors. In the results of an input-output analysis, 32% of consumed emissions (total

740 Mt CO2-e, including imports) are embodied in exports, whilst government

Chapter 2 | 40 administration and defence account for about 10%. Only 11% of total emissions occur through direct energy use by households, while a much larger portion of 47% is embodied in household purchases. It is thus argued that, in accordance with Adam Smith's classic statement in 1776 that ‘consumption is the sole end and purpose of all production’ (Lenzen & Smith, 1999: 69), that the consumer who buys a product is eventually responsible for the emissions the product has entailed in its production.

Figure 2.1.8:Australian greenhouse gas emissions, (Left) production and (Right) consumption categories. Left. Of all the produced greenhouse gases only 10% is in dwellings. Right. Only 11 % of total emissions occur through direct energy use by households, while a much larger portion of 47% is embodied in household purchases. Source: Lenzen et al., 2004.

Summarising the previous sections, we conclude that the focus therefore has to be not only on the efficient design of architectural (and urban) form (whether high-rise/low- rise/detached) but on lifestyle aspirations, public education and knowledge transfer to householders, incentives - and ultimately on understandings of how to satisfy deep- rooted liveability/habitability factors without removing the same opportunities for later generations.

As indicated in various studies, the possible steps and strategies in this direction can be summarised as below (Cherulnik, 1993; Gatersleben, Steg, & Vlek, 2002; Lenzen et al., 2004):

Attitude change-persuasion/provide consumer education. Many studies suggest that the provision of information does not necessarily motivate behavioural changes in the community (Greenfield & Williams, 2008; Lenzen & Smith, 1999).

Chapter 2 | 41 Obligatory behaviour. Analysis of obligatory and coercive initiatives (especially those where avoidance was difficult) showed that consumers complied with the initiative program where they had no choice but to act in an environmentally responsible way.

Economic measures / social benefits, addressing behaviour. For example the Residential Rebate Program by the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water (NSW DECCW, 2009) offers various types of rebates. It is stated that 70,000 household claimed rebates from February 2009. Some of these rebates are: the ‘Washing machine rebate’ for buying 4.5 star water efficient machines, the ‘Second fridge buyback’ for old fridges (one of the biggest energy user in the home), consuming up to three times the energy of new fridges. However there is the distinct possibility that this may not change behaviour in higher income households whose incomes are more elastic.

Creating conditions for the reshaping of lifestyles. It has been observed that a prerequisite for fostering pro-environmental behaviour appears to be allowing participation, that is, allowing users to find their own areas, reasons, and procedures for conserving behaviour (Lenzen & Smith, 1999; Lund, 1998).

Some emissions such as from fuel use in private cars or in homes occur directly at the place of consumption. It is therefore not surprising that there is a spreading awareness of personal responsibility for these emissions, resulting in efforts to save energy in homes or to reduce private car use (Lenzen & Smith, 1999).

It has been shown that the inner area revival is now a multi-class phenomenon and there is a higher aggregation of well educated residents in inner areas. Past studies (Vining & Ebreo, 1990) have shown that recycling behaviour tends to vary with education and income. Since inner city urbanites are often trendsetters (Bridge, 2001) it is assumed that pro-environmental ideas and preferences would be higher in new residential buildings of later developments such as Victoria Park, the ‘observatory’ for this study.

The relevance of these studies in the generation of the doctoral research conducted here is pertinent. At the time the survey was conducted, (beginning in 2006), the national political climate was not conducive for climate change discussions and other pro-environmental actions. Notwithstanding, in Australian states and at local level, initiatives were going on without government patronisation. In 2008 after the change of Federal Government, environmental issues came to prominence. One of the symbolic actions occurred within nine days after being elected, namely: the government ratified

Chapter 2 | 42 and signed the Kyoto Protocol aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Australia's overall contributions to global greenhouse gas emissions are small, but it is one of the largest polluters per capita and its stance on Kyoto was strongly symbolic. It is probable, that the prevailing negative political climate towards environmental issues at the time of survey may have had a tacit influence on individual household’s attitudes and behaviours.

2.1.7. Conclusion I would prefer to explain the processes of change and their affect on other inner areas not as a result of a single set of factors from a single theory, but as the culmination of a very complex set of events, trends and preferences, social, economic and environmental which combine and contrast in different ways and to different degrees to encourage inner city redevelopment and the improvement of inner city housing to occur (Ley, 1996; N. Smith, 1996). Most importantly the relevancy of gentrification was that it can be seen as one such process, a shift from the working-class city and the desirability of the middle-class suburbs to one in which inner urban living became once again invested with ideas of status, style and cosmopolitanism. Living in an improved inner city home also comes across as a kind of conspicuous consumption, with an apartment in a region such Victoria Park being seen as a highly regarded symbol of social status. Living close to a cultural hub was eventually perceived as interesting as living in historic cores.

Moreover, the surge of apartment living in general should not interpreted as only a current phenomenon. The emerging culture of higher density living has been prevailing since the early 1900s in inner Sydney, and has been reviewed in a paper by author (see Appendix 1) and also noted by others (SMH, 2003).

Summing up, the analysis of the revitalisation of inner area surroundings has shown that the later processes of change differ from earlier gentrification, and that it:

- is guided by the State and developers;

- takes the form of new medium to high density housing on redeveloped sites;

- creates a more diverse tenure and demographic mix than earlier wave gentrification;

- lifestyle aspirations differ in areas near CBD from in core living precincts;

Chapter 2 | 43 - inner city urbanites are often trendsetters (Bridge, 2001) it is assumed that pro-environmental ideas and preferences would be higher in new residential buildings of later developments.

However amongst the reasons for this, which forms the focus of much of this research, is that some of the changes taking place nearer to the centre of Sydney have taken on some characteristics traditionally associated with suburbanization in ways that might be influenced by ‘new ’ (see Sections 2.2.1 & 2.3.2).

Chapter 2 | 44 2.2. Overview of inner area housing scenario - changing paradigm

This part of the chapter proceeds in five sections. The first section briefly reviews how the issues addressed in the move to more compact cities have been represented in the Australian scene and how they have been addressed in Sydney. It revolves around certain theories influencing and affecting the strategies. The popular sentiments and changing attitudes towards higher density forms in inner areas are also examined here. This was an important aspect since future trends for housing form can be anticipated from these reviews. With the influence of theories and public consciousness, how then did ideas of liveability and sustainability proliferate in the planning processes?

The second section deals with the emergence of ESD, liveability and design related issues in the policies and strategies. This section establishes the inherent link between these and the generation of the urban form especially higher density housing in Sydney.

Thirdly, dwelling characteristics, medium-high density forms and future demand for new housing in inner areas are discussed.

The fourth section studies the creation of policy aimed at improving the design of higher density housing. It studies the role of architects in the planning process and its subsequent growing role of legislation in fostering good design. For example SEPP 65, an Environmental Planning Policy was concerned solely with the design quality of residential flats. During the assessment of any Development Application, the SEPP specifies design related matters which must be taken into consideration. Ex-NSW Government Chris Johnson was once Executive Director of Urban Renewal and was also instrumental in developing the Residential Flat Design Pattern Book and is currently involved in promoting the NSW Metropolitan strategy. Therefore the current form and design of higher density dwellings are to a great extent dependent on the planning processes.

The final section outlines the implications of living in higher density and the rationale for including those in the study. It discusses, if urban consolidation is to continue sustainably then how liveability of the future dwellings is to be construed in the designs. Eventually, this section makes an effort to comprehend the design issues for higher density housing that have come to the forefront in the discourses and is salient for this study.

Chapter 2 | 45 However, two common themes which are directly relevant to this research run through all the sections, that is, the comprehension of the form of higher density dwelling in inner areas and attempts to place the case study area in the context of the arguments.

2.2.1. Shifting views - form to place based cognition There has been growing support in public planning circles for the concept of a ‘compact city’ or consolidation which was also seen as a way of achieving a sustainable urban form. In the UK, planning policies in late 1980s advocated such consolidation processes (Burton, 2000). Likewise, in NSW planning strategies and policies, as briefly shown in the next sections, these ideas of consolidation in conjunction with other issues of sustainability were slowly taken up. Before proceeding directly to the plans and policies it is necessary to review the literature, both in academia and the popular media on consolidation in the Australian scenario. I then argue how they have been addressed in Sydney with respect to housing scenarios and to what extent these have influenced the direction of NSW plans and policies.

The process of achieving urban compactness is generally termed ‘intensification’, ‘consolidation’ or ‘densification’. It involves the re-use of brownfield land, more intensive use of urban buildings, sub-divisions and conversions of existing development and an increase in the density of population in urban areas. Compactness can be achieved in existing cities primarily by two methods: increasing their densities and increasing their mix of uses. Both processes imply the use of policies of ‘containment’ and ‘consolidation,’ whereby growth is accommodated within the city boundaries instead of in greenfield areas (Lawrence, 2000).

In general it also suggests a relatively high-density, mixed-use city, based on an efficient public transport system and dimensions that encourage walking and cycling. It contrasts with the car-oriented ‘’ of many modern towns and cities, seen by many as an unsustainable form of urban development. In their influential Cities and Automobile Dependence, Newman & Kenworthy (1989) argued that low-density cities relied on the car, and higher density cities of compact form reduce energy used in travel and transport. Newman (1992) especially applied this line of reasoning to Australian cities. They also showed how low density American and Australian cities use comparatively more petrol per capita than higher density European and Asian cities.

Broadly, it is now widely acknowledged that a relationship exists between the shape, size, density and uses of a city and its sustainability (Jenks, Williams, & Burton, 2000). However, consensus is lacking about the exact nature of this relationship. Hence, the

Chapter 2 | 46 current understanding is that instead of searching for one definitive sustainable urban form, the emphasis should be now on how to determine which forms are suitable in any given locality (Jenks et al., 2000). Similarly, concentrating solely on urban scale solutions only offers a partial solution to understanding. So different scales, from the house, through to the block, the neighbourhood, the district, city and region all need to be considered. A ‘sociological approach to the city’ as posited by Wirth long go in 1938 (cited in Gutman, 1972:55), was largely sidelined from sustainability discussions for some time until the turn of the century. As argued by the author in a paper (see Appendix 1, Reassessing ‘people and residential environment’: socio-spatial aspects of built forms) it took a long time before the social issues ultimately gained prominence in the sustainability discourses, and place-based research along with liveability issues were recognised as issues for sustainable urban form. Elkin et al. (Elkin, McLaren, & Hillman, 1991: 12) describe such a configuration as:

a city that is “user friendly” and resourceful, in terms not only of its form and energy-efficiency, but also its function, as a place for living’.

Economic Arguments. In the core and edges of inner areas where space is at premium economic aspects are always a priority. Not surprisingly, if economic thinking pervades the whole society, even simple non-economic values like beauty, health or liveability can endure only if they prove to be “economic.” Schumacher (1999) argued that profitability alone is not an adequate measure of whether something is “economic” or not. A new economics has thus been posited that takes into account not only profitability of a given activity, but also its effect upon people and the environment, including the resource base. Sassi (2006) argues that buildings that are liked, enjoyed and satisfied become part of the community’s own culture, have long lives and are economically sustainable as well. The concept of economic sustainability is now well understood among developers & architects. Successful buildings make money, sell quickly, command more rent, have long lives or help induce regeneration of the area. Sustainable buildings are those that are an asset for many years to come (Sassi, 2006). By being used for a long time and over and over again without being abandoned is also an objective of sustainability.

Two doctrines related to economics: about the contemporary city - ‘the global city’ and ‘the creative city’ - which were widely circulated both in academic circle and the mass media have had an impact in policy circles (Neilson, 2005). Emphasising at once the role of the city as a node in the global network of finance capitalism and its concentrated cultural diversity, Sassen’s (1991) notion of the global city, developed

Chapter 2 | 47 most fully in her book, began to impact upon academic analyses of Sydney’s transformation in the early 1990s (McNeill, Dowling, & Fagan, 2005). By 1996, the term had begun to circulate in policy discourses, for example in the NSW Planning publication Sydney as a Global City. The publication points out that ‘Sydney is Australia’s only global city’, and used the term 'global' widely in the discourses (Department of Planning, 2005d: 3). The current strategy identifies the ‘global arc’ as a critical feature of Sydney and Australia’s economy (Department of Planning, 2005d: 33). Over the last two decades, the global economic corridor - Sydney’s ‘global arc’ - has emerged as the place of concentration of linked jobs and gateway infrastructure from Macquarie Park through Chatswood, St Leonards, North Sydney and the CBD to Sydney Airport and Port Botany. However, the main thrust of the ‘global’ rhetoric has been primarily based on rather than on cultural diversity.

Green Square / Zetland

Figure 2.2.1: A section of Sydney’s ‘global arc’. The corridor of concentrated jobs and activities is seen as the powerhouse of Australia’s economy. Close to Sydney CBD, study area Zetland and Green Square falls in this highlighted zone. Source: Department of Planning, 2005.

Chapter 2 | 48 By contrast, an economics professor, Richard Florida’s The Rise of the Creative Class (Florida, 2002) had a more instant impact in policy circles and its major focus was on people not the economy. While its acceptance among academics was less enthusiastic, his idea was publicly promoted by the NSW Deputy Premier and taken up by local governments in Sydney and other Australian cities. Florida’s association of urban economic prosperity with the rise of ‘creative industries’ won him a high profile visit to Sydney in 2004 (sponsored by the Sydney City Council, the Sydney Morning Herald and the Year of the Built Environment). The general idea of this is an argument against an older economic idea that believes cities should compete to attract companies; instead, Florida argues, companies will follow where creative professionals are, and they in turn will settle where they want to live rather than necessarily following the companies (Murphy et al., 2004). It hinges on the separation of class from core and periphery similar to the arguments made in an earlier section based on Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital.

To define this class' economic function, it is what others have called the professional/managerial class or the knowledge class; while Florida calls it the creative class, and distinguishes between a core of scientists, engineers, programmers, academics, writers, artists, and intellectuals, and a periphery of professionals or technicians working in the knowledge industries: high-tech, finance, the law and health- care, business, and so on. Interestingly, the study area as well as the Sydney CBD has a higher percentage of the group as evident from census data. What differentiates the core from the periphery is the extent to which workers are 'producing new forms or designs’ (Florida, 2002: 69) or otherwise being more creative than those on the periphery. What follows from this is his suggestion for cities (Sydney and Melbourne), in order to foster an emergent creative class, for strategies based on an analysis of the values — in brief, those of 'lifestyle' — that members of this class espouse and a set of strategies for economic regeneration structured around fostering the conditions that will encourage their settlement in particular communities. He advises building communities that have a strong cultural life, are diverse, physically attractive, and have some of the values of 'authenticity' that creative class members appreciate; for example, historical inner-city architecture rather than new malls (Murphy et al., 2004).

Early Discourses and Developments. In Australia, encouraged by federal government incentives, post-war suburban development was almost entirely in separate house form and with a high level of homeownership (Paris, Beer, & Sanders, 1993). While post-war suburban development was predominantly in the form of the separate house on a

Chapter 2 | 49 single plot, there was a small number of medium density housing built, although predominantly for rental. The achievement of homeownership, most desirably in the form of a separate house on its own lot, has been a distinctive feature of Australian cities (Troy, 1995). However, in the late 70s before the sustainability discourses began, the need to reassess patterns of urban growth and development was being felt somewhat strongly, and a particular object of attention was the low density suburban style of residential development (Young & MSJ Keys Young Planners., 1976). In the context of the planning for new towns, this has led to consideration of the amount and distribution of various housing types, in particular the amount of medium density housing that might be desirable. Since the detached dwelling was the most preferred option for most of the people the discussion did not get much importance until the 80s. The basis for reassessment was the criticism that sprawling suburbs are harmful to the community in two ways:

One is that they lead to various psychological and social problems on the part of the residents; the other that they squander valuable resources through uneconomical forms of development (Young & MSJ Keys Young Planners., 1976).

The other strong argument for more compact cities in Australia was that housing forms, tenures and choice of location were too restricted (Bunker, Holloway, & Randolph, 2005a). This argument became obvious in more recent times as demographic trends, immigration, cultural changes and globalisation have led to a much wider variety of household types than the former dominant nuclear family. It has also been shown that urban consolidation may have led to more choice and variation in housing supply in Sydney. But again side by side it was concluded that planning for additional higher density housing must fully take into account the local socio-spatial context in which this development will take place (Bunker et al., 2005a). The research reported here therefore also emphasizes that this issue is more salient for inner city edge areas similar to the study area, Victoria Park.

Experiencing Higher Density. Long before the debates of urban consolidation policies, there was a history of building medium density housing in Sydney and a considerable presence of older housing of this kind (Cardew, 1980; Spearritt, 1978). It must be clear that flats had been an important feature of the urban form in Sydney long before the ideas and discussion on sustainable urban form proliferated. The flat boom that started in the 1960s was spurred on by strata title legislation introduced in 1961. Many uninspiring blocks were built during that time: three-storey walk-ups in textured, liver-

Chapter 2 | 50 coloured or blond brick that changed the character of the inner, middle and outer suburbs. Generally viewed as housing for young people who’d just left home or for the elderly who didn’t want the burden of a large house and garden, and for returned soldiers, the dreary sameness of these buildings, combined with often poor-quality finishes and fittings, gave apartments and apartment living an unsavoury reputation. So, too, did the dull prefabricated concrete tower blocks erected by the NSW Dept of Housing in the mid to late 1950s on land cleared of poorly maintained inner-city terrace housing (Burns, 2004). The legislation that enabled strata titling of multi-unit residential buildings for sale and the widening of the availability of housing finance led to the formation of the ‘six-eight pack’ flats (red/yellow/white brick buildings of typically six or eight flats), in noticeable numbers, by redeveloping the larger plots, especially in higher cost areas and some local centres (Bunker et al., 2005a).

As observed in an article by the author the overall impressions of these forms were not favourable in those times (see Appendix, 1, Reassessing ‘people and residential environment’: socio-spatial aspects of built forms). The designs of the buildings (apartments) were very utilitarian and generally lacked appropriately designed outdoor settings. For instance, the car parking areas would get more preference than the outdoor areas on the ground floor. The lifestyle preferences of these earlier higher density residents were quite different to the current inner urbanites. It is quite easy to assume that these earlier forms therefore did not have much appeal to the educated middle class who were moving into the inner city. Similarly Bridge’s (2001) study reaffirms that the ‘gentrifiers’ buying investment properties do not want to be associated (even as landlords) with this 1960s and 1970s taste and typology.

Burns (2004) states in her book Apartment Living: Australian style, that apartment design itself has altered over the years, reflecting changes in lifestyles and shifting fashions. She (2004: vii) notes the trend towards apartments: ‘In some ways, it has come full circle...’ and remarks,

Australians today are more design-conscious than before, and many who choose to live in an apartment want a building that reflects a smart, stylish and sophisticated image. Savvy developers have at last realised that good design sells and are harnessing the creative talents of architects towards this end. This, in turn, has helped to raise the profile of these low-and high–rise havens even further.

Chapter 2 | 51 The value of ‘good design’ and having creative architects was, however, not a preferred option for developers until the State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP 65) came into effect in 2002 to enforce those issues.

Impact of higher density housing on neighbourhood character. The visual impacts of consolidation policies however, were not much felt in Sydney until more recently at the turn of the 20th century. During the late 1990s a combination of market-led development and a state-led policy of urban consolidation took a strong grip of suburban development in Sydney and Melbourne. Especially in the core inner areas where space is at a premium, economic aspects were always a priority promoting the tendency toward higher density high-rise residential buildings. With high-rise coming to tower over medium density forms in older inner areas protests grew against the high rise forms.

Figure 2.2.2: There goes the neighbourhood. A newspaper article on the Horizon, a 44 storey apartment designed by one of the most prolific Australian architects, . The noticeable landmark of Sydney was considered as a blessing and an irritant by Darlinghurst residents. Source: The SMH, 2003d. Bottom. A screen shot of web page, created as a campaign against the two 14 story apartments planned in Double Bay. Source: http://doublebayhighrise.com.au

Chapter 2 | 52 Figure 2.2.3: Towering forms of apartment buildings hovering disproportionately over lower density inner neighbourhoods. Source: Rashid, 2007.

In Melbourne a movement called 'save our suburbs' emerged, determined to defend, 'the world's most liveable city' (Lewis, 1999). The resistance, which was also seen in Sydney, focused on the perceived destruction of ‘urban character' in the older and relatively greener suburbs, and opposing inappropriate development of higher density high rise forms. However, the protests were not just against designs but also in opposition to the height of the buildings. The most common public criticism was regarding the size of the buildings. Typically higher than other surrounding nearby forms, new apartment blocks either dominate the landscape, or fail to integrate with the

Chapter 2 | 53 streetscape or sit uncomfortably with heritage buildings (Searle & Byrne, 2002; SMH, 2003b, 2008). In an interview published in an local daily paper, Glen Searle, senior lecturer at the School of the Built Environment at the University of Technology, makes a similar observation, ‘Scale is the problem’, (SMH, 2008). Searle indicates that in some cases, councils used powers under the State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP 1) to allow residential developments that exceeded height and floor space ratios set in local plans (Searle, 2007).

Interestingly, most of the studies of urban form have generally focused on the form in isolation, analysing it separately from the context (Butler-Bowdon, Pickett, Dupain, Sierins, & Historic Houses Trust of New South Wales., 2007). Since most protests were against the contextual fit (settings) of these forms it is pertinent that studies in inner areas take into account the issue of surroundings.

The State's response was to require that new development be intensified in 'activity centres' and respect the 'neighbourhood character' (as elaborated in a following section). Yet this was done without clarifying what 'activity centres' or 'character' might mean. In Melbourne, while neighbourhood character studies were commissioned for most of the metropolitan area these were generally limited to physical descriptions related to planning code requirements. As observed (Dovey, Woodcock, & Wood, 2005),

While the protection of character was legislated as a key criterion for residential development, definitions remain slippery—a slipperiness that is strongly related to the social dimensions of ‘character’ and place identity.

At the same time market-led developments on former industrial sites and on the urban fringe have been engaged in meeting this quest for 'character' via '' and based on historic themes, and are designed, built and marketed as having a strong sense of 'place' and 'community'. Their appearance is tightly controlled and privately legislated in the form of covenants which insulate residents against change. Following these events, in the current strategy, eventually much emphasis was given to public feedback regarding the impacts of consolidations. However it is important to note areas similar to the Victoria Park which are disused industrial land are not exposed to public scrutiny as they are located in a previously zoned industrial area. These may not provoke the level of protest that other areas have done in the past. Therefore it is important to ensure that in the future misdirected and unscrutinised approaches are not taken here.

Chapter 2 | 54 Design strategies in these areas will have a direct influence on how ‘sustainable development’ relates to what is visible, form-wise. The acceptance of these design strategies will be governed by people’s perception of ‘what it is they like’ and ‘what it is they don’t like’ – or the aesthetic. The growing response is to work with the physical conditions and natural resources in both landscape and architecture to achieve favourable human thermal comfort and turn problems brought about by climate change to environmental advantage (Phillips, 2003). Ideas from interrelated fields of architecture, landscape, and master planning, all have to work together to intervene physically within the environment. These are concerned with physical conditions and societal needs. Political processes are required to respect these, exhibit sensitivity to cultural identity and support physiological and industrial activity. Taking this and interconnectedness of sustainable development issues into consideration, both in identifying problems and providing solutions to those problems, it would seem logical to elaborate on the hypothesis of ‘place-based cognitions’ as the core of human activity and satisfaction. Against this background, changes in approach, attitudes and methodologies are evolving in landscape, architecture and master-planning disciplines. The next section will show that over the years, slowly, concern about these issues appeared to have an effect on policies and strategies for higher density residential developments.

2.2.2. Emergence of ESD, liveability and pro-design arguments in strategy and policy discourses The compact city idea, as a sustainable approach was central to both Sydney's 1994 and 1999 Metropolitan Strategies, and is in turn reflected in Sydney's most important planning policy, urban consolidation. Fuller accounts of policies and the strategies are provided elsewhere (Bunker, Gleeson, Holloway, & Randolph, 2002; Searle, 2004b). The NSW urban consolidation policies have developed gradually from rather straightforward beginnings in the early 1980s into a much more highly developed and accommodating policy framework, in response to issues surrounding the implementation of the policy on the ground and pressure at the local level.

Defining urban consolidation. In a document published in 1984 Planning Issues in the Sydney Region: Urban Consolidation, the NSW State Government defines urban consolidation as: increasing the density of dwellings or population, or both. It does not refer to one single policy, but rather a number of related land use measures and housing initiatives that can increase residential densities (Bunker et al., 2002). Bunker et al. observed that in practice, urban consolidation has taken two main forms: firstly, higher density development of new greenfield development on the urban fringe, and

Chapter 2 | 55 secondly 'densification', including 'spot densification', of existing urban space through redevelopment of brownfield and in-fill sites for residential use at medium to high densities. The research reported here focuses on policies that have an affect on the latter of these two forms of consolidation, that is, the densification of existing urban space.

Strategies in the Past. Following the revival of inner-city urban consolidation, compact city themes were becoming a major part of strategy and policy. At the end of the last century in inner areas, with increasing scarcity of available land for residential growth, large disused industrial brownfield areas (for example: Jackson’s Landing and the Victoria Park study area) were identified as possible future developments. This section briefly describes the strategies and urban consolidation policies of the NSW Government regarding urban consolidation which have been developed and applied since 1980 and their implications for housing in inner areas. Fuller accounts are provided elsewhere (Bunker et al., 2002; Searle, 2004b).

In the Cities for the 21st Century (1994) strategy, in addition to urban consolidation, efficiency, equity and environmental sustainability were basic goals. Themes from the past documents of the Integrated Transport Strategy (Department of Transport, 1993, 1995) Sydney's Future (Department of Planning, 1993) and 1988 Strategy were continued in this strategy. Like the 1988 strategy, the Cities Strategy had a target for multi-unit housing (65 per cent of total housing) and for greenfields housing density (15 dwellings per hectare). While the Cities strategy identifies surplus non-residential sites for multi-unit housing, it does not define the boundaries of future urban development.

The UN's Brundtland report had been influential in the introduction of ESD concerns into planning around the world since the time of the previous Sydney metropolitan strategy (1988). Following this, the ESD approach is held to include the triple bottom line integration of environmental, economic and social considerations, and fostering economic growth and economic systems which are resilient in the face of change. Thus the Cities Strategy seems to merge ESD with economic development under the broader notion of ‘sustainability'. A discussion is also evident in the Strategy on ecologically sustainable development and, more generally, the preservation of the natural environment.

The fundamental message in the Strategy is closely related to environmental sustainability: that of the compact city. In response to a focus group finding, the “spacious urban environment'' was considered one of the most special features of the

Chapter 2 | 56 region and the acknowledgment that detached housing is still the goal of most households. The arguments made in favour of compact developments were (cited in Searle, 2004b:380):

First, higher density development is highlighted with very positive quality especially that of being “vibrant”.

Next, positive equity and environmental outcomes from more compact development are stressed, particularly those resulting from better use of public transport.

Finally, the arguments for a more compact city are made by critically indicating that infrastructure and service provision cost savings will result.

The Strategy, although stressing that a high standard of urban design is vital to achieving its major goals, puts forward no proposals to address the issue of ‘poor design’, as much of new higher density housing’s inferior design was becoming a major issue when the Strategy was being prepared. Such was the case that architectural critic Elizabeth Farrelly in a newspaper column (SMH, 1993) frustratingly predicted the re-emergence of 1960s-style concrete blocks whose first two storeys would be ‘dead’ car parking space and would not be able to revitalise street activities in a former industrial inner area development of Pyrmont-Ultimo (cited in Searle & Byrne, 2002). It was almost a decade later, in 2002, that this was addressed by a NSW government building design code (SEPP 65), where car garages in front of unit blocks were to be underground or be screened from main roads.

Next the Shaping our Cities Strategy (1999) had emphasised the need for ‘good urban design’ to be part of consolidation strategies and urban development generally, setting out the basic principles to be followed. This reflected rising public concern about the quality of recent higher density housing. The promotion of good urban design is now seen as part of the creation of the ‘lively’ neighbourhoods which the 1995 strategy assumed would follow naturally from urban compaction.

The compact city discourse here remains predominant. The key principle of compacting cities is continued from the previous strategy but is asserted rather than argued despite a vigorous community debate on this. As stated in the strategy (cited in Searle & Byrne, 2002:382):

Chapter 2 | 57 To accommodate new homes, the choice between low density or more compact cities is clear. Rapidly expanding urban areas will have dire environmental, social and financial consequences....

Moreover, the virtues of compact cities are excessively elaborated and asserted to be “critical” to improving air quality. A compact city strategy is seen as reducing the “dire” environmental impacts that come from rapid urban expansion. A healthy environment is purported to be an important competitive advantage for the region. And unless car use is moderated, air quality will deteriorate as will equity of access and road congestion.

With Sydney being selected for the 2000 Olympic Games the idea of integrating environmental and economic objectives was seen as advantageous. Accordingly noted,

...environmental quality was critical in Sydney being selected for the 2000 Olympic Games. This setting is unique and important in attracting international commerce and tourism.... A high quality urban and natural environment improves the attractiveness for business investment and tourism. (Searle & Byrne, 2002:382)

At one point the two discourses are presented as mutually supportive: not only is a healthy environment claimed to have a competitive advantage but, equally, a strong economy is needed to actively protect and enhance the environment.

In housing it is clear that the government will lead this association by quantifying local priorities and identifying local options, and requiring local councils to introduce potentially contentious plans and controls to increase choice (in regard to higher density) and affordability. But again it moved aside the strong local opposition to urban consolidation via State directives in rhetorical fashion under “key planning principles'':

... we will continue to build partnerships to provide greater strategic direction in order to mesh metropolitan aims with local aspirations and circumstances... (cited in Searle & Byrne, 2002:382).

In the Shaping our Cities (1999) strategy, the compact city discourse in turn interconnects the ESD discourse and equity statements to underpin another planning discourse, that of public transport. This intersection of discourses produces a document in which a lot of the strategies are mutually supportive, strengthening its legitimacy and

Chapter 2 | 58 persuasive power. Over and over again Searle (2002: 384) observes that: ‘Nevertheless the discourses are just that, and there is little attempt to seriously justify their basic premises’. The most striking difference between these strategies (as well as in 2005) and its predecessor is the way its text, structure and visual presentation are used to promote it and existing achievements of the government. The visual dimension of the Strategy was especially noteworthy. Like the Strategy structure, it was intended to allow a wide audience to be reached, especially as the Strategy was made available via the Internet. However, Searle notes that instead of closely argued identification of issues and matching strategies and actions embedded in key discussions, the document makes much greater use of rhetoric, to declare rather than argue, and relies much more on visual cues to get its message across.

The compact city discussions at the centre of both strategies were reflected in a range of state government policies and actions to intensify urban consolidation (Randolph, 2006a). In the lead up to the 1994 strategy the government had promulgated state policies (see later section) requiring the rezoning of most residential areas to allow town houses and villa houses, and requiring councils to rezone obsolete industrial areas for medium and high density housing. The government also set up a development corporation and a planning framework to achieve major urban consolidation in the old industrial area of Pyrmont-Ultimo. New housing subdivisions were required to increase their density from the previous 10 dwellings/hectare to 15 per hectare. The NSW government continued this push, initiating Sydney's largest urban consolidation project in South Sydney using a new development corporation and its Landcom agency as major developer. Importantly, planning control of remaining significant consolidation development sites on the harbour and Parramatta River was taken away from councils.

Large-scale, fast-tracked consolidation has also been pursued by the NSW government on urban brownfield sites with the assistance of special-purpose development corporations empowered to oversee the redevelopment of former industrial land. Ultimo-Pyrmont, immediately west of the CBD, has been redeveloped at high density drawing on generous funding from the federal government’s Building Better Cities Scheme over the course of the 1990s, under the auspices of the City West Development Corporation (McGuirk & O'Neill, 2002). The Better Cities program ran from 1991 to 1996 as an example of direct federal intervention in urban policy. It aimed to develop a series of projects to demonstrate ‘how higher-density, planned

Chapter 2 | 59 urban development integrating housing, services and employment will help the three aims of economic efficiency, environmental sustainability and social justice’.

Similarly, high-density redevelopment at Green Square, close to Sydney airport, and proximate to the Victoria Park research site, is being driven by the South Sydney Development Corporation. Such projects have served multiple purposes and have been comprehensively attuned to both the ideological and the pragmatic settings of the contemporary paradigm. They have enabled progress towards urban consolidation goals while also realising substantial profits for State governments via private-sector-led redevelopment of public land. City West Development Corporation has again been involved in providing in a section of the Victoria Park master plan. However, since this study is not focused on any form of subsidised housing, it is not elaborated further.

The prominent ESD discussion in both strategies was only partially reflected in ongoing planning priorities and actions. Since the early 1990s each NSW government has seen its urban consolidation policies as the main instrument of ESD, principally via reduced air pollution resulting from assumed lower car use associated with consolidation. The main ESD planning achievement over this period was the remediation of a contaminated industrial area for the main 2000 Olympic Games facilities, which incorporated solar power and water re-use, and rehabilitation of adjacent remnant woodland. Five years after the 1999 strategy, the government introduced a requirement for new housing to meet a minimum rating in water and energy use.

However, only very recently, forms other than detached dwellings were required to follow BASIX – the Building Sustainability Index. The Sustainability Unit is responsible for SEPP 65 and also delivers the BASIX. From October 2005, a BASIX Certificate was required as a part of a development application for any residential flat building in NSW (NSW Department of Planning, 2008b; NSW Legislation, 2008).

City of Cities Metropolitan Strategy (2005), NSW Metropolitan Strategy indicates that over two-thirds of future residential developments would be in existing areas.

Extensive greenfield development has been avoided by developing under-utilised sites in the existing urban area in the current strategy. To minimise Sydney’s urban footprint the Metro strategy determines that only 30 to 40 per cent of new housing will be provided in greenfield areas over the next 25 to 30 years. The remaining 60 to 70 per

Chapter 2 | 60 cent (420,000 dwellings) will be in Sydney’s existing areas. These are to be targeted at existing town centres and higher density transit corridors.

However, any reference to words likes ‘densification’ or ‘compaction’ has been cautiously avoided in the NSW Metropolitan Strategy, but is outlined as a ‘Plan for increased housing capacity target in existing areas’ which is in reality a form of urban consolidation. In line with earlier (since 80s) policies and strategies, regarding increasing dwellings in Sydney, the strategy is aimed at the consolidation of existing areas.

Figure 2.2.4: Top. The Sydney Opera House highlighted in the cover of current strategy for Sydney, City of Cities Metropolitan Strategy. Bottom. 420,000 dwellings will be in Sydney’s existing areas. These numbers are to be targeted at existing town centres and higher density transit corridors. Source: Department of Planning, 2005

Location of new dwellings. Since 2000, around 75 per cent of new dwellings have been built in established areas of Sydney while 25 per cent were in new greenfield areas (Department of Planning, 2005a). In the past five years, 43 per cent of new dwellings in existing areas have been in locations with easy access to public transport.

Chapter 2 | 61 In another estimate, it is reported that by 2013 forecasts, 190,000 new dwellings will be built in existing areas (Figure 2.6) under current planning controls. Regions surrounding the case study location (South Sydney, East, Inner West, and Sydney City) will have approximately 50% of new dwellings. By 2013 Sydney City is further expected to house a large portion (31,380) of new dwellings, almost as much as low density outer region of West Central (35,900). Until 2004 Sydney City had seen a 71% increase in dwellings. By 2013 the increase is expected to be another 41% while the majority of areas will have only 8-24% change. There is thus going to be colossal change in the physical capacity and nature of the city area.

It is expected that Sydney City and other inner areas are to accommodate large portions of the new dwellings in rezoned industrial areas. Over the years, it should be noted, inner Sydney’s traditional industrial activity has been diminishing.

There is also continuing pressure for conversion of land for residential development. In 1971, Sydney's central industrial area was home to 42 percent of the region's manufacturing jobs; by 2001, the share had dropped to 17 percent. The amount of land zoned for industry has reduced, with space converted to warehousing, distribution and commercial uses and residential development.

This indicates that existing areas will have diminishing capacity to accommodate the new dwellings over the years. If this trend continues there is a likely possibility that most of the brownfield sites will be targeted to house Sydney’s growing population. This research, therefore, concentrates on a residential development in this part of the inner city where future developments are likely to take place.

The Victoria Park (study area) in Zetland, a brownfield development, was developed on a derelict industrial lot of inner Sydney. Located adjacent to a major thoroughfare, South Dowling Highway, it has easy access to bus and train routes. Other adjacent inner suburbs of Waterloo, Rosebery and Marrickville which have areas with a similar industrial past as Zetland and with easy access to public transport route have potential to be developed as new residential sites.

Chapter 2 | 62 Figure 2.2.5: Existing housing density in Sydney city. Map showing dwelling density. Areas closer to the CBD, in the darker colour have higher density. Zetland and Green Square, in lighter shade, at the bottom have much lower housing density. Source: Department of Planning 2005.

Chapter 2 | 63 Figure 2.2.6: Existing housing density and future trends in Sydney city. Top. Future trend of dwellings in Sydney in 2013. Bottom Increase in the existing dwelling number from 1994 – 2004. Source: Department of Planning 2005.

Another public project in Zetland, the Green Square urban renewal area, was among the major redevelopment or renewal sites identified in the plan. Identifying the areas, the plan states that these sites have the potential to accommodate a share of planned growth in dwellings and will have a strong influence on the future of the subregion (Department of Planning, 2005b, 2005d; DOP, 2005, p. 78). It added that these areas will,

...continue to provide a mix of housing types towards 2031, especially in centres with good accessibility, which can support higher–density forms of residential development, to suit the changing demographics of the subregion (Department of Planning, 2005b: 82).

However, unlike Victoria Park it was envisaged as a mixed use high-density development. It was observed in the brief that from the outset the Green Square project was to be a high density development. This research, therefore, contends that the high density high-rise solutions for areas near the CBD may not be appropriate for areas which are further away, if we take into account the socio-demographic factors, issues

Chapter 2 | 64 of liveability and lifestyles. The design ideas practiced in these ambitious projects with large public land can be repeated to some extent since the area has a mix of both public and private sites. It is therefore very important how these residential projects are received by the public (users) which can act as an example for private developers in building future residential projects.

Enhancing liveability. In a noticeable departure from previous plans the current strategy had ‘enhancing liveability’ as one its six aims. As argued, it is possibly influenced by current discourses on the connection between city development and societal issues. The plan states:

Enhance Sydney’s liveability, by ensuring a diverse choice of housing for an ageing and changing population, close to services, while protecting the character of our suburbs and communities (Department of Planning, 2005d: 3).

However, in the separate housing section of the strategy no such description or detail was laid out for ‘enhancing the liveability’ of higher density housing in inner areas. Similar to the observations made by Dovey et al. (2005) in reference to the strategy for Melbourne, ‘protection of character’ which is strongly related to the social dimensions of ‘character’ and place identity, still seems to be ambiguous.

According to the Housing section of the plan in addition to protecting the region’s resource lands, some of the benefits of locating new ‘dwellings in existing areas’ (code words for consolidation) are (Department of Planning, 2005c: 130):

Strengthen the local economy Optimise use of services and infrastructure More sustainable transport Allow for multiple uses of facilities Improved local planning More interesting places to live Improved design quality Improved housing mix Healthier environments Preserving the character of some places.

It is encouraging to observe that the latter six of the above benefits are connected to liveability. It is stated that by improving design quality new buildings can make a constructive contribution to public areas, and assist the development of pedestrian

Chapter 2 | 65 friendly streets connecting to open space. This is also being practiced in the study area of Victoria Park.

It continues with existing initiatives to improve the design of higher density housing to be extended to lower density housing, including the development of design quality criteria (Searle, 2006). Consolidation has been promoted as having the potential to address some wider urban problems including reducing the use of cars and increasing access to employment. The impact of Sydney’s ‘global arc’ economic corridor plan which runs over the area of Victoria Park and other residential areas has not been elaborated.

Community feedback. Given the rising concern with consolidation, the current strategy places greater importance on public feedback - unlike previous strategies. Instead of brushing aside the strong local opposition to urban consolidation as seen in previous plans it makes an effort to harmonise popular sentiments. Craig Knowles (2004), when Minister for Infrastructure & Planning Minister for Natural Resources reasserted the importance of feedback,

A plan for Sydney is not one plan, it’s a rolling series of actions and decisions that reinforce what the community has been telling us.

In late 2004, around 1000 people from across the Sydney and the Central Coast, Lower Hunter and Illawarra regions took part in a series of forums on the Metropolitan Strategy. They were asked to discuss what they valued most about where they live, to identify things which will make Sydney an even better place to live over the next 25 years and to say what they wanted Sydney or their region to be like in 25 years.

Among the issues three emerged to be the most important in the following order,

• Natural environment, • Urban planning, • Public transport.

The natural environment was the vital theme that emerged at every forum. Different people had various ideas, depending on which part of Sydney they live in. At the North and South forums, people talked about green space, local bushland and access to national parks. People from the East forum related to Centennial Park, Royal Botanic Gardens, to smaller local parks, open space and the harbour foreshore and beaches.

Chapter 2 | 66 People talked about protecting, preserving and having access to the natural environment. People identified strongly with their local environment — beaches, parks, bushland, waterways and reserves. Unsure about future generations one of them remarked,

“Any further deterioration of the natural environment will lead to Sydney losing the qualities that make it the attractive and liveable place that it is today.” (Department of Planning, 2005d: 17)

Lack of open space and overall liveability in future (sustainability) were the issues with utmost importance for people participating in the forum.

A dilemma seems to be presented where there is push for higher density from sustainability issues of growth which would signify loss of open spaces while, on the other hand, a majority of Sydney residents tend to prefer more open green spaces. These issues can be tackled to some extent only in inner city edges where disused industrial and other brownfield land are available.

Figure 2.2.7: Vertical villages in the city, a feature in a local daily on the recent surge in the development of higher density apartments in Sydney. In areas close to the CBD high-rises vary from 8 storeys to 75 storeys high. Close to the study area the apartments in Redfern, Surry Hills and Kings Cross are 14- 19 storeys high. Source: Sydney Morning Herald, 2003.

Chapter 2 | 67 Policy background. In 1980 in a review of existing multi-unit development in Sydney, the NSW Department of Environment and Planning began to examine other ways of increasing the densities of existing suburban areas. Subsequently broad-brush densification policies like the Sydney Regional Environmental Plans (REP) focusing on dual occupancy were developed (Bunker et al., 2002). In early stages, these did not bring about the required result of a marked increase in the density of development of existing areas. Later, the NSW Government created a broad-based Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) permitting general medium density housing in all residential areas. This faced strong local opposition and instead, in 1982, a target of 12,000 medium density dwellings to be constructed across Sydney was set. Following on from this, a policy was published to include medium density housing for the aged and disabled in all residential zones (with some exceptions) through SEPP No. 5 in 1982; reduction of minimum lot sizes and introduction of integrated housing' (SEPP No. 25 of 1987); and improved and more flexible conditions under which dual occupancy could take place (REP No. 12 in 1987) (Bunker et al., 2002). Another State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP No. 28 of 1989) enabled townhouses and villa houses to be built in all residential and special use zones. Councils were also given flexibility to apply to the Minister for exemptions from SEPP No. 12 and No. 25 if their Local Environmental and Development Control Plans contained provisions consistent with the government's urban consolidation policy.

From 1993 onwards there has been an even wider variety of responses to the densification of the city. There has been a greater mixture of policy assistance coming from the state level with a number of design control guidelines. Importantly, this phase has seen a more prescriptive approach to the location of higher density forms with the explicit promotion of development around key transport nodes and urban centres.

In 1995, the State Government required local government to prepare Residential Development Strategies (RDSs) to allow additional dwellings of a suitable type to be developed within the existing urban area to minimise sprawl. The objectives and requirements for these strategies were set out in State Environmental Planning Policy SEPP 53: Metropolitan Residential Development (Department of Planning, 2005a). The strategies were required to identify local housing opportunities and to zone land to allow for increased residential development. These strategies have been reflected in land use zones in Local Environmental Plans. These RDSs have been successful by both providing a sufficient amount and appropriate location of supply. In the past five

Chapter 2 | 68 years, 43 per cent of new dwellings in existing areas have been in locations with easy access to public transport.

In 1997, the NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning (NSW DUAP) combined all existing consolidation policies into one document published as SEPP No. 53 - Metropolitan Residential Development. This in essence provided for exemption from the whole, or parts, of the policy for councils adopting suitable residential development strategies and supporting local environmental plans.

In 2002 there has been another policy, SEPP No.65, which solely deals with design issues of the higher density residential forms, and is elucidated later in a separate section.

2.2.3. Forms of higher density dwellings Dwelling Characteristics. There is a diverse mix of housing within the Sydney inner city areas, ranging from high rise apartments even within parts of Sydney CBD to terrace houses in Erskineville and Zetland, some warehouse conversions in Surrey Hills and Chippendale and a small number of detached houses in locations such as Beaconsfield and Rosebery. Post war growth saw development in Surrey Hills of public housing and, later, different forms of medium density dwelling in different areas of the inner city. Since the turn of this century areas close to the CBD, (Glebe, Pyrmont, Ultimo) and a little farther away to the south in Zetland and Waterloo, have witnessed the rise of considerable numbers of medium to high density (low-rise to high-rise) residential developments as the population growth gained momentum.

Sydney city (defined as a subregion in the ABS), in comparison to the other subregions, is home to the smallest number of residents, and it is the most densely populated. The subregion comprises the highest proportion of flats and apartments in Greater Sydney, 77 per cent per cent of dwellings, and the smallest proportion of single dwellings, with 2.4 per cent of the remainder, approximately 21 per cent, comprised of semidetached dwellings, such as terraces and town houses (Department of Planning, 2005b).

While the mix of dwelling types in inner city areas (such as separate houses, row/terrace houses, shop top houses, low-rise and high-rise flats/apartments) varies, a common feature of inner city housing is the low proportion of separate houses. On average, 7% of all occupied private dwellings in the five inner city areas were separate houses, compared to 74% for the metropolitan areas as a whole. As well as the development of medium density housing (e.g. medium density houses close to the

Chapter 2 | 69 CBD in Sydney), the on-going competition for land in inner city areas has favoured the development of adjoined dwellings and, increasingly, dwellings in high-rise blocks (ABS, 1996, 1999). Almost two thirds of all dwellings in inner Sydney (64%) were in buildings of four or more storeys high.

Studies have found that currently in Sydney different consolidation policies and strategies over the years resulted in, typically, the following types of dwelling (Bunker et al., 2002):

Dual occupancy. Two independent buildings on a single plot are defined as dual occupancy. The dwellings may be in the form of an extended single house under one roof, two separate dwellings, two new attached dwellings or one dwelling above another. Multiple small lot housing. This refers to separate dwellings each with their own title, built on small lots and arranged in groups. Housing for the aged and disabled (State Environmental Planning Policy, SEPP 5, Housing) is usually arranged as attached dwellings in groups of varying size, and of single, or more rarely two-storey construction. Townhouses and villa homes. Villas are generally single storey, and townhouses usually of two or three storeys. These forms are self-contained dwellings with open space, attached to one another in groups or in clusters. Flats and units (apartments). These consist of attached dwellings in various configurations of height and number within an individual building.

All these can be referred to as medium density housing (Judd & Dean, 1983), although the latter types are often regarded as 'high density'. Depending on the height of the forms the latter forms (low-rise or high-rise) are classified as high density or medium density. These forms have been to some extent prevailing in Sydney long before the consolidation policies. For the purposes of this study, the terms medium and high density housing interchangeably refer to all the five forms of dwelling listed above. However, the forms of Victoria Park are referred to as medium-high or higher density forms, since it has a varied mix of low-rise to high-rise forms.

Chapter 2 | 70 Figure 2.2.8: Selected dwelling forms of Inner Sydney. Source: Rashid, 2007. Top. Terraces varying in style and detail - a recognisable earliest dwelling form of inner areas. Divided by partition walls the individual dwellings interact with the street and create a ‘neighbourhood character’. Middle. Medium density walk-ups of 60s-70s, another noticeable dwelling form of Sydney’s inner area, lack the quality & sensitivity of connectivity with the street shown by the terraces. The banal forms/facades do not correspond to any orientation. Here in one example the inner court is entirely given to paved parking ignoring demands for outdoor green areas. Normally the street level is either blocked by garages or does not interact with street. Bottom. Continuous stretch of facade of repetitive elements of current higher density high-rise forms fails to respond to the neighbourhood and street.

Chapter 2 | 71 2.2.4. Uplifting ‘good design’ through legislation Over the ten-year period 1986 to 1996, the majority of the development in Sydney's inner area was in units in buildings above four stories (ABS 1996). The NSW State Government’s urban consolidation policies have generated a dramatic increase in the development of medium and high-rise apartment buildings in Sydney.

Consolidation policies in the past, however innovative, could not ameliorate the mediocre level of higher density housing solutions especially in the inner areas. Such was the level of ‘ugly flat syndrome’ (AAP & SMH, 2002; Delaney, 2002) prevailing for more than a decade, that the Premier of NSW criticized the development industry for its ‘degrading’ of residential apartment developments – labelled ‘brick shoeboxes’, and commissioned the government’s Urban Design Advisory Committee to carry out a design review (Searle, 2007: 10).

A debate was also held on residential flat design issues in March 2000, based on the Premiers initiative, which brought together more than 200 planners, architects, developers, builders and local government officials in a single forum (NSW DIPNR, 2004). Based on this forum the government’s Urban Design Advisory Committee recommended the following four specific actions which were subsequently taken up by the NSW Government. These were:

• A new State Environmental Planning Policy which, among other things, ensures that only designers with the proper experience and qualifications are able to design these particular buildings; • Design Pattern book which acts as a tool to show developers and designers examples of better designed flat buildings; • A comprehensive Model Code that gives clear advice and assistance on how to design the key elements of better designed flats and • The establishment of new Design Review Panels to support councils in the development approvals process.

Then NSW Premier Bob Carr maintained that the objective was also to improve overall liveability,

It shows how some very simple design principles can not only greatly improve the appearance of buildings but, more importantly, make them better places to live (AAP & SMH, 2002).

Chapter 2 | 72 The result was new legislation in 2002 in the form of the Special Environmental Planning Policy (State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 (NSW Legislation, 2008).

During the assessment of any Development Application, the SEPP specifies three matters which are to be obliged:

• the ten design quality principles contained within the SEPP; • the Residential Flat Design Code; and • advice received from a 'Design Review Panel'.

Accordingly any application to which this SEPP applies must include detailed information specifying how the application meets both the design quality principles and the Residential Flat Design Code. Within social dimensions and housing affordability, virtues of good design are noted in conjunction to social issues,

Good design responds to the social context and needs of the local community in terms of lifestyles, affordability, and access to social facilities (NSW Legislation, 2008).

The ten Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings, solely aimed at improving the design quality of low-rise, medium-rise and high-rise buildings are,

Context, Scale, Built form, Density, Resources, Energy and water efficiency, Landscape, Amenity, Safety and security, Social dimensions and Housing affordability, Aesthetics.

Interestingly, the environmental sustainability and design issues are considered to be linked (NSW Department of Planning, 2008b; NSW Legislation, 2008), which is one of major hypotheses of this research. For example, BASIX recognises good cross ventilation for an individual dwelling with a quantitative reduction in estimated cooling loads and therefore greenhouse gas emissions. Simultaneously, cross ventilation may continue to be required for the purpose of ‘Amenity’ under SEPP 65. Similarly, good orientation for daylight access may also be required, and may continue to be required for the purpose of ‘Amenity’ under SEPP 65.

These are issues (with the exception of social issues) that architects, in theory at least, normally consider when designing any building. Therefore, the legislation required that qualified designers be engaged to design, or direct the design of, all residential flat development above three stories. A key element of SEPP 65 is the establishment of Design Review Panels, which may be established for a region or for one or more local

Chapter 2 | 73 government area. Each Panel consisted of up to five people, with expertise in architecture, urban design, environmental planning, and . The Regulation also requires a statement of environmental effects accompanying a development application for residential flat development.

A Residential Flat Design Code was issued as a resource tool to assist councils, planners, developers and architects to improve apartment design. The Design Code sets broad parameters for good flat design by illustrating the use of development controls and consistent guidelines. Aspects of local context, site and building design are covered in the Design Codes. The Design Code document description maintains that the codes endorse a ‘place-based approach’, by providing guidance in defining suitable building types and designing place-specific building envelopes, development controls and guidelines.

This document concentrates on residential flat development in relation to three different scales:

Local context, Site, and Building.

A Residential Flat Design Pattern Book was published in 2001 illustrating ten case studies of best practice in Sydney, and presenting principles for good design for three typical apartment types (NSW Department of Planning, 2008a). The pattern book presents a range of built and virtual examples of well designed (selected) residential apartment buildings and by describing the positive contribution each makes to its urban context. A helpful resource book, its objective was to provide base-level information of good quality design that was accessible to the community of the building industry, to regulators and councils and designers. The higher density designs similar to the Victoria Park Study Area designs were also exemplified as ‘good designs’ in the pattern book.

Later in 2004 another publication Improving Flat Design: a progress report (NSW DIPNR, 2004), was produced to review the quality of residential developments that have occurred mostly in Sydney inner areas and its surroundings. It studies 20 built projects since the Premier issued his challenge over designs of apartments in 2000 that demonstrate a visually observed improvement in design quality. Two designs from Victoria Park were illustrated as ‘good examples’ of perimeter block development set around an internal court in a master planned redevelopment area.

Chapter 2 | 74 Figure 2.2.9: Resources by NSW Department of Planning illustrating good design practices. Top image. Residential Flat Design Code (2002), Resource tools for improving the design of residential flat buildings. Middle image. The Residential Flat Design Pattern Book published in 2001 illustrates ten case studies of best practice. Bottom image. Improving Flat Design: a progress report in 2004, reviews the quality of residential developments that have occurred since the Premier issued his challenge over designs of apartments in 2000. Source: NSW Department of Planning, 2001, 2004

Chapter 2 | 75 Figure 2.2.10: Pages from Improving Flat Design: a progress report. Among 20 projects featured, two low-rise designs (Centric and Nova) from the study area are illustrated as examples of ‘good design’. Source: NSW Department of Planning, 2008

Chapter 2 | 76 In other words this Residential Flat Design Code (2002) booklet - through built examples - promotes the effectiveness of SEPP 65 and associated resources. Without conforming to any particular style or design, various aspects of design, surface articulation, built form and sensitivity to context have been indicated. The majority of the aspects shown are also applicable for the designs of Victoria Park. These are (NSW DIPNR, 2004: 1- 48):

• Form and block design

Block edge built form gives good street definition. Perimeter building form defines the central courtyard. The massing and strong horizontality of the apartment block provide a strong sense of enclosure. ‘Perimeter edge’ provides good street definition. Defined corner helps to modulate form. Provides a range of apartment types and sizes. Variety in roof forms Distinct top, middle and base with contrasting forms (for higher forms).

• Street level treatments

Good street definition where facade follows street alignment. Good definition of street edge also enables passive surveillance from retail premises at street level and from the first floor screened terrace. Human scale at pedestrian level is enhanced by setting tower elements back behind a low rise form. Multiple entries ensure only a small number of apartments per lobby (for lower forms). Ground level apartments are raised half a level above street level to enhance privacy but still provide visual passive surveillance. Retaining existing trees enhance privacy and outlook of apartments as well as creating a beautiful park-like streetscape and noise buffer. Mixed uses with retail at street level. Good definition of street edge also enables passive surveillance from retail premises at street level.

• Orientation

Cross-ventilation of apartments.

Chapter 2 | 77 Orientation to optimise solar penetration. Facades respond to orientation, setting and context. West facing sunscreens add amenity, contribute to identity, and shield against over-heating.

• Facade and fenestration

A range of complementary colours / materials helps provide definition and form to facades. Use of colour accents on structural party walls adds visual interest. Facades with strong formal lines and sleek materials enhance streetscape. Louvers provide excellent solar control to apartments whilst still providing outlook. Materials include bricks, clear and opaque glass and metal cladding which provide detail to the facade.

• Balcony design and material

Adjustable sliding louvered panels and balcony balustrade design allow for all-weather utilisation of balconies. Balconies provided with sliding louvered screens for sun protection and offer an alternative apartment style. Balconies provide both recessed and a projecting form which allows for weather protection as well as facade interest. Recessed balconies provide enhanced privacy and weather protection and sliding louvered screens enhance useability. Deep recessed balconies provide residents with enhanced privacy and more useable outside area. Recessed and projecting balconies give variety and modulation to the facades. Variety in balustrades: solid, grilles and glazed. Balcony balustrades of clear glass maximise views.

• Courtyard design

Dramatic landscape elements and planting schemes provide a pleasant courtyard environment for residents. Courtyard entirely located on ‘deep soil’ zone and provided with pergolas, water features, native and exotic planting.

Chapter 2 | 78 By locating parking under buildings in a ‘donut’ shape, the courtyard can provide deep soil to allow for substantial trees.

• Car Parking

Concealed car parking below courtyards. Semi-basement parking (for high-rises) without mechanical ventilation. Discreet car parking entry off side streets.

Even though the intention was to raise the minimum standards, these attempts were prescriptive (formalistic, concentrated more on individual building outlook) in their approach and were done from the perspective of expert designers based on the assumptions that these would be accepted widely and would benefit the users. With the exception of some of the street level formal qualities, Urban Design aspects of access to open spaces and greenery - integral to form design, especially in those of master planned settlements similar to the study area - were largely overlooked.

In addition there were some concerns that the pattern book would limit the creative ideas of architects; that it could be used as a document to force something to be designed in a negative sense. It might also be used to constrain an established architect or stop a talented young designer because the planners may wield greater control and demand a specific apartment typology ‘by the book’. Ex-NSW Government Architect Chris Johnson who was involved in the publication however argued against that notion and expressed his view regarding creative expression in an interview:

I think we need a certain amount of civic decorum and order and pleasant, well- mannered background for much of the city. Obviously you’ve got to have spark and difference, and there will always be fabulous things on special sites...

...obviously we don’t want it to be used in that way. It’s all about getting some decent creativity and good thinking into the design of our cities and suburbs. This is certainly not intended to say this is the only way; the fabulous one-off designs should and will occur anyway. (Johnson, 2002a)

Initially concerns were raised by some developers regarding the acceptability of non- economic values such as aesthetics, health, or liveability (SMH, 2001, 2002). They mentioned that the extra design work and consultation would raise the cost of apartments. The Urban Taskforce, including Mirvac, Meriton and a few other major

Chapter 2 | 79 developers in the multi-residential development industry, protested about being shut out of the design panels (SMH, 2001, 2002). They asserted:

While an improvement in urban design standards would be a good thing...the extra design work and consultation will make inner city developments a domain of the rich.

However, in the first place, if the pattern language had been generated from users feedback or users’ perspectives it would have made design related approaches more desirable (from the buyers viewpoints) and would have added value to the design efforts. Then, economical viability would not have been an issue. The research reported here, for instance, weighed the importance of these concerns and investigated whether these apartments are considered as good value for money/a good investment as well as relating to affordability issues (see Questionnaire in Appendix 3).

Once issues of built form, architectural design and environmental aspects are taken care of, it is opportune to question the social sustainability of the housing solutions of inner areas after SEPP 65 became effective. More importantly, from a societal point of view, most people opting for more consolidated living seek the urbanity that inner city areas provide (Daly, 1998). Social (socio-psychological) issues need to be addressed for long term liveability (social sustainability) of these designs.

Since the designs in Victoria Park followed and expanded the design ideas laid out in the pattern book this research also provides a societal insight into the impact of physical design guidelines. It investigates the features from the users’ perspectives that have been portrayed as good and positive in addition to the aesthetics. This research therefore attempts to comprehend the nature of inner city living, and the preferences and attitudes of this growing population, to shed light on future dwelling designs in those areas.

2.2.5. Summing up– implications of higher density city living Consolidation seemingly offered a solution to a wide range of pressing urban problems – the high infrastructure costs of low density sprawl, excessive car use, declining housing affordability, lack of housing variety, and serious air and water pollution (Searle, 2006). By the turn of the 20th century the urban consolidation programs had been operating at a significant level for two decades. This led to several academic (Bunker, Holloway, & Randolph, 2005b; Searle, 2004a) assessments of the outcomes of the policies and strategies, particularly concerning the social impacts of urban consolidation. Searle in his article asserts,

Chapter 2 | 80 The scale and density of residential redevelopment have arguable social limits, and there are constraints on the capacity of the urban fabric to accommodate ever-increasing densities (Searle, 2004a: 12).

These concerns are also shared by this research. They have formed the rationale for embarking on this study on an inner area residential development which has evolved as a consequence of urban consolidation. Without compromising liveability aspects, it is arguable whether the growth rate of new dwellings can be maintained sustainably all over Sydney City subregion as determined by the plan.

Then the questions arise, what would be the forms of these new dwellings in which areas? Can the negative effects of higher density forms be neutralised by innovative design ideas in a master plan, building forms and apartment plans? How can ‘good designs’ (surrogating for sustainable design) enhance the liveability of whole settings and not simply concentrate on the forms of housing devoid of setting?

From the outset, in some areas there is a predisposition from the planning point of view that only higher density forms can accommodate the new dwellings in inner areas. If the liveability of new residential areas is under consideration, providing diverse sets of dwellings in terms of only apartment size in high density forms would be myopic. The whole setting of higher density residential areas needs to be part of the plan, not just building forms. Ways and means need to be explored to ensure those higher rise built environments are liveable while providing a varied range of units and facilities. As we have seen the saliency of design issues that have come forth over the years in the planning policies and strategies for densification of the city, is not merely a question of providing certain number or density it becomes an issue of how these are provided through appropriate design. In similar vein Judd, argues that good housing and urban design becomes more critical as housing densities increase,

... in low-density residential environments the landscape dominates and privacy, solar access and on-site parking can more easily be achieved through the low scale and separation of buildings. As density increases, the form and character of buildings is more dominant in the streetscape and solar access, privacy and the increase in vehicle numbers require more sophisticated design solutions. Likewise, the more limited opportunities for landscape require more strategic and careful consideration.(SMH, 2003b)

Chapter 2 | 81 Figure 2.2.11: Effects of density can be reduced skilfully by design. Top left. In Victoria Park a five storeyed form is broken up into two fragments with each having separate surface treatment. In the background the 20 storeyed high-rise is seen. Top right. Distinctive approaches in the designs of high density apartment forms are clearly visible in the streetscapes. Moreover, horizontality is accentuated by design elements. Effects of high density can be counteracted adeptly by design, as seen on the views from Victoria Park. Note the high-rise form at the far end is 20 storeys. Bottom. Whereas, on the lower two street views of an adjacent precinct (with similar density) appear to have very higher density & congested forms even though some of the forms are lower than Victoria Park. Also note the absence of trees which scale and humanise the streetscape.

Chapter 2 | 82 There needs to be much more sensitivity to local circumstances and housing needs in planning for future medium and high-density development (Bunker et al., 2005b). Evidence from Sydney suggests that this process of revitalization is spatially very selective and as a result it is overly simplistic to talk about the inner suburbs as a whole. Within inner city areas there exists a very considerable mix of both land use and building quality. Moreover the socio-economic characteristics of residents and their attitudes towards the issues of preservation, rebuilding and high-rise tend to vary between the different types of residential environments. Consequently no single planning prognosis can exist for all inner suburban areas. Standardisation ‘is fatal because great diversity in age and types of buildings has a direct, explicit connection with diversity of population, diversity of enterprises and diversity of scenes’ (Jacobs, 1964: 225). Very high densities, such as Le Corbusier’s famous scheme for rebuilding inner Paris, and as witnessed in modern day Hong Kong for instance, are sometimes plagued by the issue of a standardised form being repeated over and over again. Beyond this, there is a considerable danger of standardised buildings, of ‘rank upon rank of virtually identical massive elevator apartment houses’ (Jacobs, 1964: 228), generating large purposeless open areas between them.

Much of the necessary local analysis seems based on estimates of physical capacity. However the findings of the research reported in an article show that housing needs and social conditions should inform the setting of targets and selection of locations for intensive renewal. It is also noted that over ambitious targets and changes extrapolate and enlarge concentrations of existing housing sub-markets formed by households in difficult circumstances, and this can aggravate social problems and build the ‘slums of the future’ (Bunker et al., 2005b: 24).

Lifestyle aspirations. As mentioned, there is a tendency in studies to aggregate all of the inner areas as one. In addition to the forms of housing as argued in a previous section, lifestyle aspirations would be somewhat different from people living near core inner areas. The socio-demographic profile is also shown as being different from core areas. There is also a presence of higher numbers of professional and managerial classes in the area of study from that of core areas. This again brings us back to the arguments by Florida (2002) of the rise of the creative class. He argues, we have seen, that companies will go where creative professionals are, and they in turn will settle where they want to live rather than necessarily following the companies. If creativity is an important aspect of urban development, how is it to be understood or positioned with respect to the communities that inhabit the city? Therefore, one approach would

Chapter 2 | 83 be the successful commodification of this class’s need by providing appropriately designed living environments along with other infrastructure that support creativity.

What most studies have overlooked was the issues of good design and liveability coming to the forefront in later strategies and policies, as shown here in the previous sections. Since this research also sees these as core ideas, these issues are further highlighted by going through the lifestyles aspirations of the urbanites.

To date, many studies assume that, in Australia, higher density housing has been perceived as a temporary housing option for most people before they move on to the house in the suburbs or beyond (Randolph, 2006b; Troy, 1996b). However this absolute statement may not be always valid, for instance, for urbanites seeking inner urban lifestyles.

The survey questionnaire developed in this current research has included ‘future preference of area’ (inner location or suburbs) and of ‘built form’ (high-rise low-rise or mid-rise). This should reflect on the general perception that at a certain age or lifecycle stage people move back to the detached house in suburbs. If the conditions are there they may move to a similar form of dwelling. The developers are taking advantage of this psyche by building more child friendly apartments and by focusing on ‘the city as their backyard’. It seems the estate agents are also interpreting works on these social dynamics and so their practices and spoken accounts of these issues are potentially of great value. Certainly the accounts given by agents in Sydney newspapers show a good degree of consistency and sociological awareness.

Variety. It is recommended that higher density developments should include a mix of flats of various sizes and town houses (Randolph, 2006b). Since, it is noted, that to meet the predicted numbers, new smaller households may be planned for. Planners do not seem to have understood that planning for thousands of flats in higher density town centres may well lead to a degree of urban spatial segregation based on lifestyle or life stage that is new for Australian cities (Talen, 2008). The implication is that DINKS (Dual/income, no kids), singles, YUPPIES (young upwardly-mobile professionals or young urban professionals) and ‘empty nesters’ will become concentrated in flats in high density centres, while families are consigned to houses in lower density suburbs. This would be contrary to the prevailing notions about the importance of socially inclusive cities with more balanced communities (Talen, 2008). To avoid this, the plans and strategies could ensure that a range of higher density housing opportunities are delivered that encourage a wider social mix for all household types and needs. This

Chapter 2 | 84 means the inclusion of a substantial proportion of larger affordable family size dwellings in the new higher density stock. If not, then families will be effectively excluded from this form of housing.

However, it is important to note that, simply providing larger apartments and providing facilities indoors would not bring in families. Families with children need a safe residential environment where there are facilities for their children in addition to the needs of schooling and child care facilities. But increasing the attraction of these areas for children also means the provision of appropriate safe space for play and recreation areas—and not just play grounds for pre-schoolers. Over the longer term, children become teenagers. Importantly, the higher density residential developments should consider facilities that cater to their needs too.

Outdoor greenery. Outdoor spaces are limited in core inner areas locations. The severity of the shortage of open areas has been mentioned in several studies (Randolph, 2006a; Searle, 2004a, 2006). Sydney inner city areas have insufficient local open space even with below-peak population levels. For example, the inner Leichhardt municipality in Sydney has 1.66 ha of open space per 1,000 people compared to the standard in the NSW planning act of 2.83 ha per 1,000 (Searle, 2004a). In the major Pyrmont-Ultimo zone of residential redevelopment in Sydney, calculations based on government planning documents indicate that there will be 0.48 ha of local parks and squares per 1,000 residents in 2021. Such data imply that there is a shortage of open space in inner areas, and that new open space needs to be provided with new residential development in those areas.

In the study area which is a large master planned residential development the demand for more open space and local services may be higher and different to core areas. More people and higher residential densities will inevitably create a demand for local open areas in these developments.

Do Australians have to change their attitudes towards open space when they move in new higher density urban centres? Councils will need to plan for appropriate levels of open space which may be difficult unless sites are put aside for such use. It is not just the issue of providing open areas such as public parks; the residential areas need to provide outdoor green space too. And where open space is provided, it may become increasingly contested, for example, between those families with children that may live there, people of different age who need it for socialising and sport, people who want it for peace, quite and relaxation, and those who need space to exercise their dogs.

Chapter 2 | 85 These are the few functions of the outdoors that have been observed in the reconnaissance survey of inner area residential developments, and need to be considered.

Furthermore outdoor spaces can be accommodated in the designs, by the inclusion of internal courtyards and larger balconies. Johnson, as mentioned, argued that people in the very centre may prefer garden-less apartments, while an increasing number are looking to combine a small suburban garden with an urban lifestyle. Apartment designs can fill these needs...

"But I think that if we can change the image of what an apartment is to be more about gardens and outdoor spaces and things, then we get a much different kind of reading by communities about apartments" (Johnson, 2002b).

Moreover, having outdoor space would encourage families with children to relocate to apartments. Outdoor facilities that vary from accommodating pre-schoolers to teenagers are also considered here. This issue of variety in dwelling types has been considered in the Victoria Park designs. Here the range of dwelling types are town houses and one bedroom to three bedroom type apartments, and these are distributed in the different complex types of varying heights. Moreover, here variety is pursued in the form of the design ranging in aesthetics to plan level organisation.

Taking the aspects discussed here into consideration the study therefore makes an effort to elicit from users the extent of suitability and satisfaction derived from the designs of higher density apartments and the overall setting.

Chapter 2 | 86 2.3. Conceptions of ‘good’ urban form, aspects of liveability and sustainable design

The sections which follow are a synthesis of the literature and an attempt to comprehend the context of the study area from master plan level to individual block level including outdoor spaces in courts and parks. However, overall, the perimeter block is always a central theme, appropriately in this research - and everything else is related to and connected to that form, space and its design.

The section on functionalities of urban block and spaces reviews two examples of perimeter blocks from past precedents showing how this typology can be varied to suit different urban contexts and design ideals. This section explores whether and how the prevailing ideas of urban design and urban form are echoed in the design of projects in Victoria Park.

In order to understand the economical dynamics and the transformation of urban models, a careful analysis of the architectural models of the urban block is necessary. Not only does the urban block transform under the influence of changes in socio- cultural and economic contexts, but also the relation between the private space of dwellings and the public domain of the city turns highly relevant. Since stand-alone forms were developed to create more outdoor spaces in opposition to perimeter block forms, spaces created by both of these typologies and their implications are also investigated. Again some of the positive outcomes of the stand alone form schemes, devised by Le Corbusier which found its way into current designs of perimeter blocks, are brought to light and exemplified through a design from Victoria Park.

The next section, qualities of urban residential form and liveability goes through the arguments of contemporary theorists and thinkers on the physical structure of urban form and its liveability. In doing so, this part connects physical design and place- making to societal capital.

The ‘good city’ and ‘good form’ attributes of social, environmental and spatial/formal properties elucidated by many others theorists and thinkers, have found their way into current thinking on sustainability of urban form. On the other hand, all of these ideas of form were inspired from traditional (pre-modern) cities and were adapted for the contemporary city in their current settings. This section specifically focuses on physical

Chapter 2 | 87 aspects of the sustainable design of the block typology promoted by studies and legislative bodies.

The next section focuses on outdoor spaces (courtyard and parks). One of the exclusive features of the Victoria Park design is that all complexes have green inner courtyards and all complexes are in close proximity to the green park spaces. The perimeter blocks of Europe may have similarity of formal quality but the character (greenness) of public and private spaces created here in Australia would be different from dense European examples, given the climatic and socio-cultural variation. There is a perception that Australians have a strong affinity for natural features or greenery and the bush and that is reflected in their lifestyle choices (Department of Planning, 2005d: 17). Therefore, this section looks into the environmental/ecological gain to psycho-social capital from greenery experienced positively by users of urban areas. Finally, the involvement of design in creating outdoor spaces is revisited.

When environmental design approaches put too much emphasis on design, this tends to negate the users. From the outset this final section clarifies the position taken in this research, in that regard.

2.3.1. Functionalities of urban block and spaces Camillo Sitte, an Austrian art historian and architect, a century ago in 1901 commented that the main ornaments of the city are its streets and blocks (Moughtin & Shirley, 2005). According to his observations the most important consideration is not the architectural shape or form of each building but the inherent creative quality of urban space. Notwithstanding, it is the street block above all else which forms the boundaries of public space. The street block is also an interface between the public world of the street and, for instance, the inner life of a courtyard and its surrounding buildings. As shown in the commentary on earlier historical precedents, perimeter development clearly seems a most effective way of arranging buildings in an urban setting - to act as a filter between the public facade and the private activities which are pursued within the block.

Perimeter blocks earlier urban contexts. From antiquity, courts in houses have been in use, both in rural and urban house forms. Various types of courtyard houses in the ancient cities of Mohenjo-Daro, Kahun and Athens, were documented by Schoenauer (2000) in his encyclopaedic work 6,000 years of housing. Moving from ancient times to later times, the following examples from two cities show the transition of types of court use, and characteristics of perimeter block design.

Chapter 2 | 88 Figure 2.3.1: Paris example of courts and urban form. Top. Drawing by Mathie Marien showing the inauguration of Place Royale, one of the oldest planned squares in Pre-Haussmannien Paris. Source: Cameron & Salinger, 1984. Bottom right. The court is now known as Place des Vosges. The courts in surrounding forms are enlivened with greenery and bring light to the inner areas. Source: Cameron & Salinger, 1984. Bottom left. Street character on Rue de Birague. A common feature of French apartments is balconies, with doors that open to a railing with a view of street below. Source: Google Streetview, Google Maps, 2010.

Figure 2.3.2: Aerial views of close knit urban blocks and courts. As seen in the aerial views, the emphasis was on providing a cohesive streetscape and the courts were reduced to function only as light wells. The strong lines of the diagonal grids are highly visible. The public face was more intent on creating a monumental effect. Left. Source: Cameron & Salinger, 1984. Right. Source: Bing Maps, 2010.

Chapter 2 | 89 This section is not an exhaustive review of all possible courtyard and block arrangements prevailing in history but an attempt to provide some of the historic precedents which are prevalent in high density urban settings. A few other precedents can be found elsewhere (Moughtin & Shirley, 2005; Williams, Burton, & Jenks, 2000).

In the 1800s in Paris, in the very close knit urban blocks, the courts were carved more out of necessity than for any social role (Panerai, Castex, Depaule, & Samuels, 2004). Many of these blocks were transformed into a cohesive streetscape following the Napoleonic and Haussmannien interventions from the 1850s, including the creation of triangular grid forms, with the intent of giving a modern image, appropriate to a commercial and cosmopolitan world city. Block level details became secondary to larger global ideas of urban design – including military-civilian functions (ease of surveillability of potentially troublesome citizens). To facilitate natural daylight in the deep buildings, inner courts (more or less functioning as light-wells) as well as ventilation shafts were widely used. Previously, these were small, disproportionate, lacked proper vegetation and were less accessible to the occupants.

...there were no private social relationships in the courtyards and no more hidden or barely tolerated activities. There was no other place in the plot where these activities were tolerated either; the plot had lost its depth and the succession of spaces towards the interior had been truncated (Panerai et al., 2004: 24).

Compared to the traditional, now contemporary, Parisian blocks these blocks had only a reduced multi-functionality. Nonetheless, in the traditional Pre-Haussmannien blocks the dense edge, intimately connected with the street, was understood as a ‘place for exchange and as the presentation space’ – having a vital social function, despite its possibly insalubrious nature.

It was also observed that the block court was then ‘capable of an internal complexity that, without being codified in explicit manner, could be explored’ (Panerai et al., 2004: 25). In the heart of the block, one could find workshops, garages, sheds, gardens, parks, or in some cases a public facility - which may have been a primary school or administrative building. Therefore, in the same block, living quarters, exchange and workplaces and collective facilities were found mixed together. What began to disappear with the Haussmannien block was the interior of the block with its functional properties and the vividness of it articulation. The figures (Figure 2.3.1, 2.3.2) compare the pre-Haussmannien Paris with its hierarchy of form and spaces and the closed

Chapter 2 | 90 tightly knit Haussmannien blocks arising from triangular grids (Cameron & Salinger, 1984).

It was in the perimeter block where densification took place. Much more concentrated than London, Paris was also socially stratified vertically. An apartment building might contain shops and workshops at ground level, over which there would be grand high- ceilinged apartments on the first floor. Living costs fell as one went up in the building, and the ‘variously indigent occupied the roof space, or mansards’ - named after the well-known seventeenth century architect, Francois Mansard, who made popular the two-slope curb-roof that even now dominates the roofline of most French and other European cities (Rykwert, 2004: 77).

In Rotterdam, in a schematic form of a masterplan for the Spangen Polder in 1903, de Jonge put forward the notion of housing development through dense configurations of closed perimeter enclosures with interior stairs and single-floor dwelling units. These housing blocks were uniform, whole blocks that combined to create a monumental effect, as opposed to the Haussmannien Parisian idea of a picturesque, urban landscape. Various architects were commissioned to work in different sections. In 1918, Michiel Brinkman was commissioned to design housing for two blocks in the Spangen Polder in Rotterdam’s north-western fringe. In a radical departure from the typical closed block arrangement, Brinkman envisioned a process of opening the perimeter block, thus providing places of meeting and creating a second overhead street in the form of the gallery - that might bring together the occupants. As an architect Brinkman had provided a powerful design scheme that promoted social change, especially for those in the socialist movement in this city of workers. It was observed that early residents generally applauded the controversial broken perimeter block, and courtyard, elevators, common bath and laundry, individual garbage chutes, shops, central heating plant, front-door delivery of milk and vegetables, and 3,000 foot long gallery. These attributes provided for common, everyday contacts that brought individual residents to acknowledge their social potential in the form of concrete engagement, interdependence, and visibility. However, these designs ignored the traditional notion of direct connection between dwelling and street in the public domain. ‘By turning its back on the street’ – by disengaging from the public street it became in itself an internal miniature city (Lambla, 1998: 6).

Chapter 2 | 91 Figure 2.3.3: Perimeter blocks in Rotterdam. Top. Spangen Polder plan, showing Justus van Effenstraat project on left. In early last century this area of Rotterdam saw the development of urban blocks of monumental proportions taking various shapes. Source: Bing Maps, 2010. Middle. The aerial photo shows the courtyard with white walls of the block. Source: Bing Maps, 2010. Bottom left. On the street, the form does not interact with the public space. The external surface of the block is faced uninterestingly in dark brown brick. Pedestrian entry to court is seen on left. Source: Google Streetview, Google Maps, 2010.

With continuing use over the years in Europe (much later in North America) perimeter block characteristics and the internal court shape, size & scale have been evolving based on their varying social role and environmental functions. Architects have been constantly juggling with different schemes where design and form of blocks play a crucial role in maintaining (or, inadvertently) neglecting connection with the outer public realm and the level of effectiveness of inner private realms. There is indication that this form has an ability to be adaptable over time, corresponding to different socio-political conditions in history. By not conforming to any specific physical order this adaptability makes it more interesting. There is a viewpoint that sees ‘sustainability as process rather than an end state’, and therefore suggests that changes in urban forms should be open for adaptation over time, as more information is gathered, and social, economic and environmental changes occur (Williams et al., 2000: 353).

The pre-industrial traditional cities grew incrementally and, more importantly, unhurriedly as the result of the decisions of individual people, enterprises and local authorities (Frey, 2007: xiii). This gave each new project sufficient time to study its urban context and shape it such that it would be compatible with the existing methodology, construction system, materials, and facades to maintain continuity of

Chapter 2 | 92 urban form and structure. There was time for each block to be specifically designed and detailed to generate architectural and functional variety within continuity. Likewise design and development of the public realm, and some of the most beautiful and popular squares, took hundreds of years to be completed or to be adapted to their present-day form.

Stand-alone forms and segregation of urban activities. The key characteristic of the perimeter block, however, is not its context but rather that it represents a fundamentally different conception of space from stand-alone forms in a large plot, a trend that has prevailed strongly in North America and the Australian urban scene. The sequence of street, edges, courtyards and end of plot that had ordered the old structures and had already been reduced due to Haussmann’s grid in Paris, and in Rotterdam, for example - is finally, purposefully compressed into a block. It was remarked that it ‘... appeared to us as negation of the city and the last metamorphosis of the block’ (Panerai et al., 2004: 121).

One of the most influential models for modern urbanism was the 1942 , issued by the Congrés Internationale des Architects Moderns (CIAM), which laid out specific guidelines for the design of cities. The Athens charter of CIAM provided the basis of much planning in the coming half-century. It declared that any city should be segmented and separated into four basic functions: habitat, work, recreation and circulation (Rykwert, 2004: 175). The perimeter type of development, which integrated several functions, was thus ‘anathema to Le Corbusier, Gropius and the Avant-garde movements in architecture and planning’ (Le Corbusier, 1947; Moughtin & Shirley, 2005: 201).

Le Corbusier had been largely instrumental in laying out the Athens guideline, drawing on ideas he had published earlier (Le Corbusier, 1931). It informed much of the post war European cities and American efforts around 1950s, to rebuild cities for urban renewal. The Athens Charter favoured high-rise apartment towers that gave every resident air, light, and a view outward to the horizon, three qualities that many found lacking in traditional urban streets and buildings. Large dwelling blocks were envisaged, to free up the space for parks and garden. In Le Corbusier’s own words, ‘its presence in the city is a sort of caress, a kindly thing in the midst of our severe creations’ (Le Corbusier, 1947: 237).

Chapter 2 | 93 Figure 2.3.4: Top. Le Corbusier’s idea of a contemporary city. Top. Sketched view showing a large housing scheme, where ‘every window of every room looks onto open space’ Source: Le Corbusier, 1947: 239). Bottom. View of Skyscrapers of CBD and lower forms of residential blocks in the contemporary city scheme. Source: Le Corbusier, 1947: 173. Bottom. Overall view of stand-alone forms of Pruitt-Igoe in St. Louis, USA and its demolition in 1972. The public housing project (1956) was designed by architects George Hellmuth and Minoru Yamasaki. Source: Oscar Newman, 1996: 10-12. Top. The freed up large spaces eventually became ‘lost spaces’ or neutral spaces, since the streets were not enclosed, and the areas in between free standing buildings were neither public nor private. Deemed as an unsuccessful, unliveable project, by users, the forms were eventually demolished in 1972 incurring a loss of 300 million dollars. Source: Oscar Newman, 1996: 10-12.

Chapter 2 | 94 Dwellings lifted up in gigantic forms, on the other hand, disconnected them from the collective realm. The green spaces were meant to be viewed from windows only, without any sort of formal feature of connectivity. The quality of public spaces eventually decreased because the collective green spaces were not understood by the new inhabitants, and were left unused. In most cases the parks were vandalised or proved to be unsafe, since they could only be viewed from far without any intervention. These large spaces eventually became ‘lost spaces’, since the streets were not enclosed, and the areas in-between free standing buildings were neither public nor private (Frey, 1999: 87). Lengthening the distance between dwelling and public realm of the city, by decreasing the density of the neighbourhood and eventually expelling any other economic activity (rejecting multi-functionality, separating functions) was its other inadvertent consequence. The neighbourhoods were not able to transform and provide a public domain and spaces for small-scale economic activity for inhabitants with a variety of backgrounds (Komossa, 2009).

Figure 2.3.5: Architect’s conception of communal corridor and the actual vandalised conditions of Pruitt-Igoe project. Source: Oscar Newman, 1996: 10-12.

Chapter 2 | 95 What had been seen in the more public area was also repeated in internal public domains, inside the buildings, as observed in the case of Pruitt-Igoe. Although this project won its architect a design award, it was soon observed that corridors, lobbies, elevators were not safe to use. They were covered with graffiti and were in filthy condition ‘littered with garbage and human waste’ (O. Newman, 1996: 10). Ultimately, it was imploded. People eventually refused to live there.

This design philosophy was eventually understood as creating more social problems than solving the physical problems of noise, congestion, greenery etc. Such spectacular failures and overall negative impacts of the modernist planning ideals in Europe and North America rekindled interest in traditional forms. Interest in traditional urban forms, especially in perimeter block designs was resurfacing in studies and these were seen as a more sustainable form of dwelling design. Not only in planning, but in architectural detail, where and how forms connect the public sphere, and in the articulation of inner areas, became central elements in contemporary design.

Nevertheless, one should be reminded that Corbusier’s Unité d'Habitation block in Marseille (1945-52) was a singularly distinctive example of multiple-use high-rise dwelling. The typology he created was seen as novel, for its creation of internal streets (elaborate hallways) and accommodation of social and communal functions— kindergartens, medical facilities, and recreational spaces, often at rooftop, as well as for its formal qualities (large pilotis and roofscape) and subtle use of ‘polychromatic colours’ on facades (D. Gans, 2006: 112- 119; Sbriglio, 2004). The idea behind this form was that the users would meet their social needs within the form which was conceived as a small city. Le Corbusier designed several variations of the famous unité d’habitation, many not implementing all of his ideas to the full. The vertical forms were also copied en mass by other architects but without the formal qualities and any obvious understanding of the creative insights that Corbusier instilled in those designs. One of most negative examples of the general typology without integrated functionalities and human focus was Pruitt-Igoe.

However, some of Le Corbusier’s social ideals did not have the intended results, albeit his architectural conceptions were highly admired (Kampen, 2010; Toronto Star, 2010). Currently architects in Australia (as seen in the Victoria Park designs) have reinvented some of his formal ideals without having any visual similarity with Corbusier’s form, such as: using colours in facades, connecting two levels in a single apartment, utilising roof spaces (as penthouse deck), creating interesting roof outlines, using sun shading louvers (brise soleil), etc. Many of these are not just an aesthetic exercise but concern

Chapter 2 | 96 practical functional aspects. These to an extent reflect some of Corbusier’s ideas generated almost 75 years ago.

Similarly in his later designs of dwellings (Villa Shodhan or Villa Sarabai) he sought to integrate natural elements with that of the dwelling form (Menin & Samuel, 2003). In the field of architecture he is revered as one of the master architects of contemporary times. His contribution to architecture in general should not be confounded with his planning ideals, which failed.

Figure 2.3.6: Le Corbusier’s Unité d'Habitation block in Marseille. Top. Activities on roof. Source: Kampen, 2010. Bottom left. Facade and internal layout variations, with brise soleil (louvers for sun shading) and colour variation. Bottom. The width of the linear form was dictated by apartment length, where all the apartments had cross ventilation and natural daylight. Source: essential-architecture.com, 2010.

Chapter 2 | 97 A very contemporary reflection - having a crossover, cross ventilated apartment, is seen as vital in designs nowadays, featuring as a sustainable aspect. The concept of cross ventilation and sun shading louvers is also illustrated as good design features in the Residential Flat Design Pattern Book and Improving Flat Design: a progress report (NSW DIPNR, 2004; NSW DUAP, 2001).

In regard to climatic perspectives, the orientation of the stand alone forms were more appropriate with their long side facing north. Whereas, in perimeter blocks the section facing north (in Australian condition) would be more favourable than the sections facing east or west. However, in the study area, the orientation of the blocks in the master plan and the actual design scheme was considered with solar and natural ventilation in mind. The Victoria Park Master Plan orientates the blocks at an angle to the cardinal axis, where most blocks have two sides facing north, either north-east or north-west.

Planners, even before modernist ideas pushed for social and economic recognition, believed in developing patterns of segregation (of functions) that now frequently characterise contemporary cities. argued in the 1950s that the mechanisms largely put into place with the help of planners. Zoning and highways, for example had reduced a city’s capacity to foster its primary function of human exchange – ‘the maximum interplay of capacities and functions’ (Talen, 2008: 9). By disregarding the logic that each system is inter-linked, one feeding into and sustaining the other, separation and segregation were conceived.

Through transportation, land use, zoning, housing, mortgage lending, energy, school finance, and many other types of policies, planners have been notoriously complicit in the sorting of social groups and economic functions (Talen, 2008: 9).

2.3.2. Social attributes of urban dwelling form and liveability Ahead of current arguments on sustainability of urban form, discussed in her seminal works the nature of the physical structure of the city where economical innovation and new businesses emerge as opposed to modernist planning notions of separation and segregation. Although her arguments were made to counteract the modernist planning ideals prevailing at that time, they did not make a case or develop a line of reasoning for sustainability issues nor did she make any specific reference to any type of form of urban dwelling (such as perimeter block form). She did clearly favour, short blocks, with many intersecting streets, as well as peopled streets. However, current thinking on the qualities of sustainable urban form from a social

Chapter 2 | 98 perspective happens to coincide with some of her observations. Jacobs (1972) makes a realistic argument in the same way as in her earlier book (Jacobs, 1961): relating to the wisdom of encouraging smallness, variety, and experimentation in cities especially the ‘downtowns’. She eventually connects physical design to societal and economic capital. She argues that,

...the physical arrangements that promote the greatest profusion of duplicate and diverse enterprises serving the population of the city... lead therefore to the greatest opportunities for plentiful division on which new work can potentially arise.... (Jacobs, 1972: 100).

By ‘physical arrangements’ she advocates: vicinity and connectivity, and the mixture of functions like cafés and shops that are used by everybody. High density of users and visitors, short routes and mixture of uses, different types of buildings, big and small, new and old, cheap and expensive also form some of the preconditions for her appropriate physical conditions. In her earlier book (1962) she captures the life of traditional cities, and transported the ideas to contemporary downtown settings,

Under the seeming disorder of the old city, wherever the old city is working successfully, is a marvellous order for maintaining the safety of streets and freedom of the city. It is a complex order (Jacobs, 1962: 50).

Instead of taking the apparent complexity of traditional cities as chaos, she sees the inherent organic order as an order of life, the only kind that can contribute to the actual liveability of neighbourhoods and city (P. Newman & Kenworthy, 1999). In a similar vein, taking cues from historical precedents, contemporary practitioners connected to New Urbanism, , Liveable Communities and related movements are calling for physical design that explicitly supports diversity (Talen, 2008). Jacobs (1962) made this argument fifty years ago, that two issues are central to maintaining the social capital of any place: diversity at the neighbourhood level; agreeable and easily accessible settings for casual public contact. She stresses that by including sidewalks, public spaces, and neighbourhood stores, intricate webs of human relationships build up over time and provide mutual support in time of need, ensure the safety of the streets, and promote a sense of civic responsibility.

By the 1960s and 1970s dissatisfaction within Modernism led to more nuanced but also diverse humanistic approaches, drawing on work by Kevin Lynch and Christopher Alexander (Alexander, Ishikawa, & Silverstein, 1977; Lynch, 1960). This was part of a wave of work that looked at how cities actually functioned, that examined how residents

Chapter 2 | 99 actually experienced the city, and that included such influential analyses as that of Jane Jacobs.

Lynch's argument in his short but relatively complex work Image of the City, based on studies of middle-class professionals in the downtown areas of Los Angeles, Boston and Jersey City, is that, it is possible to identify a public or shared image of an environment, and that some environments are more legible to the general public than others and ‘can be recognized and can be organized into a coherent pattern’ (Lynch, 1960: 2-3, 9-10).

Lynch emphasizes that legible environments ‘allow for new experiences over time’, are easier to get around, easier to invest with meaning’, will seem ‘well formed, distinct, remarkable’, and will be valued by people in the neighbourhood and outsiders alike (Lynch, 1960: 10). Lynch designates the elements in a city providing this sense of legibility as paths (along which the observer customarily, occasionally or potentially moves), edges (linear elements not used or considered as paths), districts (medium-to- large sections of the city…which the observer mentally enters 'inside of', and which are recognizable as having some common identifying character), nodes (strategic spots that one can enter into, junctions, concentrations of activities, cores of districts), and landmarks (a reference point like a node, but where the observer does not enter, that can be physically noticeable, or locally important) (Lynch, 1960, pp. 47-48). He suggests that in order to appeal to different people city designers should strive to provide many of these elements.

In Alexander's view, the pattern languages have broken down in our time and urbanites have lost touch with the deep patterns which are capable of generating ‘life’ in places where they live and work. The patterns are suggested to reflect the network of connections that are so fundamental in nature (Alexander et al., 1977). He calls for certain amounts of densities (mainly medium density) and mixed use development. Among other features one aspect which is relevant for the research reported here was that Alexander suggests a general limit of four storeys for any building (with limited exceptions allowed for non residential buildings). He argues this is due to the apparent psychological effects on people who live and work in tall buildings resulting from the detachment from society that occurs the further away from the ground one lives. Above four storeys one cannot comfortably walk down, call out or otherwise feel a part of the street scene below. This psychological aspect of height was shared by one of the architects in Victoria Park, where he defined the height of buildings in terms of the

Chapter 2 | 100 height of trees. Accordingly, forms which are within the height of tree canopies (approximately 40-50feet) were defined as low-rise.

Many studies and urban regeneration plans now invoke the phrase, ‘there must be eyes on the street’ attributed to Jane Jacobs, to make arguments about the relationship between safety and design (Jacobs, 1962: 32; NSW DIPNR, 2004; Wekerle, 2000). Works by Oscar Newman and others built on Jacobs’ insight into the relationship between urban design and crime (O. Newman, 1972; O. Newman & Center for Urban Policy Research, 1996). They restructured the physical layout of communities to allow residents to control the areas around their homes. This includes the streets and grounds outside their buildings and the lobbies and corridors within them. The program helps people preserve those areas in which they can realise their commonly held values and lifestyles.

Originating in the 1980s, but coming to prominence in the 1990s, the New Urbanist movement of North America and the urban village movement in Europe took advantage of into these professional debates and also popular dissatisfactions with conventional city layouts, proposing a return to the urban designs of the early periods (Bohl, 2000).

With regard to suburban development, it has been criticized for its aesthetics and seen as monotonous, bland and tasteless. Indeed, one book on suburbia written by an architect in the 1960s was straightforwardly titled The Australian Ugliness (Boyd, 1960), reflecting the overall negative aspects of sprawl from an architectural perspective. It was critical of the sprawl and advocated ; and proposed a multifunctional city by making proposals about economic, social and administrative issues, as well as about the physical form of the metropolis. New Urbanist design principles, meanwhile, have been adopted for many housing developments and in the revitalization of inner-city neighbourhoods in American cities (Bohl, 2000). There is still, however, a widespread perception that New Urbanism is a suburban experiment. Nevertheless, in North America, applications of New Urbanism for inner-city revitalization have developed rapidly recently and involve a wide variety of conditions.

... including the replacement or retrofit of public housing projects, brownfield redevelopment efforts, transit-oriented development, and garden-variety urban projects of different shapes and sizes (Bohl, 2000: 766).

Some of the specifics of the visions are — mixed use, a return to traditional blocks and streets, more local styles ‘seamlessly linked to their surroundings’, ‘interesting to the

Chapter 2 | 101 pedestrian’, emphasising passive design features of local climate and topography, and on resource efficient ‘natural methods of heating and cooling’ (Congress for the New Urbanism, 2001). Lately, in 2009, in an addition to the 1996 New Urbanism Charter, in Canons of Sustainable Architecture, the same ideals are reiterated. They state,

...sustainable design must be rooted in and evolve from adaptations to local climate, light, flora, fauna, materials and human culture as manifest in indigenous urban, architectural and landscape pattern. (Congress for the New Urbanism, 2009: 2)

Even though there is no straightforward mention of perimeter block development, New Urbanists also advocate the setting configuration of urban blocks, which, combined with a build-to-line requirement, results in perimeter block development (Tiesdell, 2002).

New Urbanist developments often include architecture with modern styles, especially if their context is modern, but the underlying philosophy is of responsiveness to locality and inference from ‘enduring architectural principles and typologies’ rather than new, yet universal design principles (Forsyth & Crewe, 2009; Tiesdell, 2002). In relation to the Victoria Park designs, no attempts were made to transpose elements like a front porch, gable or sloped roof, which are believed (by post-modernists especially) to evoke a home-like quality, or to put up any superficial ornament mimicking past traditional or vernacular forms (in neo-modernist styling). As far as style is concerned, the buildings in the case study setting clearly conform to contemporary modern styles. Since various architects were engaged, variations in visual and functional aspects were achieved.

Importance of place based ideas. Place is a complicated term with many meanings (Talen, 1999; Vanclay, Higgins, & Blackshaw, 2008). However, in dealing with the sense of place it “connotes the myriad values, beliefs, feelings, hopes and fears the human beings attach both individually and collectively to certain settlements, regions, environments and landscapes” (Bullock & Trombley, 1999: 652). Therefore, 'place' denotes an emotional connection which is broad, and includes sensory experiences. Mental mapping or environmental awareness - a related notion - of a sense of place is also promoted by contemporary urbanist form. In other words it helps the users to identify themselves with the physical setting. Jacobs, Lynch and new urbanist have more to say about places communicating specific meanings. Lynch’s ideas are more abstract and based on perception, and New Urbanism valorises local conditions.

Chapter 2 | 102 Lynch’s idea of legibility links the physical place to collective symbols, providing elements that can provide a rich sense of the city, and new urbanists advocate

...urban places should be framed by architecture and landscape design that celebrate local history, climate, ecology, and building practice. (Congress for the New Urbanism, 2001)

Relating such place-based concepts to the Victoria Park precinct, in particular, it is essential to know that it is located in a disused industrial area adjacent to industrial warehouses to the North and South. There was thus a pre-existing setting that could be used as a reference point. Preserving part of a pre-existing racecourse structure, (a Toteliser building) and reutilising it as a Landcom (the land developer) office - can be seen as an attempt to communicate the historical significance of the place. Side by side the history of the area is being narrated by introducing indigenous landscape elements in the park areas.

Thus an attempt to evoke pre-settlement history is done through the master planning and landscaping of the green areas. Early historical descriptions of the Victoria Park and Green Square area (of which it is a part) describe an image of meadows which were considered to be amongst the finest in the world (Johnson & Gerada, 2003). It was suggested that its park-like quality could have arisen from the burning of the area by the Australian Aborigines. This was taken as an inspiration for the development of master plan in Victoria Park,

...what we are trying to do in the swales was pull back the original landscape into the urban development. We used the same plants to create these same meadows. (Johnson & Gerada, 2003: 54)

Moreover, the concept of ecological sustainability is integrated with the place based imagery of the development. As sustainable ecological practice, a collection pond uses wetland species of plants to clean the water before it is recycled across the landscape. These indigenous plants are found in wetlands in and around Sydney’s Botany Bay and in turn attract native fauna. The harvested water is then used in watering the greenery and the water features. It was anticipated that the linkages of public spaces around these will contribute greatly towards a sense of meaning and place in the public domain, by providing physical links for movement as well as links to the natural and past industrial aspects of the area.

Chapter 2 | 103 2.3.3. Sustainable design practices and perimeter block In a similar vein to the ‘good city’ and ‘good form’ attributes of social, environmental and spatial/formal properties elucidated by Alexander, Lynch, Jacobs and many others, but in a much more practical attempt at urban design and architecture, in the book Responsive Environment the perimeter block is taken as an exemplar in most of their exploratory suggestions (Bentley, McGlynn, & Smith, 1985). Here, the issue of permeability, variety and robustness provided by this typology is illustrated comprehensively. However, their main argument was to accommodate socio-political issues and its implication on form,

As a starting point, we are interested in why modern architecture and urban design are so often criticised as inhuman and repressive...the tragedy of modern design, it seems to us, is that designers never made a concerted effort to work out the form implications of their social and political ideals. (Bentley et al., 1985: 9)

In current practices and studies of urban design, the design principles embodied in the perimeter form is progressively being seen as a sustainable approach (Frey, 1999; Moughtin & Shirley, 2005; Thomas, 2003; Williams et al., 2000). Architects also view this form along with its urban design potentials as advantageous for design. In his Finding future urban form article, Joe Holyoak an architect and urban designer and reader at the Birmingham School of Architecture, sees it thus: ‘the answer is sustainable, fine–grained, permeable, mixed use perimeter blocks’ (Holyoak, 1999: 48).

A similar interpretation from a sustainable perspective was made by arguing that it is a sustainable design of urban form,

The conclusions derived from the debate on sustainable development support the idea of small-scale city blocks composed of compatible mixed activities or mixed land uses, surrounded by a perimeter block of two, three or four storeys. Sustainable forms of this type also provide a framework for the development of city vitality but with a friendly human scale; that is, a scale normally associated with the morphology of the traditional European city. (Moughtin & Shirley, 2005: 215).

Earlier studies by Martin and March (1972) have shown that perimeter buildings give the most effective relationship between building volume and usable open space. Moreover, when compared to other forms of housing it was stated that,

Chapter 2 | 104 Perimeter development in street blocks is clearly the effective method of allocating space in a sustainable city. (cited in Moughtin & Shirley, 2005: 202)

The Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE, 2005) in 2003 undertook a study of housing intensification and sustainable living in London and South-East England. In its literature review section included were research, toolkits, guidance notes and policy statements. It commented that a number of publications drew attention to the value of the perimeter block in the design of intensified schemes, because of its flexibility/adaptability, efficiency and legibility, within a varied urban grain (CABE, 2005: 12). Moreover, a central conclusion of a number of publications was the rediscovery of the importance of the street as the central organising element of urban areas. It was found that strong block structures (e.g. perimeter blocks) result in clearly defined spaces and places between buildings and give spatial continuity to routes connecting surrounding neighbourhoods, centres and established routes, street, place and space patterns - thereby providing a high degree of urban integration. The findings were comparable to an earlier CABE (2001) publication, Better Places to Live, which clearly advocates perimeter block development. Recognizing that perimeter block structures have proved robust over time, the guidance stresses that such a form allows for:

Good connections to the surrounding area; Efficient use of land; Clear demarcation between public and private realms; Legible environment; Good natural surveillance of the street. (CABE/DTLR, 2001: 42; Tiesdell, 2002)

Consequently, many Councils in the UK in their design development guides identify it as a good city form as opposed to the pavilion type form (Communities Scotland, 2004; Wokingham Borough Council, 2008).

Thomas (2003: 19) is his book Sustainable urban design an environmental approach argues that perimeter block by creating ‘active street frontage’ has the potential to be sustainable urban form.

Though not being explicit, the Department of Planning in NSW in their publications, Residential Flat Design Pattern Book and Improving Flat Design included case studies of perimeter block in Sydney inner areas among other examples of good designs (NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning, 2001; NSW DIPNR, 2004).

Chapter 2 | 105 Figure 2.3.7: A section (page 12) from Residential Flat Design Code, indicating courtyard apartment (perimeter block) variations. Source: NSW Department of Planning, 2002.

Chapter 2 | 106 The Residential Flat Design Code (2002) document concentrates on residential flat development in relation to three different scales: local context, site, and building. In the section titled building design it refers to the sustainable practice of passive design features as Better Design Practice, which gives,

The ability of the residential flat development to optimise thermal performance, thermal comfort and daylighting will contribute to the energy efficiency of buildings, provide increased amenity to occupants and reduce greenhouse emissions and, with them, the cost of supplying energy. (NSW Department of Planning, 2002: 93)

The Code (2002: 12) in block level illustrates the various configurations of perimeter blocks among other block typologies where it explains the design practices they have promoted can be met by certain conditions of formal configuration (Figure 2.3.7).

In Residential Flat Design Pattern Book and Improving Flat Design the layout, referring to specific examples of perimeter block aspects of layout, orientation, cross ventilation facade/ fenestration, balcony design/material, courtyard design, parking, form, and streetscape, has been illustrated graphically (elaborated in section 2.2.4).

2.3.4. Sustainable design of green open space in higher density setting Australians, historically, have a great enthusiasm for the urban garden, so that principal cities are graced with generous public parks, green belts and reserves (Gleeson & Low, 2000: 2). There is a clear perception that Australians have a strong affinity for natural features or greenery and the bush and that is reflected in their lifestyle choices (Burnley & Murphy, 2004; Salt, 2003). These perceptions complement the fact that a great majority of Australians are still living in detached houses (83% in 2001, ABS 2004). Clearly, there is still an archaic preference for detached houses with their front gardens and back yards (Gleeson, 2005; Troy, 1996; Troy, ANU, & URP, 1991).

It is commonly understood that the main advantage of suburbs over cities is the generous provision of open spaces; but, when ‘usefulness’ is considered, the fewer open spaces which are integral into a higher density neighbourhood design are relatively more ‘appreciated’. In an urban setting (especially in populous inner residential areas) their relative scarcity ensures their intensive use. In detached houses, frequently front yards can be conceived as more or less display spaces – for the fleeting viewing pleasure of people driving past suburban houses. But medium density forms of the 1960s-70s also rarely produced effective shared common space (Burns, 2004). And observation reveals that the shared spaces which are often

Chapter 2 | 107 concreted and barren, around which buildings of this era are generally grouped, have little potential to materialise as social space. Similarly to the detached house model, setbacks from the street also do not foster any effective use. The same conclusion was also arrived at for the stand-alone urban forms of earlier decades, as seen in the previous sections. Since open space is a scarcity in inner areas the question of its effective use becomes paramount. The value of shared green spaces for developing social relationship in urban settings has been referred to in various studies. Contemporary Australian architects are beginning to recognise the importance of integrating green spaces in the design of the private and semi-private spaces in dense urban settings – including courtyards, larger balconies and green roofs (Johnston & Newton, 2004; SMH, 2002a).

Early studies in the 60s and 70s on high-rise, higher density forms tended to focus on social psychological consequences (mostly negative) of these forms, while the effect of the setting itself was largely ignored (Homenuck, 1975; Young & MSJ Keys Young Planners., 1976). The socio-physical urban context, including the design impact of outdoor spaces and lifestyle choice implications was overlooked in the evaluation of resident’s well being and liveability. Further, studies have shown that high densities can be achieved by low-rise buildings as well as high rise (Churchman, 1999).

More recently, developers and designers of medium density precincts (like Victoria Park) have appreciated that green space can be a factor in housing choice. In this research, satisfaction with neighbourhood greenery is assumed as an important predictor element. The empirical analysis of environmental experience (importance, satisfaction, environmental fit, and use) consequently addresses the importance of having greenery in a higher density urban setting and its potential benefits for residents.

As elaborated in another section (Revival of Inner Areas), given the push for consolidation in NSW planning policies - as a sustainable approach to city growth, in the last few decades - the issue of natural features and green spaces has become of great concern among both urban residents and academics (Department of Planning, 2005; Searle, 2004). Moreover, in brownfield developments like Victoria Park where there was no pre-existing greenery, there is potential to reduce the existing deficit of greenery in inner urban areas and, most probably, the impact of this greenery could be felt beyond the precinct’s boundary (McGuirk & Dowling, 2007).

Chapter 2 | 108 Reviewed in this section, therefore, is the inclusion of greenery as a sustainable design practice for inner area brownfield residential and implications for social, environmental and economic benefits for future generations.

A literature search reveals that psychological and social implications of inner city urban space as a part of sustainable urban design practice have not been comprehensively studied previously in the Australian context.

Sydney, however, has a long tradition of planned residential development, following the British ‘garden cities’ approach of the early 1900s. Daceyville, a social housing neighbourhood in the Eastern suburbs – now close to the inner suburbs - was planned before World War 1. Much more recently, at the turn of the twentieth century, there has been a revival of master planned settlements all over Sydney (Dowling & McGuirk, 2005; Freestone, Butler-Bowdon, & Randolph, 2006). And, there have been studies which focus on sustainability aspects of master planned settlements, but only on greenfield developments.

Two major projects to date by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (Blair et al., 2003) and by a multidisciplinary research group at the University of Queensland (Muirhead et al 2003, cited in Dowling & McGuirk, 2005) were mainly concerned with, among other aspects, whether and how these developments might generate and sustain social capital and cohesive community. This vision of master- planned residential development shares common ground with the New Urbanism approach. The thrust here is the presumption that social capital can be engineered as an outcome of design and infrastructure, and particularly the provision of communal civic and community spaces. These research projects, in part at least, critically explored that proposition. Logically, having a designed green space in a lower density greenfield area would impart a different perception than space created in dense urban inner areas. In any event, brownfield developments and impacts of their green spaces have been ignored in the studies.

Moreover, there is a gap in assessing implications because of a common misunderstanding that design involves only the appearance of these new areas. In some studies, superficiality (by appearance) of design issues tends to be more in focus than the overall impact of design (Gleeson & Low, 2000; Randolph, 2006). The review following therefore presents the underlying complexity designers (architects, landscape architects and urban designers) tackle and take into consideration apparently simple issue of greenery.

Chapter 2 | 109 Historically, architects have been interested in green design and have understood the benefits which often tend to be sidelined (Menin & Samuel, 2003) when architecture dominates nature rather than serving it. In Le Corbusier’s words,

We have seen how a tree is a thing that pleases us all, since, however remotely, we are still children of nature; we have seen urban manifestation which completely ignored Nature would soon find itself at odds with our deepest primeval impulses.

It would seem that the tree is an element essential to our comfort, and its presence in the city is a sort of caress, a kindly thing in the midst of our severe creations. (Le Corbusier, 1947: 237)

The following sections will further elaborate on its implications on environment, economy and the users. Given the multidimensionality of the effect of green space the review incorporates different disciplines.

Economic and ecological gains from outdoor greenery. There is an understanding among some developers that natural beauty results in added real estate value – a fact reflected by property prices in greener areas. A survey in Manchester, Connecticut, investigating residential property values in similar areas with and without trees, showed that the presence of a sizeable number of trees did enhance property values (Morales, 1980). It indicated that good tree cover added about 6% to the value of the homes. This figure compares with a contribution of between 7-15% to property values in a study conducted by the US Forest Service, and a general consensus expressed by some British developers of an increase of around 10% (Johnston & Newton, 2004).

Perimeter type blocks with green inner courts are likely to contribute to the overall perception of greenery in, for instance, Victoria Park, and increase the economic return. Elizabeth Farrelly, the Sydney Morning Herald's writer on architecture, comments on a marketing strategy that focuses strongly on greenery of the given precinct,

Slick marketing is clearly the go at Victoria Park, with names, like Esprit, Centric, Sublime and Arc, and a heavy deployment of words like visionary, pure, dynamic, ecosystem, renewal, sustainable, natural and unique. Yet some of it is true. (SMH, 2002b)

Chapter 2 | 110 Environmentally sustainable urban design approach. Many studies have focused on aesthetic enjoyment, well-being and environmental benefits that green-space-oriented redevelopment can bring to urban areas. Included are: improving environmental quality, restoring natural habitats, enhancing recreational opportunities, improving the appearance of urban areas and strengthening neighbourhood social ties.

In Victoria Park, additionally, a feature hidden below all the greenery is its novel water management system, and other associated activities beneath the landscape. The ‘environmental strategies came first’ in reversal of typical master planned designs where the road layouts and location of built masses are usually thought-out first (Bryant, 2003; Johnson & Gerada, 2003: 52). The approaches to water management and landscape design as seen here are similar to the new urbanist principles of designing with local environmental setting. Filtering stormwater, even in high-density urban locations, was later stated as an important aim of sustainable urbanism for America (Farr, 2008). The environmental strategy was seen as integral to the placed- based approach of the master plan design. As critiqued by a prominent Australian landscape architect:

The formalism of these large-scale works is provocative, but incidental to the big idea of Victoria Park – the water-responsive design of the streets and public parks.

... has produced a distinctive streetscape and a distinctive expression of constructed ecology – one-dimensional in terms of the true demands of sustainable design, but certainly significant as a development scheme shaped by the creative manipulation of water. (Weirick, 2004)

Energy conservation and air quality. The issue of air quality is of serious concern for Sydney inner city living (Searle, 2004). Studies have shown that urban trees offer significant benefits in reducing building air-conditioning demand and improving urban air-quality (H. Akbari, 2002). Similarly, Johnson outlined the environmental effects of urban structures and illustrated the various environmental benefits of including greenery by design in different studies (Johnson & Gerada, 2003). It is likely that because of his thorough comprehension of the issue he was instrumental in encouraging various environmental measures in the Victoria Park master plan designs. Likewise, in an excerpt in a newspaper article (SMH, 2003a), he points to the advantages of greenery in reducing urban pollution,

Landscaping helps biodiversity...

Chapter 2 | 111 ...It cleans the air by removing toxins and benzene and we know people feel less stressful in green environments than they do in non-green environments.

It is now commonly understood that greenery helps reduce the heat island effect which is typical of any city built up of solid and thermal mass. One direct study has been found on the actual research location confirming the exceptionally cooling nature of vegetation compared to other coolants…such as reflective colour and even water (Samuels, Randolph, Graham, McCormick, & Pollard, 2010).

Trees and shrubs can help reduce overall energy use in buildings. Savings on energy costs by careful planting of trees for a conventional house over a one-year period, can be as much as 25% (Heisler, 1985). A practicing Australian architect, Stephen Lesiuk in his doctoral research (1982) People, Plant and Buildings, has shown that one mature tree potentially provides as much cooling as five, three-kilowatt air conditioners (cited in Johnson & Gerada, 2003). Also, house shade trees provide significant seasonal cooling energy savings (Hashem Akbari, Kurn, Bretz, & Hanford, 1997).

It is probable that Victoria Park, because of greenery and trees in parks, along the streets and in courtyards, could also provide energy saving advantages and improve air quality.

Mixing vegetation layers. This mixing of greenery provides for formal variations in landscape design while giving viewing pleasure, and psychological and physiological benefits, as stated earlier. Moreover, there is an ecological benefit in using greenery and having such variations in vegetation. Lesiuk argues that in addition to the concept of having natural landscaping for energy conservation, it maintains the ecological balance of species,

...if a landscape contains many layers such as tall trees, medium sized shrubs, small shrubs, bushes, grasses and ground covers, various animal species are able to use different levels of vegetation (cited in Johnson & Gerada, 2003: 124)

In the Victoria Park precinct, creative use of various vegetation types, mostly of indigenous origin, has been included - instead of mainly providing a large green turf area as seen in typical public neighbourhood parks. Having a variety of vegetation layers was one of the most important features in the planning and landscaping of the green park areas and courts (Johnson & Gerada, 2003; Weirick, 2004). Landcom newsletters claim that over 1000,000 trees and shrubs are used here (Landcom, 2005).

Chapter 2 | 112 Psycho-social capital of greenery. Humans have lived the vast majority of the time surrounded by nature, being a part of the natural world in very real ways, not apart from it. If geological time is considered, it is only a tick of the clock that has been spent in highly urbanised settings, working in concrete buildings, driving in climatically controlled cars, living in densely populated areas relatively devoid of nature. It would be surprising if modern city life unconnected to nature did not have some negative effects associated with it, or that being exposed to nature has positive effects. Mostly green spaces are associated with physiological benefits induced by activities such as walking, jogging, playing etc. but psychological benefits are quite separate.

There is a growing body of studies on psychological benefits associated with direct and indirect experience of nature. Though the definition of nature varies from gardens to wilderness parks, overall outcomes indicate that any type of greenery exposure can be expected to be beneficial. Different studies have shown that connectedness to nature increases positive emotions and ability to reflect on life problems (Mayer, Frantz, Bruehlman-Senecal, & Dolliver, 2009); contact with nature is related to effective functioning, emotional and psychological well-being (Herzog & Strevey, 2008; Hinds & Sparks, 2009; Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989); overall elderly residents in a long term care facilities, in higher density urban areas, place a high value on access to green spaces (patio gardens, rooftop gardens and courtyards with varying vegetation layers and landscape design) and derive a number of benefits from these spaces, even though they spend relatively little time in these settings (Kearney & Winterbottom, 2006); nearby natural environment plays a far more significant role in the well-being of children and cognitive functioning of children residing in poor urban environments than has previously been recognized (Wells, 2000); green space immediately outside the home can help children lead more effective, self-disciplined lives (A. F. Taylor, Kuo, & Sullivan, 2002); residents in public housing living closer to courtyards with natural elements (e.g., grass, trees), as compared to those living near courtyards that were mostly paved, enjoyed a range of benefits including higher overall satisfaction with their home, better relationships with their neighbours, and a lower level of domestic violence (Rodiek & Schwarz, 2005: 9).

Visual access to nature. Many studies point to the importance (psychological benefits) of view content. A study carried out in the context of hospitals has demonstrated the role of nature-view and content from windows in speeding recovery (Ulrich, 1984). Studies in the workplace, prison or dormitory setting, described in Kaplan (2001), indicated different forms of positive effects of natural views on people.

Chapter 2 | 113 In the residential context, the role of the view from the window is reflected in economic indicators such as rent, price of housing, and even hotel rate structures. View is generally mentioned as an amenity in advertisements for apartments in the context inner Sydney. Cooper-Marcus and Sarkissian (1986) pointed out that the primary basis for judgments of the attractiveness of one’s neighbourhood is what can be seen from the window of one’s home.

The extent that nature view, compared to other views, effects satisfaction of users has been studied by Kaplan and others in 1983 and 1991 (cited in Kaplan, 2001) showing greater satisfaction with the neighbourhood when residents of apartment complexes could look out onto more natural rather than more built settings. At the same time, however, satisfaction was far greater when residents could see even a few trees than when their view was of large open spaces. In another context of a master- outside Seattle, the findings of a study by the same researcher (Kaplan, 2001) provide considerable support for the premise that the content of the view from the window in the home setting makes a difference. Nature content contributed substantially and differentially to residents’ satisfaction with nature and with their neighbourhood; while the availability of gardens and well-landscaped areas was particularly salient to these satisfactions.

However, in empirical studies, the impact of nature views from apartments in the context of inner city areas has received very little attention. Nonetheless, in the context of Victoria Park, an effort has been made to maximise visual access to parks and green trees wherever possible. This study therefore ascertains which types of views from apartments are considered most preferable to the residents.

Perception of density. Increased density may or may not have direct negative social and psychological consequences but may also lead to a sense of crowding and an accompanying host of problems.

The perception of crowding in the neighbourhood has been found, for example, to be a significant negative factor in overall residential satisfaction. The results of the study by Bonnes, Bonaiuto, & Ercolani, in 1991 (cited in Kearney, 2006) also point to the strong saliency of the crowding evaluation within overall satisfaction and the inhabitants concern with the ‘spatio-social openness – closedness’ of the neighbourhood environment. The nature of open spaces is also a major factor determining how the space is perceived. There is a strong likelihood that a barren space would not produce the same psychological effect as a green outdoor space.

Chapter 2 | 114 Rapoport (1975) contradicted the popular method of ascertaining for an area in planning goals, suggesting a more subjective perception of density. He hypothesized that the inclusion of natural or green elements could reduce the perception of density. Although few studies directly explore the relationship between shared nature space and perceptions of density, Churchman (1999) suggests that designing or planning to lower the level of sensory stimulation from human activity could decrease perceived density.

The result of another study suggests that higher density may be more acceptable if matched with nature views (Kearney, 2006). The study asserts that negative feelings about higher density are not an unavoidable outcome. An important finding of this study was that regardless of density level, the presence of nature views and the reduction of views of neighbours’ houses reduced negative feelings about density. In other words, independent of actual lot size, residents who had more view of nature and less view of each others’ houses were less likely to feel their lot was too small, that they lacked privacy, or that the neighbourhood homes were too close together.

Pro-environment behaviours & connectivity to nature. Besides the psychological benefits, yet other work also indicates that people who feel more connected to nature are more likely to engage in eco-friendly acts (Dutcher, Finley, Luloff, & Johnson, 2007; Hinds & Sparks, 2009; Mayer & Frantz, 2004). This attitude is understandable since connectivity with nature reflects a sense of empathy. Thus, ‘connectivity is not only seeing the environment as part of ourselves but also ourselves as part of the environment’ (Dutcher et al., 2007: 489). These findings are relevant for Victoria Park, since it was expected beforehand that along with a preference for an inner urban lifestyle the residents would exhibit some kind of empathy towards the environment because of the specific connectedness to designed outdoor green areas in the precinct. On the other hand, however, with high incomes it was also shown in studies that people’s lifestyle tends to be less environmentally friendly. Again, another comparative study between a new urbanist neighbourhood and a traditional neighbourhood found no appreciable difference in pro-environmental behaviours (Youngentob & Hostetler, 2005).

Therefore, to tackle these contradicting findings, the research analysed here elicits from users the importance and satisfaction they accord to different eco-friendly behaviour and actions. Moreover, as a consequence of the setting, the extent of the environmental behaviour was also investigated in this research by enquiring whether their attitudes towards the environment have changed since living there.

Chapter 2 | 115 Social interactions, social relationships & greenery. Trees help create fundamentally neighbourhood-friendly spaces in inner areas. In an inner-city neighbourhood study, for instance, results suggest that by increasing face-to face contact and the number of individuals involved in social interactions, trees and grass in inner-city common spaces contribute to the social cohesion and vitality of a neighbourhood (Sullivan, Kuo, & Depooter, 2004). A positive link between greenness of neighbourhood spaces and the number of individuals involved in social activity within such spaces was demonstrated in the study. Moreover, in the context of an inner city they found more individuals are involved in social activity in green areas compared to barren spaces.

Other studies conducted in the inner area show that the use of green outdoor common areas (areas with both trees and grass) predicted both the strength of neighbourhood social ties and sense of community among older adults (Kweon, Sullivan, & Wiley, 1998).

In the context of high-rise and low-rise apartment buildings, both direct and indirect evidence suggests that trees and greenery promote residents’ greater use of neighbourhood outdoor spaces. These findings bolster previous understandings of the physical characteristics that influence social contact among neighbours (Coley, Sullivan, & Kuo, 1997). Their results also suggest that the presence of trees and grass in neighbourhood spaces increases the use of those spaces. High level of design and good maintenance, views of water, and nice places to sit can also increase this use- frequency, in addition to the greenery. Results of a previous study conducted in Chicago public housing developments consistently indicated that natural landscaping encourages greater use of outdoor areas by residents (Coley et al., 1997). The findings suggest that natural elements (natural landscaping) such as trees promote increased opportunities for social interactions, monitoring of outdoor areas, and supervision of children in an impoverished urban neighbourhood. Spaces with trees attracted larger groups of people, as well as more mixed groups of children, youths and adults, than did spaces devoid of nature. It is likely that the presence of adults both increases the children’s supervision and also increases their opportunities to interact personally with other adults in the neighbourhood.

Moreover, outdoor spaces can also be used by residents with pets. As well as green spaces contributing to an urban neighbourhood’s social connectedness, pets have been found to facilitate social capital too. A study completed by Wood, Giles-Corti and Bulsara (2005) investigated the role that pets can play in promoting social capital, by surveying a random sample of 339 Australian residents. They found that pets promote

Chapter 2 | 116 opportunities for their owners to have social contact with other pet owners, neighbours and members of their community. Furthermore, pets were found to motivate owners to participate in community events and to make use of community facilities (Wood et al., 2005).

From observation it has been found in Victoria Park that people with pets use the parks and pavements for walking or for exercising their dogs. It has also been observed that people with pets converge in the specific location of the central park (Joynton), indicating possibly a form of social interaction between owners while their pets are exercising.

Landcom in their effort to promote community development in Victoria Park, in newsletters came up with creative strategies to bring residents together by promoting activities in various open areas. Some advertisements were,

New mums meet in Tote Park to offer friendship and support to each other through the ups and downs of parenthood. Or if you’re a dog-lover, why not meet up with like-minded residents and take advantage of the open space while putting your pooch through its paces? You can find fellow dog-lovers meeting near the west Water Stairs in Joynton Park, around 5:00pm most evenings. (Landcom, 2005a)

... Want to increase your flexibility and stay stress-free? The traditional Chinese exercise of tai-chi involves slow movements which instil a sense of relaxation. Now you can join other residents for tai-chi in Tote Park commencing Saturday 22 April 2006, at 9.00am. (Landcom, 2006)

Increased presence of residents in outdoor public areas eventually leads to more passive surveillance of the area, greater feelings of safety, and decreased criminal activity, as suggested by Newman and others (Newman, 1972; Newman, 1973). The consequences of this increased interaction may include more opportunities for children to play in the presence of adults, higher levels of social cohesion among neighbours, and a greater sense of safety and territoriality among neighbours.

In Victoria Park, it is not just the parks and trees lining pavements that make the spaces usable. They attract people to go outside, and in doing so, they increase the chance of casual social encounters among neighbours. Such encounters have been shown in previous research to foster neighbourliness and social relationship (Yancey,

Chapter 2 | 117 1971). Accordingly, in Victoria Park this research puts importance on evaluating the use of outdoor space and ascertains resident’s use-frequency of these spaces.

Paying attention to all of these, the research investigates the use-frequency (in addition to the satisfaction and importance) of parks and courts - to examine the extent to which greenness interacts with other features that make outdoor space comfortable and engaging – a powerful liveability and sustainability factor.

Neighbourhood satisfaction and greenery. Kaplan (1985) and Kaplan and Austin (2004) showed that the presence of nearby nature was important to neighbourhood satisfaction in a broader sense as well. Particularly important was the availability of forests and other trees, well-landscaped grounds, and places for taking walks. Works by Sullivan, Kuo and colleagues at the University of Illinois (Kuo & Sullivan, 1996; Taylor, Wiley, Kuo, & Sullivan, 1998), for example, have shown that the presence of nearby nature in urban housing projects is related to better relations among neighbours, decreased violence, and greater overall satisfaction with one’s home. Kaplan (2001) recently surveyed residents at six low-rise apartment communities and found that nature views from residents’ windows contributed substantially to both their own sense of well-being and to their satisfaction with their neighbourhood.

In a study in an outer urban area, a master plan development in this suburban context established that the presence of shared outdoor spaces, opportunities to visit these areas and the nature views they afford were most important to neighbourhood satisfaction (Kearney, 2006). Contrary to the popular perception that people place a high value on large plot, low density residential development, this study indicated that density might not affect neighbourhood satisfaction as much as assumed.

Bringing design back. Design of green areas ultimately turns out to be a very important factor - as most studies indicate - as a catalyst to achieve the aims of social and psychological benefits. Issues of economic or ecological benefits are easily attributed to design issues, but the social benefits are difficult to directly point to design factors.

Studies which are from a non-architectural perspective, moreover, provide recommendations for sensitive design approaches. While stressing alternative development frameworks, Kearney, (2006) asserts that greater attention to design details and planning could promote greater neighbourhood satisfaction:

...in particular, housing clusters should be strategically positioned around shared outdoor space, and convenient access points should be provided to

Chapter 2 | 118 facilitate use of the spaces. Shared space should include both less developed nature areas and areas with some amenities (e.g., playgrounds, ball fields), providing opportunities for both nature and social interaction. In addition, residences should be thoughtfully oriented on the lot to maximize nature views, particularly of forested areas and landscaping, and minimize views of busy roads and neighbours’ houses (Kearney, 2006: 136).

If we consider Pruitt-Igoe, it is not just a matter of providing green spaces and trees, but how green spaces are integrated with built forms in the master plan which also plays a significant role in creating social interaction. Yancey’s (1971) work on the demolished Pruitt-Igoe projects points to the role that shared spaces play in providing community members with opportunities for social interaction. The lack of semi-private shared space in the projects was associated with a decrease in positive social interactions and, ultimately, to high rates of vandalism and crime and a low sense of community. Even though there was an abundance of outdoor space, the outdoor greeneries here failed to convey its meaning as shared space (Moughtin & Shirley, 2005). In other words, for whom these spaces were intended and what would be the likely uses of these areas were not built-in. It was found that many former residents in Pruitt-Igoe were initially attracted to the new projects because of their amenities (e.g., heating, working plumbing, more space...). What new residents did not anticipate, however, was the lack of opportunity for social interaction created by the layout of their new neighbourhood. In the end, many residents expressed significantly less overall satisfaction with their new (high-rise project) neighbourhood than with their old neighbourhood even with inferior living conditions (Yancey, 1971).

In a similar vein, another study established that residents of a new urbanist community had a greater sense of community than those of a nearby traditional suburban development (Kim & Kaplan, 2004). It was shown that the presence of more natural features and shared spaces in the new urbanist community, as well as differences in overall layout of the community, architectural style, and other physical features - attributed to the differences. Churchman (2003) in arguing for children’s needs for open space in the city, argued that the elements of the city and the neighbourhood need to be integrated with the ‘open-space system’. Cities need to do more than the ‘cosmetic change’ of adding playgrounds in fenced off or separated areas. All outdoor spaces of the residential environment need to be planned and designed in such a way that children can play in them, with playgrounds forming only one part of a wider open- space system, while other activities of adults can go on simultaneously.

Chapter 2 | 119 People generally tend to keep their windows shut and shades drawn for privacy or to inhibit crime opportunities and noise, and so cannot watch what happens outdoors (Coley et al., 1997). Although, some researchers have even suggested that trees and vegetation might decrease the perception of safeness of an area, for instance, by reducing sightlines provide cover for people to hide behind and by making the area shaded or darker at night (Coley et al., 1997; Samuels, 1995). Design decisions regarding foliage, canopy and selection and specific placement of trees thus become important in a multidimensional sense. The role of design in inhibiting or promoting use of open spaces has been often studied and many design guidelines are available for designing suitable settings (Kearney & Winterbottom, 2006; Marcus, 1970; Marcus & Barnes, 1999; Marcus & Francis, 1998; Rodiek & Schwarz, 2005).

Buildings relate to the outdoor spaces via the arrangement of the forms, through the balconies and windows, entry points, etc. Moreover, in inner city areas, perimeter blocks provide the opportunity for contact with the natural environment which is otherwise only available in urban parks.

In any event, circumspection needs to be brought to the issue of aesthetics, whether from the viewpoint of the layperson or the designer:

...the recent trumpeting of design signals more than a simple resurgence of environmental determinism – the proposition that appearance of built environments determines the quality of social life and the nature of human experience (Gleeson & Low, 2000:190).

In reviewing the above cited book, Kate Crowley (2002), notes that the planning outlook was highly criticised for its attribution of environmental design achievements, which it conflates with ‘urban design fetishism’, and ‘environmental determinism’ - that reduces planning to ‘a politics of surfaces’ (Gleeson & Low, 2000:190). Others from the same discipline acknowledge that design does matter, not just as an image making upmarket product. By laying out the importance of design in revitalisation of master planned areas, Randolph remarked,

While good design will not solve social problems, it may assist in improving “liveability” and thereby enhance peoples’ lives, rather than depress them (Randolph, 2006: 2 ).

On the other hand, some researchers, (Coleman, 1985) for instance, have excessively stressed design improvements ignoring social factors like health and well being, while

Chapter 2 | 120 others have been more critical of this view (Mikellides, 1980). Citing these extreme views Oscar Newman (considered by some as a determinist) acknowledges in his later works that attention to social factors interacting with the physical needs to be considered. Indeed, his (O. Newman, 1980) later work was entitled: ‘Communities of Interest’.

‘Design determinism’ is not a view this current research endorses, and acknowledges that design (architecture, landscape architecture and urban design) cannot solve but assists in advancing social and psychological benefits for people by consciously designing a residential environment which includes environmental design-behavioural opportunities.

2.3.5. Position taken on deterministic approaches Since the vision of the master-planned residential development of Victoria Park shares some common ground with that of the new urbanism and other environmental design (possibly deterministic) ideals it is important to clarify the position taken by this study. Claims and criticisms of design based strategies of New Urbanism and other similar approaches and the long-standing debates over the extent to which physical planning and design can affect human behaviour are revisited in this section.

Even if all those theories (as explained in later sections) are in-built into places does not mean it is necessarily going to work as expected – because the human condition intervenes. For example: regarding eyes on the street, people may be less interested in street activities or may not be as sociable as those in Greenwich Village of yesteryear. Moreover, in a series of essays beginning in the early 1960s, Gans and other social scientists concluded that the effect of the built environment on human behaviour was negligible compared with more powerful predictors like social, economic, and cultural factors (Gans, 1962, 1967, 1972). While the majority of criticisms were directed at CIAM influenced urban renewal, Gans in his 1961 essay on ‘Urban Vitality and the Fallacy of Physical Determinism’, also rejected the opposing paradigm embodied in Jane Jacobs’ work (cited in Bohl, 2000: 777). From this time forward, the use of physical planning and design for addressing policy issues became labelled and generally discredited as physical, environmental, or architectural determinism in social studies.

To date, however, the New Urbanist literature has not involved social scientific theory building and empirical testing, but rather marketing and manifestos (Bohl, 2000). Similarly in one of the aims of the South Sydney Local Environmental Plan 1998

Chapter 2 | 121 (Amendment No. 2) - Green Square (includes Victoria Park), is assumed, rhetorically, that physical factors were creating 'a vibrant and sustainable community’. It noted,

to facilitate the development of a vibrant and sustainable community, which is based on accessibility, reduced car dependence, a mix of land uses, friendly and safe streets, high quality public domain and active commercial centres (Gilbert, 2001: 10).

There have been these disagreements because of the sometime overemphasis on determining physical factors in environmental approaches; especially when it is claimed that the physical environment alone can create (as opposed to contribute to) a sense of community or provide a sense of security. New Urbanist principles specifically either support or contradict the idea that a sense of community will follow the physical form of cities and neighbourhoods generally (Talen, 1999).

Moreover, place-based ideas have also been critically viewed by psychologists differentiating between ‘designing spaces’ and ‘creating places’ (Sime, 1986). Architecture, urban design and planning, in concentrating on the physical dimensions of space and form, are in danger of neglecting the patterns of behaviour and experience which instil built forms with meaning. Psychology has traditionally been removed from the physical environment of building processes, yet it is essentially a part of our everyday behaviour and experiences. ‘Designing spaces’ is a process ascribed to architects who, in concentrating on the properties of geometric space, may pay insufficient attention to the activities and experiences those spaces are likely to engender for other people. ‘Creating places’, in contrast, is what ‘good’ architecture should aspire to, given it reflects everyday life.

It has been argued that physical factors alone cannot be solely relied on to preserve local order and feelings of security (Samuels, 1994). Studies have shown that block- level linkages between local social ties and territorial attitudes may contribute to the development of group- based norms regarding appropriate behaviours in on-block settings (R. B. Taylor, Gottfredson, & Brower, 1984). In general, the role that urban and architectural design elements play is frequently a supportive role for other more influential situational conditions, such as social networks, home ownership and territorial responsibility.

Another work demonstrated how a 'series of subtle design features can undermine' an otherwise defensible design; and how ethnic heterogeneity, for instance, can result in a general anonymity that defuses a sense of community spirit that a design might

Chapter 2 | 122 otherwise enhance (Merry, 1981a, 1981b). Physical defensible space features (barriers, surveillance opportunities etc.) can help boost neighbourhood identification, but cannot do everything when it comes to ensuring safety and security (Merry, 1981a, 1981b). In other words, in an architectural sense, spaces may be potentially defensible and secure, but are not ‘watched over’ because the socio-cultural and community fabric is weak. It is also possible that if they were aware of the implications of aspects of the design that professionals judge as important, it would then be considered important by the residents. For example, a study has shown that residents ranked ‘safety and security’ as the most important aspect they want from a development, but they did not always agree with professionals about whether the design and layout of developments made it feel safe (CABE, 2007). It is important to understand how situational opportunities and environmental cues are interpreted by users, for instance:

... defensible design features [in-built surveillability and accessibility/occupancy potentials], and territorial markers [signs of personal, neighbourhood, community and civic appropriation of, or responsibility for, places]... (Samuels, 1994: 4)

It has been purported that New Urbanist principles either support or contradict the idea that a sense of community will follow the physical form of cities and neighbourhoods generally (Gilbert, 2001; McGuirk & Dowling, 2007). It has however been shown that intermediate variable roles are important in achieving social goals,

... while some research supports the idea that resident interaction and sense of community are related to environmental factors, the effectuation of this goal is usually only achieved via some intermediate variable. (Talen, 1999: 1362)

Some of the intermediate variables may be resident homogeneity, affluence, social position, length of stay, home ownership or family composition (Talen, 1999). These types of designed settlements may simply be attracting residents with certain similar characteristics, or residents of new urban developments may view their communities as commodities, and thus the commitment to them may be based on economic rationality as opposed to a socially based sense of community. Sense of neighbourhood, it seems, diminishes in importance with increasing social position. Poor people more readily form into communities, in contrast (Talen, 1999).

Most social effects take time to incubate; and length of residence is also found to be a key variable in the formation of a sense of community. One strong variable which surfaces repeatedly in the quest to determine why and where sense of community is

Chapter 2 | 123 found, is this period. Conversely, residential transience has been linked to areas with low social integration. Home ownership has been found to be an important part of nurturing a sense of community, since, the argument goes, residents who have more financial commitment to their neighbourhoods will have a stronger sense of community. Family composition, especially the presence or absence of children, in turn is associated with residents’ degree of autonomy and couples’ joint work status is also implicated (Talen, 1999).

One way out of this impasse would be to soften the argument regarding social aspirations (some social goals) and declare that they are simply meeting the human requirements of physical design, rather than actively creating certain behaviours. Physical design need not create a sense of community, but rather, aim to increase its probability, as rationalized by ‘environmental probablism’ (Bell, 2001). Spatial arrangement is therefore a medium rather than a variable with its own effect. Creating an environment where desired forms of behaviour (i.e. social interaction and sense of community) are possible may be a laudable enough reason to build planned settlements. As posited,

Architecture and urban form do not cause behaviour (in a deterministic sense), but can increase and decrease the likelihood of behaviours occurring. It is not enough to examine design feature alone. We must understand how people perceive or interpret the meanings embodied in such places (Samuels, 1994: 3).

In one study, Clare Cooper Marcus (2000) suggests specific aspects of the physical form of cohousing may enhance the ability of residents to meet casually, and to feel themselves blending in or standing apart from the neighbourhood context in which they are located. Each of the communities described were visited for three to five days, during which time the author lived in a community guest room, observed the day-to-day activities in shared spaces, participated in shared meals, and interviewed five to eight residents selected by the host-contact as forming a typical cross-section of the community. In other words the users’ were involved in all phases.

This current research therefore is more interested in the users’ interpretations and experiential aspects of spaces (both internal and external). Their interpretations are the sum of their expectations, experiences and evaluations (emerging as satisfactions, preferences...). It seems at least possible that physical effects are encompassing enough to apply in practice, despite some moderate variations in social patterns, or

Chapter 2 | 124 even to be general in their application, because of certain regularities in the nature of human beings and their cultures.

It is obvious, however, that community cohesion can be augmented by physical design, by the provision of in-built potentials for community interaction (Samuels, 1994). Examples are: high quality and integrated outdoor spaces (people are more likely to use outdoor space that is both thermally comfortable and secure), community vegetable gardens, sport and leisure facilities, and child and teenage-dedicated spaces (e.g. day-care centres, children’s play areas). It is equally self-evident that potentials for both privacy and community must co-exist, and that residents should have access to both when they so desire.

Extreme physical conditions can be cited in which form (e.g. Pruitt Igoe) has its influence independent of social context. Most social patterns also have no significant independent influence, beyond extreme cases. But in most realistic cases, the influences of physical and social parameters are difficult to disentangle. To understand the effect on a person of some social institution we must have a notion of its typical physical spatial setting. This understanding is shared by Kevin Lynch and accordingly in his work Theory of a good city form, he posits,

Social investigators rarely legalize this fact and analyse social patterns as if they occurred in spaceless point. Spatial investigators are more timid, and hardly dare to neglect people in analysing space. Yet it is evident that physical patterns have important effects on people, given a set of social patterns, and that an analysis of these physical effects is important to understanding the whole (Lynch, 1981: 101).

Many studies (Kim, 1997) have selected high-rise residences distributed all over a country in their search for satisfaction with high-rise high-density dwelling forms. However, the social formation and lifestyle aspirations and experiences of people living in a high-rise building in a city centre, in areas near the city, or in a peripheral suburb are likely to be quite different even though the form of dwelling remains constant. This is elaborated in another section in this dissertation - on inner-city lifestyle and its associated ‘creative’ class.

Moreover, the psychological impact of an 18 storey high structure rising up from low- rise forms (for instance in a place like Victoria Park), however, is still not high-rise when considered among other high-rises in the context of the Sydney CBD. Therefore the

Chapter 2 | 125 overall perception of size is also dependent on the context, meaning urban design does have influence on peoples’ perceptions.

2.3.6. Conclusion Three different variations have been explored here within the perimeter block typology. The overall understanding is that perimeter form can be successfully repeated but its size, scale and form must respond to the demand from citizens for different uses and agendas. The logic of layout, form heights, designs etc should be site specific and contextual.

As argued, this form has an ability to be adaptable over time, corresponding to different socio-political conditions in history. It is necessary to give new projects sufficient time to integrate into their urban contexts. To maintain continuity of urban form and structure is a way to sustain heritage but could be stifling of creativity if taken to extremes. It is important to see the development here as a process rather than reproducing form and design as an end product.

When the concepts and ideas reviewed in the above section are related to the study at hand, it can be seen that Victoria Park designs are based on the Green Square Development Control Plan 1997 Urban Design (Amendment) Stage 1, and Green Square Draft Structural Masterplan (Stanisic, Turner and Hassell, 1997, cited in Gilbert, 2001). The detailed design and environmental standards provide for a layout of public spaces and streets for the creation of a ‘high quality’ public domain and buildings with an emphasis on site responsive design - based on the principles of sustainable development (Gilbert, 2001). The broad principles outlined in the planning documents guiding redevelopment in this area appear to reflect important urban design qualities noted in the literature. However, as always with urban design, it is only after an examination of the detail, that one can gain an appreciation of the extent to which the design details are appropriate and likely to result in a quality environment. In Victoria Park the use of the block and its urban design implications are studied by illuminating some the current ideas, studies and public guidance which consider it as sustainable design.

Chapter 2 | 126 Chapter 3 : Design and methodology of the study

3.1. The study area

The major aspects considered in this section are the rationale for the study area selection, history of the place, design strategies, ESD features, sustainable design aspects which effect users and the nature of the built forms, and are described below. These findings had methodological implications for the research. This section is an amalgamation of archival information on the precinct and observations on the study area. This section explains, first, why the study area has been selected as the object and subject of investigation, and then elaborates the master plan design. The sustainable parameters that have been included in the master plan scheme and in the design of the blocks are also outlined. Finally the rationalization of the grouping of the blocks and complexes are elaborated.

3.1.1. Justification for the study area selection In the reconnaissance phase of this study a visual survey of inner areas and their residential forms was made. The study area, 5km from the CBD, which was part of a larger rezoned industrial area was eventually selected. A representative range of residential buildings in the precinct was selected as case studies - since this development is considered a model of a successful transformation of a neglected inner city precinct. Sydney’s ‘global arc’ economic corridor plan runs over the area towards the airport in south (Department of Planning, 2005d: 33)(see section 2.2.1 & 2.2.2). However, it is not only the aspects of open spaces and the design of the builtform which were instantly noticeable that made this precinct a suitable study area but other environmental approaches associated with the history of the place. Systematic observation of the precinct prior to the design and methodology of the study revealed that block design and broader urban design potentials were utilised in the Victoria Park configurations. Moreover, the residential buildings in Victoria Park were selected as case studies since this development is considered as a model of a successful transformation of a neglected inner city precinct, as previously outlined. Also, the range of multi-storied buildings allows for an evaluation of a central theme in the current work: the effect of height and formal arrangements in residential buildings on liveability.

Victoria Park has had a long and varied history. Originally it was known as the Waterloo swamp, during the 19th century and later it became the Victoria Park pony club racecourse. With continued reuse over the century it can be considered as a

Chapter 3 | 127 classic brownfield development example in an inner urban setting, even before sustainability arguments began to proliferate.

However, given the current trend towards higher density environments in inner areas in Australian cities, the solutions by these settings offered have not been tested. There is a lack of current studies on Sydney inner city medium & higher density housing which evaluates user perspectives including both subjective and objective features of housing design and setting. Moreover there is lack of studies on inner city master planned higher density brownfield developments (McGuirk and Dowling 2007). As noted, major Australian works to date have focused almost entirely on outer suburban greenfield planned settlements (Blair et al., 2003). Others, in their attempt to comprehend planned settlements, observed that Victoria Park cannot be analysed by grouping it in any of the typical categories, given its complexity and its exclusive characteristics (Dowling & McGuirk, 2005). Within this premise this research investigates higher density housing in inner Sydney taking user satisfaction, liveable and sustainable design issues as the major points of investigation; and height as a parameter of special interest.

In 2001 Landcom considered its Victoria Park project in Zetland as, ‘a model strategic project delivering the Government’s renewal policy for inner-city sites’ (2001: 14). Moreover, Landcom sees the Victoria Park development as their ‘best practice for waste management’ where it was indicated that over 90% of the material from previous buildings and other infrastructure were recycled into the project (Landcom, 2002: 9). During 2001-2004 it won various awards for urban design; Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD), ESD, and for its landscape designs (AILA, 2004a; Architecture Australia, 2003; Hassell, 2002). One of the mixed use mid-rise complexes, named ‘ARC’, in 2002 received the South Sydney Development Corporation award for energy efficient design, and for the design of its open spaces. ‘Centric’, another complex, in 2001 received the South Sydney Development Corporation design and innovation award (Tonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects, 2006). ‘ECO’ another, low-rise, complex was awarded for architecture and landscape design (AILA, 2004b; Stanisic Associates Architects, 2006). The ‘AIRIA’ scheme, with the checker board patterned deep balconies, has been featured in the popular media even before it was completed (Johnson, 2002; SMH, 2002a) (Figure 3.1.1). Clearly, in the overall designs of Victoria Park, the environmental aspects were highly commended by professionals and the media. However, given the importance attached to the project any comprehensive research on the residents’ liveability fostered by sustainable design ideas remained elusive. Clearly the awards and recognitions have generated greater public interest..

Chapter 3 | 128 Figure 3.1.1: The design scheme has been featured in the popular media even before it was completed. Top. A virtual view from the central park of a low-rise scheme designed by Turner Associates. Below. Newspaper article promoting a design of a section AIRIA, by then NSW government architect Johnson, illustrating his concept of greening within and outside the form. Source: SMH, 2002a, 2003c & Turner Architects, 2006.

Chapter 3 | 129 From the speedy sales, economic returns, and profitability of the apartments developers have also perceived these as highly successful projects But does this popular perception have bearing in user perceptions of the design and spaces? To what extent do users of the precinct consider the design in their appreciation or otherwise? Can the ideas projected here be considered as environmentally and socially sustainable design ideas?

Landcom lays downs four key sustainability guiding principles: 1. Deliver a sustainable quality of life 2. Conserve resources 3. Protect biodiversity 4. Minimise pollution (Landcom, 2003b). However, compared to their urban design initiatives which were comprehensively elaborated, sustainable aspects in the designs of individual building forms are less thorough and lacking in detail. Out of 15 Project Indicators (Landcom, 2003b: 23) intended to provide a measure of the sustainability of Landcom’s current development, only 3 deal specifically with the built form. One possible reason was that their focus was more on societal aspects (social sustainability) than on physical fabric. For example, in relation to greenhouse gas emission reduction, instead of concentrating entirely on physical aspects of built form Landcom tends to aim for ‘energy smart communities’ (Landcom, 2003a). This coincides with the view this research conveys, yet actual user studies have not been the basis of these aspects nor whether these are actually working. There is a gap in knowledge, where user feedback could be used as ways to approach the issues of reducing household greenhouse emissions, via behavioural and attitudinal surveys for instance.

Overall multiple common threads can be also be drawn between some of the urban design theories in the literature review and study from an Australian urban planning perspective reviewing the Green Square Draft Structural Masterplan (Stanisic, Turner and Hassell, 1997, cited in Gilbert, 2001). Some of the aspects identified in that study were: sense of place;reasonable densities; limit on building heights; mixed and compatible uses; human scale;public-private domain;linkages and relationships (permeability and legibility); and compatibility with the natural environment. Since this study analysed the master plan documents before the development took shape, it is salient to see whether these habitability criteria have materialised or not. To see to what extent these aspects, which are currently seen as social sustainable parameters of urban design, along with those described in this research, have contributed to the liveability of the area. Side by side, visual observation through photographs has been carried out to corroborate these links. These are further reflected upon in the analyses of the responses of the users in the area.

Chapter 3 | 130 Figure 3.1.2: With continued reuse over the century even before Landcom took over the site, it can be considered a classic brownfield development example in an inner urban area. A phase-wise strategy was taken by Landcom to develop the precinct. Source: Rashid, 2007.

Chapter 3 | 131 3.1.2. History of the place Prior to European settlement, the site was a lagoon and swamp (Waterloo Swamp), part of the sand dune and swale formations of the Botany sand beds which drain from Centennial Park and Moore Park to the tidal estuary of the Cooks River and Botany Bay. Around 1910, the lagoon was drained and filled to create the Victoria Park Race Course, a private pony track promoted by the newspaper proprietor, property developer and gambling man, Sir James Joynton Smith. The Figure 3.1.2 elucidates the continuous reuse of this area until the late 1990s when Landcom took over the site.

Since the 1990s the conversion of old industrial sites to residential use has been a key component of the NSW Government’s urban consolidation policy. Consequently in 1997 Landcom, the former Land Commission and the NSW government's greenfields development section, added inner-urban renewal to its business operations. The new objective was to acquire and re-develop large industrial and derelict sites in established areas for new residential and commercial accommodation. In doing so Landcom set itself two primary aims for all of its projects: to establish new benchmarks in urban design and development best practice through good planning and design, and to achieve a reasonable return consistent with the level of risk involved. With this vision, Landcom entered its new business with the acquisition of several medium-sized sites around Sydney. In 1995 the Department of Defence put its 24.5 hectare Navy Stores site at Zetland on the market - a key area in the emerging Green Square regeneration district and in itself a large site suitable for urban renewal. With the increasing importance of brownfield redevelopments in the western & inner Sydney context, Landcom acquired the site at the end of June 1997.

3.1.3. Aspects of the master plan scheme In February 1998, Landcom commissioned a planning team headed by Cox Richardson (Architects) to prepare a master plan for Victoria Park, that was consistent with the 'Green Square Structure Master Plan' prepared for the new South Sydney Development Corporation. The Victoria Park Master Plan was completed and adopted by South Sydney Council in December 1998, following a period of public exhibition. By that time Landcom’s focus has shifted toward a design for the site that blended environmental principles, flexibility and community and social spaces within a standard redevelopment budget.

Once more, following a design competition the Government Architect’s Office and Hassell Architects were selected to redevelop the master plan for the site. In later stages a revised master plan with Built Form Design Quality Objectives was prepared

Chapter 3 | 132 Figure 3.1.3:The Victoria Park master plan, showing the stages of development. Commercial section on right of the master plan is not developed. Note, the blocks are oriented in an angle to the cardinal axis (the north is upward). Almost all blocks have two sides facing north, which is either north-east or north-west. Central park is the focus of the whole scheme. Bottom Left. Location of the precinct in Zetland Suburb. Source: Landcom, 2004.

Chapter 3 | 132-i by Hassell Architects (Hassell, 2000). This new document uses as its basis the street as ‘a place’ and illustrates graphically with case study projects, how the interface between the built form and the public space of the street may be achieved. Other potentials - traditional ideas of providing a coherent streetscape, managing the public and private realms, mixed uses etc - to an extent shaped the scheme, and were employed in the designs. The approach illustrated here was quite similar to the later publications by NSW government of good design examples which was associated with the legislations (State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65). As stated in the document,

An important design objective for the built form of Victoria Park is to insure not only innovative and imaginative housing design, but that the built form defines and addresses the street character and contributes to the quality of the public domain (Hassell, 2000: 1).

Presently, as observations reveals, it is seen as a master-planned ‘new town’ medium- high density community but one that appears to be physically integrated into its surrounding urban fabric and its surrounding established communities. The purpose was not to have a gated or fortress community but one which would blend in with the surroundings. It was intended to have mixed housing types, and perhaps some socio- economic diversity in terms of tenure and household type. The original building, Totalisator remains on the site and has been incorporated into the development. Extensive renovations have been completed to this heritage listed building (adjacent to Tote Park) to commemorate the site’s history.

3.1.4. Phase strategy At the outset a phase-wise strategy was taken by Landcom to develop the precinct. The initial stages of the residential project were developed in partnership with a number of developers, who in turn engaged different architectural firms to design the dwellings which are still being marketed progressively to the public (Landcom, 2001).

For example, the low-rise complexes were built in the first phase along with parks. The high-rise complexes were completed later. The process is still on-going, with complexes still under construction (Figure 3.1.3 & 3.1.4).

The current research considers only the complexes that were completed by January 2006. From 2008 onward the other areas of the master plan are slowly being developed for residential and mixed use design. The perimeter block design principle appears to accommodate long-term objectives of adaptation and change without

Chapter 3 | 133 disruption of the original urban intention. However the articulation of the blocks and court design quality of each complex varied from the master plan schema, depending on each architect’s design intentions. While flexibly and adaptability were prime motives in the planning framework, they are translated at the level of physical provision. By the actions of gradual development the design schemes were able to give sufficient time for designs to mature. This strategy avoided the appearance of the precinct being a mass production and endless repetition of facades and stereotypical high-rise (stand alone) blocks, while introducing formal and visual variety and to some extent bringing vibrancy to the urban setting.

Currently, a mid-rise complex is being completed, which is part of the phase marked as stage 5 (located northern part of master plan). In an earlier phase high-rise complexes were constructed, to judge the market viability of such forms. Clearly phase-wise development offers the flexibility of changing the formal configurations to suit market conditions. For example, in any global slowdown of market economies, construction can be scaled down, if needed, without affecting the usability of the overall precinct.

The Government’s shifting position on global warming and rising public awareness on these issues may have led to the introduction of newer features into the new structures at Victoria Park (DECC, 2006). The newer structures now accommodate other principles of sustainability which are becoming more accepted commercially by developers. For example: using a roof top terrace as a communal space in the building called ‘Prominence’ or installing solar panels on the high-rise section of the ‘ECO’ complex.

Economics. Financial reports from Landcom suggests that it achieved its targeted rate of return and also provided affordable housing at the numbers required (Landcom, 2003b). The Property Council of Australia remarks on the economic benefits achieved by Landcom in Victoria Park,

Due to the extraordinary master planning input the notional land value has almost doubled in comparison to what it would be worth had it been subdivided and sold on without the quality and value-adding planning and design investments made (Property Council of Australia, 2002).

Master planned residential developments are getting growing recognition from property developers since they achieve sales targets from typical small block developments. These are seen as long term commitments to development as opposed to the short term of small scale ones. These are called master planned communities (MPCs) and a

Chapter 3 | 134 host of environmental and social objectives have become part of developer marketing strategies (Property Council of Australia, 2003, 2005). Some of these aspects are: lifestyle features, protection of the environment and a range of residential, recreational, commercial and job opportunities.

3.1.5. Energy-efficiency and passive design features Passive design features were given high priority in the Victoria Park designs. Cross flow ventilation was a key element in achieving principles of energy efficiency. Architects were encouraged to design ‘slimline’ built form instead of deep plans in the master plan (Hassell, 2000). Cross-over apartments that would maximise natural cross ventilation and permit natural daylight is a feature that was also followed in the designs.

Similarly, in Landcom’s ‘Energy smart communities policy’ (2003a) attention was given to the passive design feature of building orientation in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. These were indicated as mandatory requirements:

Apartment blocks should have a north/south aspect, with main living areas located to the north.

Apartment blocks should be designed to maximise cross flow ventilation.

A thermal performance study should be carried out at initial design stage and designs modified, where required, to minimise potential heating and cooling loads.

Exterior shading must be provided for all north and west facing windows by means of either permanent overhangs (suitably dimensioned for the height of the glazing) or operable external blinds/shutters. (Landcom, 2003a: 5-7).

It was indicated in the above guideline that most of the buildings were targeted to achieve a Nathers star rating of 4.5 or greater (out of 5 stars). Completed in 2002, ARC, a mid-rise complex was the first apartment complex in Sydney to achieve a five star rating (Tonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects, 2006).

It was also indicated that ‘a project-specific cooling strategy appropriate to the climate zone must be developed’. For this reason, the installation of air-conditioners was not

Chapter 3 | 135 permitted under the building’s by-laws in apartments with cross ventilation (ARC, 2010).

Building orientation also improves natural lighting and dependence on artificial lighting thereby reducing energy needs (as exemplified in Residential Flat Design Pattern Book and Improving Flat Design) .

Having higher star rated energy efficient appliance use was encouraged. Dishwashers and clothes dryers must have a minimum 3.5 rating, a refrigerator must have a 5* rating. In Canada, interestingly, dwellings are normally equipped with these basic appliances. Since in Australia appliances are not supplied with the dwellings these controls are difficult to enforce.

On the other hand passive design ideas which accommodate the simple function of clothes drying can help to minimise the use of dryers, especially in Australian climatic condition. Having too small balconies with too much transparency can deter users from using these spaces in apartments effectively. Accordingly noted as mandatory requirements,

Facilities for exterior drying (e.g. rotary hoist, clothes lines) must be provided in an area with good solar access. Apartments are to be provided with low level pull out lines on balconies (or screened areas of balconies), which must be designed to accommodate these without adverse visual impact. (Landcom, 2003a: 8)

Other aspects of water efficiency, by using AAA rated taps/shower heads (as per Water Services Association Australia standards) and using gas for heating water, are mandatory in Landcom’s guidelines.

Renewable energy. Landcom found co-generation was not economically viable for developers, even though it was technically feasible for the projects in the precinct (Landcom, 2003b: 60). It was also indicated in another Landcom report that, ‘the solar system provides a minimum of 60% of hot water needs unless constraints such as insufficient roof space for panels make this impractical’.

It was anticipated that further retrofitting of energy saving material can be done, when the technology/material becomes financially more viable and accepted. However, it was a requisite from Landcom that all buildings must be pre-wired to accept future

Chapter 3 | 136 Photovoltaic (PV) panel installations. The apartments were to facilitate roof installation in the designs.

Photovoltaic panels were installed only in one high-rise (ESP) and were added at a later stage after completion. This was however found viable for hot water use for half of the apartments’ needs. None of the low-rises were observed to have solar panels despite having large unused roof space.

3.1.6. Courtyards, outdoor spaces & greenery in the scheme One of the notable perceptible aspects is the greenness as one walks into the precinct. A feature in the Victoria Park master plan was that all complexes have green inner courtyards and all complexes are in close proximity to the green park spaces. The initial observations, as well as from examining the master plan schemes, clearly revealed the extent to which open green spaces is a central concept in the urban design.

These site characteristics therefore allow for the research to concentrate on the appreciation of natural design - as evaluated by users, by assessing their perceptions of satisfaction with the same, the congruency of that satisfaction with the importance they afford to this , in a word: its ‘environmental fit’. And, if they use the outdoor spaces in great numbers, this is taken to indicate the functionality of the design, and a vindication that these spaces have ‘served their purpose’. Moreover, in the current research the concept of ‘place’ is generally ascribed to a physical location which engenders a positive, satisfactory experience. ‘Creating places’ would mean ‘places’ which potential users of the ‘spaces’ actually ‘like’ through their experience of them (measured via environmental fit and frequency of use).

The current study does not intend to investigate any types of psychological benefits directly (as noted in the literature review); in recognition of these, it anticipates outdoor greenery would have some positive impact on resident’s overall satisfaction with the Victoria Park precinct. Here it is seen not just as breathing space for dense urban space but a resource of empirically proven yet intangible psychological benefits.

Economic benefits of open space. As indicated in a Landcom report (2003), in the current master plan almost 40% of this 25 hectare site is devoted to the public domain, featuring four large and functional green community spaces.

Chapter 3 | 137 According to Waltcorp’s Marketing Manager Lisa McCutchion, the strong sales are the result of a diverse selection of properties featuring ‘innovative floor plans’; but it is also mentioned that almost half of Waltcorp’s sales (in 2005) in ‘Form’ (a high rise complex) have been to first home buyers who showed preference because of Victoria Park’s extensive parks, playgrounds and proximity to the city. In an independent survey commissioned by Landcom, of Victoria Park residents, three benefits stand out as particularly important: it’s well-planned design, great location and green and leafy setting (Landcom, 2005a). Unfortunately, the details of that survey could not be accessed because Landcom was not prepared to make the whole survey publicly accessible. Earlier in their sustainability report of 2004, which was accessible online, they reiterated some partial results without going into details. It claims that residents consider the development is well designed and constructed, and they particularly like the open spaces and parks.

These are seen to foster a sense of community ownership and provide a more relaxed and peaceful environment. It was noted that the green spaces help to create a more suburban feel for city living. 35% of survey respondents indicated that the existence of parks and the quality of landscaping influenced their decision to live at Victoria Park. (Landcom, 2004: 19)

Influenced by land developers, real estate agents in their advertisements of Victoria Park apartments very frequently highlight the fact that 40% of the area is green parks. Most of the sales brochures highlight the greenness, or connect the aspects of liveability with that of greenness. Advertisements in Victoria Park often highlight a 'green outlook', from living room views onto streets or toward courtyards with trees. Superlatives like ‘green with envy’, ‘garden grandeur’, ‘leafy outlook’, ‘quiet park aspects’ or ‘picture perfect’ were some of the popular expressions used when promoting greenery in the surroundings (REA Group Australia, 2008). Perimeter type blocks with green inner courts probably contributed to the overall perception of greenery here.

Courts as communal space. As observation revealed, the courts here were created mainly for their environmental functions and, to an extent, to promote opportunities for some social roles and interaction in the private domain.

As shown in studies and in history, building form with a continuous, uninterrupted block edge defines the linear street better than pavilion buildings (CABE, 2005; CABE/DTLR, 2001; Panerai, Castex, Depaule, & Samuels, 2004). Thus a perimeter building form

Chapter 3 | 138 developing around an inner court has two domains: a public domain and private court domain. The private domain generally provides refuge from street activities and noise especially in an active urban setting. However, in Victoria Park, the private domain of the court was probably not conceived for refuge from noisy on-street activity, because of the relatively calm atmosphere in the precinct. It does provide a private secured area but its potential was not fully explored by the designers. Other than providing environmental advantages to the layout and form its other uses remain less developed. The courts in the design schemes appear to be created mainly for their environmental functions rather than to promote social roles. In line with current thinking, the scale of the blocks has been much reduced, to more human proportions, opposed to creating monumentally large schemes. However, other potentials - traditional ideas of providing a coherent streetscape, managing the public and private realms, mixed uses etc - to an extent shaped the scheme. As elaborated, in the literature review, currently the perimeter block principle is seen more as a design solution for sustainable urban housing than as generic urban design schema.

Perimeter blocks with a central communal open space are particularly suitable for children’s play, especially if access from the street is controlled. The landscaping and orientation of play areas can contribute significantly to their amenity value. However, the noise from the courtyard play areas can diminish residential amenity, particularly in smaller schemes, and designers need to find solutions which balance all factors involved. Possibly the noise factor discouraged designers from creating children areas in the courts in Victoria Park. The presence of a separate play lot (Tote Park) in close proximity probably has deterred designers from providing internalized children play areas. All things considered, allowing for this different type of social use could be considered as a missed opportunity to make the inner court livelier.

Water sensitive urban design . However, hidden in the central park is the main feature of a water sensitive urban design (WSUD) approach which is rarely noticed (Bryant, 2003; Wong, 2006). In some of the roads rain water is channelled through central swales, which cleans the water by filtering and slowing down the flow, and then directing it into a central collection pond. The harvested water is then re-used to water the greenery and feed the two aesthetic water-step features. As a result precious potable water is not used to irrigate any of the green spaces. The site’s natural heritage, where the Waterloo Swamp once worked as a wetland system, detaining and cleansing the water flowing through the site, was thus reworked in the WSUD designs.

Chapter 3 | 139 Indeed, reworking an earlier Cox Richardson master plan, landscape architect Penny Allan (NSW Dept. of Public Works & Services), from the Government Architects Office of NSW, & Hassell (Architects) articulated the road layout, open park spaces and finally determined building placements too, based on water management principles (Johnson & Gerada, 2003; Weirick, 2004).

So this current development approach ensures that Victoria Park can continue to function in a similar way to a wetland today.

3.1.7. Perimeter block scheme – orientation, appearance & urban design potentials Within the apartment block formation, the varying types of dwelling and design variations comprising the internal layouts within each height group are the other noticeable features which were documented and purposefully focused on in this research. Three different variations have been employed here within the perimeter block typology.

Since various architects were engaged in the designs by different building developers this contributed to the variations. There are repetitions of form and height with both low- rise and high-rise forms represented (AAP & SMH, 2002; Delaney, 2002). The inherent design variation and complexity was one main aspect of the Victoria park designs. Moreover, lower floor dwellings in low-rise structures are different to lower floor dwellings in high-rises.

Orientation. The orientation of the blocks in the master plan and the actual design scheme was considered with solar and natural ventilation in mind. The Victoria Park Master Plan orientates the blocks in an angle to the cardinal axis. As a result almost all blocks have two sides facing north, either north-east or north-west. Again the other two sides facing south are designed in such a way that they have most of their usable space facing towards the inner courts, which is either north-east or north-west.

From the point of view of architectural design, again, balance is needed between maximising climatic potential with that of views or natural surveillance of the street or public-private interface of the street edge, or other design objectives. Crucially, a balance is needed between seeking the optimum condition for winter and summer based on climatic conditions for Sydney. All these aspects, which require lived-in experiences to appreciate, are investigated via the users' responses in the survey.

Chapter 3 | 140 Variations in building heights and breaks in the building line can reduce shadowing and increase solar access or natural daylight within the block and the court. These again create a robust perimeter block form with continuity in regard to the relationships between public realm and private realm. As per the master plan requirements, the internal courtyards in Victoria Park precinct must achieve the minimum 2 hour solar illumination on the winter solstice. Solar orientation also influences thinking about the internal layout of the individual dwellings within the block.

Appearance - style and aesthetics. Borrowing styles not coming from the region, or a general European vernacular, or nearby town or historical vernaculars, the overall setting is given an appearance of a contemporary development.

By not having the same architect for all block designs the precinct avoided being stylistically monotonous or repetitive. Even in a single block each side/facade was treated differently (elevation, surface treatment, balcony privacy etc.) by architects depending upon the exposure to the public realm. In ‘Centric’, for instance, the north- west block with exposure to a busy road was dealt with differently to the north-east block which faces an internal precinct street.

Block design & urban design potentials. Systematic observation of the precinct reveals how block design and broader urban design potentials were utilised in the Victoria Park configurations.

In line with the current Built Form Design Quality Objectives by Hassell Architects (Hassell, 2000), the scale of the blocks has been much reduced, to more human proportions, opposed to creating monumentally large schemes. As a general principal it has been suggested that the city block should be as small as practicable (Bentley, McGlynn, & Smith, 1985). There is general agreement that street blocks of mixed uses result in vital and interesting cities. There also appears to be wide agreement that street blocks should be as small as is reasonably possible in order to maximise the ‘permeability’ of city districts. A city with small street blocks gives the pedestrian a greater choice and variety of routes between any two points. Smaller street blocks in cities increase the visibility of corners which announce the junction of paths and in consequence both physical and visual permeability are increased (Bentley et al., 1985).

3.1.8. Explanation of the groups Height groups & complex groups. Generally, studies dealing in housing and user satisfactions with residential forms, identify two types of form, low-rise or high-rise (Davis, 1977; Francescato, 1979; Macsai & Hidvegi, 1982). However, the advantage of

Chapter 3 | 141 Victoria Park is that two different paradigms can be studied in a single locality. Previous studies tend to compare residents of higher floors to lower floors or the forms themselves without taking into consideration the setting (Francescato, 1979; Kim, 1997; Oh, 1999). Importantly, this current study compares complexes which take into account the setting and does not isolate a single form (e.g. low-rise or high-rise).

In terms of height of the builtform, three types were identified (low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise) and in terms of perimeter block configuration three types of complexes were identified (low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise complexes).

Two lines of thinking were taken into consideration for the groupings. First, conceptually, how these forms are seen in size or in volume and their functional role with the surroundings. Secondly, the groups have to meet statistical assumptions of minimum group size and similarity in size.

Conceptually, high-rise and mid-rise are normally seen to be linked beyond the neighbourhood level to city level, while low-rises having more relationship with the ground and surroundings (Alexander, Ishikawa, & Silverstein, 1977; Jacobs, 1962). Architects of Victoria Park also share a similar viewpoint; they for instance conceptualize one group of buildings within the canopy of trees and one beyond that; ie the high rise components (Johnson, 2006). Architect Nick Turner, whose firm was involved with designing several complexes in the precinct, identifies the low-rise as groundscapers and the high-rise as skyscrapers (SMH, 2002a; Turner Associates, 2006).

On the other hand, considerations for robustness of statistical tests, group sizes need to be reasonably similar (Pallant, 2005:198). Forms were, therefore, collapsed into two groups having reasonably similar size. Considering the above arguments, the groups were eventually established as follows.

Height groups. Fundamentally the height groups and complex groups are different. The height groups only include floor level (height) of the building. The effect of height on the relationship to the variables was tested here. For height groups, the respondents from different floors were grouped into two groups:

1-4 Floors , (where 1 = ground level, total 4 levels) 5-18 Floors , (total 14 levels)

Respondents living within walk-up range were placed in the 1-4 Floors group. Respondents above four storeys (five or more) were placed in 5-18 Floor group.

Chapter 3 | 142 Figure 3.1.4: Aerial view of the Victoria Park showing the three types of complexes, with abundance of greenery in the parks, courts and in street landscaping. On the left of the aerial photo are the low-rise complexes, bottom left are the mid-rises and on the right are the high-rises. Clearly internal courts are an invariable feature in all complexes. All built forms here follow a flexible perimeter block formations with varying heights of buildings. Source: Bing Maps, 2010. Below, a three dimensional block study of the precinct, illustrating the forms and the complexes. Only complexes completed by 2006 are shown. Note, the high-rise & mid-rise complexes are composed of forms of various heights.

Chapter 3 | 142-i Figure 3.1.5: Top & middle. Forms of high-rise complexes as experienced from the streets and parks. Horizontality of the forms is expressively used in the designs to create a scale down appearance. The large forms are broken up into smaller scaled down fragments. Bottom. The high-rise blocks are not stand alone structures, but are part of a complicated perimeter block configuration along with other forms of varying heights. This is done to reduce the tunnelling effect of courts and to provide ample sunlight in the internal courts. Source: Rashid, 2006.

Chapter 3 | 142-ii Figure 3.1.6: Top. View of the mid-rise forms from streets and parks. Middle. The formal variations and corner treatments c. Bottom. The mid-rise complexes are part of perimeter block configurations with low-rise forms of varying heights on other sides. The dwelling type are normally not repetitive. Note here, the connection from street can be exploited more than the high-rises. Source: Rashid, 2006.

Chapter 3 | 142-iii Figure 3.1.7: Top. View of low-rise complexes as experienced from the streets and the parks. Middle. The formal variations and treatments are explored profusely within the blocks. Middle & bottom. The streets are normally narrower and have more street level entries for town house type dwelling at the lower level. Here the formal variations are more noticeable when compared to a high-rise form. Overall, the forms are in human scale and visual connections to the street or parks are maintained. Source: Rashid, 2006.

Chapter 3 | 142-iv Respondents in the 1-4 Floor group may be living in a high-rise (1-18 storeys), mid-rise (1-8 storeys) or low-rise structure (1-5 storeys). Similarly, respondents in the 5-18 Floor group may also reside on the top (5th) floor of a low-rise structure.

The varying type of dwelling and design variations in internal layouts within each height group are acknowledged. There are repetitions but not at the scale of 1960-70s designs. Lower floor dwellings in a low-rise would be different to lower floor dwellings in a high-rise.

Complex 2 Group. Three types of complexes were identified in the Victoria Park precinct: low-rise complex, mid-rise complex and high-rise complex. Complexes comprising high-rises & mid-rises are typically considered here as higher density forms, and were therefore aggregated into one group. The two groups which were formed, thus:

Low-rise complex High & mid-rise complex

The complexes have much wider implications than the height groups. These should not be seen merely as separate forms or as a self contained single building unit but rather as arrangements of blocks around a single courtyard. The forms and their courts are indivisibly designed here. Within the complex groups, the suggestion of ‘setting’ characteristics is inherently implied. In addition, a low-rise complex also obviously represents a lower density per area than a high-rise complex. Moreover, each complex was designed by architects with different themes and concepts within the generic framework of the master plan.

In the low-rise complexes groups all low-rises within a maximum of 5 floors were included. Normally three to four structures are arranged around a courtyard. These structures may vary in height from 4 to 5 storeys. The two storey blocks are normally townhouse/terrace type dwellings. The four storey blocks in many cases may include a penthouse with open patios on the top fifth floor in some sections. Some low-rise complex blocks may be five storeys apartments with maisonette apartments (NOVA apartments) at the top, even though predominantly the low-rise are of four storeys. Therefore, the low-rise complex group differs from the 1-4 floor group.

In a typical mid-rise complex there is normally one block which is 8-9 storeys high while others may vary from 2 storey townhouses to 6 storey blocks of apartments with

Chapter 3 | 143 various typologies. These blocks are also arranged around an open landscaped courtyard.

The high-rise complexes also vary in formal configuration. Here also these structures may vary in height, in different sections, from 2 storeys up to 18 storeys. The two-three storey blocks are normally of townhouse/terrace type dwellings. For example, ESP, a high rise complex, has one 18 storey tower, a mid-rise structure of eight storeys and a five storeys block all arranged around a triangular courtyard. The other high-rise complex, Form, is set around a rectangular court with similar variations in block heights and dwelling typologies. Some of the high-rise and mid-rise complexes are of mixed use functions with apartments, townhouses, and commercial lots of shops, small offices, etc. on street level.

Any generalisation of building forms on the findings on complex groups is clearly much more difficult in practice than making generalisations from height groups. Grouping and generalisation can be made easily for statistical reasons; but as far as designs are concerned, groups do not necessarily represent similarity in architectural design.

Chapter 3 | 144 3.2. Research philosophy, strategy & methods

This chapter starts with a philosophical overview of the research questions. It then proceeds to illuminate research strategy, and methods and analyses. Decisions about context and case study area have been described earlier in a separate section.

The combined output of a review of literature, heuristic experience, theoretical frameworks & lastly the initial observation of the study area have shaped the methodological framework. Where a theoretical framework affects the choice of methods or analysis, this is stated as such and the arguments are presented. This is then followed by a description of the procedure. Where the thesis relies on a pragmatic, a-theoretical viewpoint on what is to be gathered, observed and brought together, it proceeds to explain the procedure without attempting to force onto it any precedent or precept. Finally in the assessments, the exploratory nature of the research is always given priority than strictly adhering to any theoretical underpinnings.

Research strategy & approaches. This work utilized a case study research methodology to understand the effects of sustainable design ideas on liveability. The intention was to conduct an empirical inquiry that ‘investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident, and in which multiple sources of evidence are used’ (Yin, 2002: 13). This strategy was seen as appropriate, since, from the outset this research had objectively covered contextual conditions of inner city areas and the lifestyle of urbanites living in the areas which are near to the city. Later this was narrowed down to a specific location in areas where there was potential for future residential growth and possible application.

An interdisciplinary approach was therefore necessary for the research on the complex problem of user perceptions (preferences & satisfaction) with built forms and neighbourhood. To understand why people act as they do, one cannot view their actions solely in psychological terms, or historical terms, or physically. Knowledge will be more thorough and accurate when it includes ideas and findings from many different sources (Sommer & Sommer, 2002). Ultimately it was found useful to organize the methods according to a broad perspective that address the issues stemming from design and social sustainability, ‘How people live and behave in designed settings?’

Chapter 3 | 145 This work identifies the elements of physical design (termed ‘sustainable design’) that seem to work in Victoria Park to a certain extent, but again this is not thought to be sufficient in itself. Some of these broader social goals are beyond the ambit of this research. But, in any event, the research acknowledges the reality of a situation lies in the mutual relationships between its elements – physical, spatial, temporal, social, cultural and personal. The question for this research is not whether these ideas have a deterministic influence over people’s behaviour, but the extent to which design is any better or worse at satisfying (‘affording’) the needs of people living in inner-city (near CBD) neighbourhoods.

The use of a multi-methodological approach using convergent methods has resulted in a range of methods being employed in this thesis, some of which have been pursued to greater depth than others. Given the limitations of accessibility, the survey of users was given priority over other methods given its effectiveness in eliciting information. The survey sample was compared with Zetland Census data to ensure that findings are generalisable beyond the immediate case or cases, reflecting external validity. Data triangulation was another advantage of the strategy utilised here. The information was collected from multiple sources but ‘aimed at corroborating the same phenomenon’ (Yin, 2002: 99). With data triangulation, the construct validity also can be addressed because multiple sources of evidence provide multiple measures of the same phenomenon. Triangulation is broadly defined by Denzin (1978: 291) as ‘the combination of methodologies in the study of the same phenomenon.’ It is assumed in the method that multiple and independent measures do not share the same weaknesses or potential for bias. Each method has assets and liabilities; triangulation tends to take advantage of the assets and neutralize, rather than compound the liabilities.

Here the attempts to use triangulation have been reflected in efforts to integrate fieldwork and survey methods. Survey research is seen as quantitative and fieldwork as qualitative. Diesing (1970: 5) concluded that the advantage of variety of combinations is so great that survey research and fieldwork are better viewed as two ends of continuum rather than as two distinct kinds of methods.

On other hand, much of the extant environmental-behavioural research is exploratory and/or descriptive in nature (Selltiz, Wrightsman, & Cook, 1976; Stokols, 1977). Designs used in studies are not intended to test a single hypothesis of a cause-and- effect relationship between variables but are utilised specifically for developing an accurate description and/or exploration of a situation or of a relationship between

Chapter 3 | 146 variables. As Selltiz et al. (1977) point out, because these designs are not constrained by requiring a test of causal relationship, they can be extremely flexible in nature. As a result, a diversity of designs has been used here, with the major methodological concerns centering around the survey data-collection techniques employed. Therefore the threats (errors) to theory relevance and validity associated with exploratory descriptive research will be discussed in the following sections on data-collection methods.

Figure 3.2.1: Methods used in the research.

3.3. Observation

Observation is fundamental to all methods of data collection. However, the forms vary primarily in how techniques of investigation are organized, how observations are made and recorded, and in their validity and reliability (Reiss, 1968a). The object of much observation in is to capture events for later measurement and analysis. Unfortunately, precise measurement by direct observation and recording of events as they occur in residential settings are seldom done by architects. Systematic observations of natural social phenomena and physical traces are some procedures for doing so.

In this research, information was gathered on a number of activities in the residential setting by observation. This included: what happens, what people do or how users

Chapter 3 | 147 behave, and where the behaviour takes place. The research observation was used in conjunction with other methods, and as both a follow-up (systematic observation) after the questionnaire survey of users and (casually) prior to the survey to locate critical areas of interest that then served as cues for the questioning of the users of the spaces.

The types of observation undertaken were both human (subjective impressions of the researcher in the light of theoretical frameworks derived from the literature review) and mechanical including visual, assisted by a digital camera as recording device - for later analysis of the settings and activities occurring there. In order to ensure a high quality of observation – inevitably subjective – the process was purposely kept naturalistic and unobtrusive (Webb et al., 1966). It is crucial that the observer does not modify the activity in any way by his/her presence in the setting, given that the intention is to record what would take place naturally without any outside presence and which, thus, is not contrived.

Zeisel’s (1981, 2005) methods of environmental behavioural research of observing physical traces were utilised in this research for discerning the actual use of spaces and maintenances of these spaces. Inside the buildings, signs of physical misuse or vandalism were noted. The areas looked into were also guided by Newman’s work regarding Pruitt-Igoe,

The corridors, lobbies, elevators were dangerous places to walk. They become covered with graffiti and littered with garbage and human waste...The elevators, laundry, and community rooms were vandalized, and garbage was stacked high around choked garbage chutes. (Newman & Rutgers University. Center for Urban Policy Research, 1996: 10)

No apparent physical marks of misuse or lack of maintenance were observed. These observations were extended to outdoor public spaces as well. Moreover, any signs of lack of security in the area were also investigated (e.g., extra security grills on ground floor windows). Other observation included outdoor space uses and balcony use.

Nonetheless, there are many activities that are difficult, sensitive, and/or time consuming or expensive to study in the field, especially in their original setting, private/personal behaviours and interactions occurring in public space being one obvious category. Before starting the empirical project it was thus carefully considered whether the information needed could be collected without direct empirical operations

Chapter 3 | 148 or whether the selected specific activities could only be obtained by observation. Such steps included:

 Finding relevant information in already existing texts and literature;

 To establish the expected/anticipated occurrence of behaviour in a general sense.

However, it was also understood that researchers need to continually go back to the actual setting under observation as cultures/lifestyles and people do change from time to time. Earlier literature reviews, for instance, have shown the changing attitudes towards and culture of apartment living in inner-city Sydney since the early part of the twentieth century. Acceptance that exploratory observation is non-systematic, indirect and unobtrusive was necessary to set the scene for the study, as always.

Architects involved in the design of these residential settings were ultimately interviewed. This allowed a comparison of what was intended theoretically and what actually happens in a phenomenological sense in the public spaces around the buildings (expanded later).

3.3.1. Methods & error reductions Exploratory observation. Exploratory observation was deemed essential in framing the study and to complement the multi-methodological fieldwork stages. It is assumed that there is no inherent contradiction between what is often called exploratory research and systematic-observation research (Reiss 1971). A period of exploratory research prior to systematic observation and other methods in the field were therefore necessary for the following reasons.

Identify important explanatory variables that can be systematically investigated or variables that can only be studied through survey questionnaires. The approach is qualitative in most instances and based on descriptions of events and settings. Attempts were made to observe widely, that is: physical traces left in the setting after behaviour which are indicative of ways people use the settings and their attitudes towards them (graffiti for instance is a cue to who has been there and what the environment ‘means’ to them), people’s reactions to events (both planned and randomly occurring), patterns of contact (or avoidance) among people, what people do under different circumstances (including times of the day and of the week), and the type of settings they operate in, generally.

Chapter 3 | 149 Potential problems & limitations of studying the specific residential setting included the rejection of interviewing as a major data-gathering tool of the residents, in favour of a survey questionnaire, largely because of the inaccessibility to the individual units in the multi-family buildings. Moreover, it proved difficult to make ‘spot observations’ (Baksh, 1989) of households, and, obviously, recording of sequential changes of behaviour of users inside their residences as well as in the inner courtyard areas was excluded. Access to the inner courtyard areas required special permission, which was obtained, but only for the preliminary exploratory visits. Observations of traces of leftovers, erosions and missing traces (those expected) in inner courtyard areas led to the assumption that these areas are used infrequently (Zeisel, 2005). These observations helped to focus research attention on certain other common points of transactions so that comparisons could be systematically made. Finally, exploratory observation helps guide the organization of the observation process and ‘train’ the researcher for the systematic data collection procedure.

Systematic Observation. To define and determine the essential quality of this method Reiss (1971) expounds,

“By systematic observation, I mean only that observation and recording are done according to explicit procedures which permit replication and that rules are followed which permit the use of the logic of scientific inference. The means of observation and recording, whether a person or some form of technology, must be independent of that which is observed and the effects of observing and measuring must be measurable. By natural social phenomena, I mean that events and their consequences, including properties of organization, can be observed more or less as they occur” (Reiss, 1971: 4).

For methodological triangulation data were gathered via empirical observation. One of the first questions to resolve was the extent of the empirical material. Once preliminary knowledge of the residential settings and behaviour were obtained, the questions to be studied could be defined. Thus when starting the systematic observation the two aspects considered were the physical/spatial scenario/setting and the problem or research questions under investigation;

the scenario: the normal course of actions

the problem: the specific variation in the actions at issue in the current project.

Chapter 3 | 150 Sometimes it is possible to define a hypothesis which predicts how the variation might normally occur. Observations are then carried out to verify whether the prediction is true or not. In other words, theoretical assumptions are only hypotheses until verified or disproved by empirical research. For example, the Tote Park has an intimate scale which is presumed as suitable for children play activities - having a sense of safety and security; and balconies designed as flexible spaces are assumed to be capable of adapting to the different needs of users, and therefore expected to be used more frequently than those not designed this way.

Starting from the scenario, the observation methods are designed in such a way to obtain records of only those actions, attributes, or variables that are included in the problem or hypothesis. Others are considered superfluous and not recorded.

Observation is selective and purposive and involves decisions about what should be noticed and what should be ignored. It is used to decide both which episodes of interaction will be observed and how observer attention will be allocated within a given episode.

The observation period is divided into smaller time segments, permitting the use of time-sampling techniques. The objective of time sampling is to make observation discontinuous - conducted only during pre-selected times or at pre-selected intervals (McCall, 1984).

The pre-defined points of times were chosen from the non-systematic observations. The observation identified and recorded actual times and days of the week when the pre-defined actions (events) took place, and where. For example, it was found that more people use the Joynton Park and Tote Park on weekends than on working days. This could be compared to the probable time and hours of anticipated use. The exact locations of the events (actions) were established and marked on the master plan. Based on that, the points from where the observations can be made are decided.

Recording Methods. During several exploratory field sessions, a suite of methods was developed for recording the activities. Only photography is described here. Reporting sheets with illustrations were used where detailed observations of a number of activities took place and the encoded activities are recorded. For reasons of privacy and ethical concerns photographs of people participating in outdoor activities are carefully and sensitively recorded in the observations. For registering actions regarding the use of balconies and the operable louvres or shading devices digital photography was used. This saves time in the field so that other outdoor activities happening

Chapter 3 | 151 simultaneously and spontaneously can be observed. The most positive aspect of field photography is that the researcher is able to cover actions in detail, even events occurring at some distance away, and the data from the photos can be analysed later.

Systematic Photography. Besides the familiar methods of watching people or observing a place (such as various activities in the field), systematic photographs of artefacts or settings were also taken. For example, during the field visits photographs of the elevations of selected buildings were taken. By analysing these photographs over the course of the month, it is possible to find patterns of use regarding the removable louvers and shading devices. Seasonal observations are also important in this regard. Balcony use was also recorded by observing leftovers (e.g. articles stored there, and furnishings) or the lack of them or missing traces (Zeisel, 2005).

Photography Logistics. Digital cameras of 5MB resolution with professional lenses, with a 35mm lens for photos requiring high-quality, wide-angle, or telephoto magnification were used for systematic photography. This produced a time-stamped record that was easily accessible after fieldwork and provided photos that could be immediately analysed thus reducing memory distortions. Photos were transferred after every field trip to a laptop hard drive.

Observer error. Observer prejudices and expectancies about subjects, hypotheses, and data may systemically distort observational data, although the most stringently designed investigations suggest that such effects may only be appreciable when expectancies are reinforced by the principal investigator (McCall, 1984; Reiss, 1971). Given that the systematic observations came after the exploratory observations, the design of the fieldwork anticipated these errors and made provision for their containment to the extent possible.

To control observer drift and bias the observation was solely carried out by the researcher without using any other associative support (Kazdin, 1979). Time sampling of two hours in the morning and in the evening on selected days was effective in checking ‘observer drift’ occurring due to continual and long hours of observation.

Since this study involves only non-participant unobtrusive observation the observer error stemming from role relations is nonexistent (McCall, 1984).

When behaviour in public spaces is recorded sufficient distance is maintained so that reactivity of measurement does not occur. Given that the camera was also used to

Chapter 3 | 152 record physical traces there was no possibility of increase of reactivity of measurement by the visible recording device.

Data related to human behaviours are recorded but contemporaneous recording was unworkable, and retrospective recollection raises the possibility of introducing memory distortions (McCall, 1984). To minimise that, photography was assisted with written text during fieldwork.

3.3.2. Utilising observation data Observations were done prior to the survey and interview. In the exploratory part the information was crucial in developing the survey technique and questionnaire administration. For example initial observations revealed that individual dwellings would be inaccessible, hence, the survey questionnaire was used.

The aspects covered in the questionnaire were supported from evidence from observational data. Some aspects typically given priority in high density residential development were given less importance. For example, observing physical traces no evidence of vandalism was found in the precinct and the internal corridors were well kept. These led to conclusion that the aspect of security would need to be less considered here.

Outdoor space use was triangulated with the survey data. In the discussions observation photos were used to triangulate the evidence.

3.4. Interview

The interviews were conducted as a part of multi-method strategy of the research. Interviews with architects were conducted with the intention of eliciting the underlying ideas behind the designs in the Victoria Park precincts. Four architects from the relevant architectural firms were selected for interview. The basis for selecting architects was that they were involved directly with the project from conception to building stage.

Since the questions also deal with theoretical aspects of design philosophy & sustainability it was an added advantage that the participants were well experienced in

Chapter 3 | 153 the field of architecture. Their biographies revealed their experience in multi-storeyed residential dwellings. They were not only practicing architects, but academics, and their works had influence in the overall planning legislations of NSW, often held up as case studies. Therefore, in the analyses of the information collected these factors were taken into consideration and were treated as valuable pre-insights - not as quantitative data from sample respondents.

3.4.1. Aim and structure The aim was to get information from knowledgeable people, people who are involved in the processes of designing and building. The main focus was to comprehend how the ideas behind such projects generated and the information architects work with, in the designs of residential complexes, where the actual users do not yet exist (so cannot participate). The overall focus, (and one research question) was to find out the extent to which architects of the study area considered users in their designs.

The way the open-ended questions were formulated is that they fall into structured groups which all architects dealing with residential complex would presumably consider (Broadbent, 1988; Futagawa, 2002). However, the user issues were considered a common thread running through all the groups. The subgroups are: form and design; sustainable design; user needs; developer constraints.

3.4.2. Conducting the Interview The meeting for the face to face interview was arranged through email. The interview questionnaire was emailed to the architects beforehand, so that the interview could focus on the issues to be discussed (Denzin & Lincoln, 2005). Effectively it was a combination of email and face-to-face interviews. Issues concerning ethics especially ‘privacy and confidentiality’ were thoroughly followed during the face-to-face interview.

Since the architects selected were highly experienced, it was essential that their knowledge and experience could be shared constructively without any alteration to their actual meaning. It was therefore requested beforehand whether their observations could be quoted and if they can be identified (an ethics requirement by the university). All architects responded in the positive. The average duration of each interview was three-quarters of an hour, and was recorded.

3.4.3. Utilising the interview The theoretical basis of an investigation provides the context for making decisions about the interviews that will be analysed (Kvale, 1996; Peattie, 1983). The interviewees were seen as informants not as anonymous respondents, where their

Chapter 3 | 154 observations can be identified with their experience. Nothing can replace the quality of content provided by a qualitative interview. The information collected was analysed for qualitative interpretation and used as quotes to enrich the discussions of user perceptions. The elucidation was not on quantifying the extent (content analyses for number of times or frequency of themes) users are brought into their design considerations, but also on the intent, whether and how user issues are incorporated in their design ideas. The focus is on interpretation and meaning of the content providing insights into the conceptual knowledge of the designs. Moreover, it is used in ‘method triangulation’. For instance: what the architects are imparting through their design ideas, were those being understood by users? Then these were further validated by observation of user behaviour and analysis of survey responses.

3.5. Survey methodology

Table 3.5.1: Population sampled in the precinct.

Building complexes Height GFA Dwellings /

(Gross floor area, m2) Household (HH) 3 and 8 storeys with 9 storey Arc corner element 7,123 63

Nest 4, 6 and 8 storeys 10,170 95

Nova 4 and 5 storeys 11,316 119

Form 4, 5, 7, 9 and 15 storeys 28,791 219

Aria 4 and 5 storeys 12,000 129

ESP 5, 8, 9 and 18 storeys 20,491 221

Eco 1 and 2 4 storeys 13,885 141

Centric 2, 3 and 4 storeys 7,962 62

Total (2006) 113,081 m2 1049

Chapter 3 | 155 3.5.1. Population and sampling In sampling, there are two major steps; identifying the target population and selecting a sample. Selection of the study area was based on extensive search for higher density forms with varying heights and arrangement within the inner areas of Sydney (as elaborated in an earlier section). The target population was entire households in the Victoria Park precinct. The target population however did not include the affordable housing structure that was also built within the precinct. The number of households in building complexes covered in the Victoria Park precinct is detailed in Table 3.5.1. Each complex comprises of various heights within perimeter block formations. The complex typologies are further elaborated in the case study sections.

The basic methodology employed in this research was a postal survey of residents of a complex of apartment buildings. As with every methodology there are benefits and disadvantages. Given the unavoidable limitations encountered by doctoral research candidates, a postal survey offered the best resolution. The rationale for the multi- dimensional range of research methodologies utilised, follows. Secondary techniques employed were: negotiations with project management representatives for permission to approach residents and to gain entry to the buildings to observe their internal functioning, and, as previously outlined, interviews with architects involved in the design of a range of the buildings surveyed, systematic observation of user behaviour on site, examination of floor plans, and interpretative photography.

A brief theoretical discussion follows of the survey methodologies selected, reasons for following those and avoidance of errors/biases. This is followed by the questionnaire structure and the types of information sought from respondents are briefly outlined.

3.5.2. Standardised survey questionnaire Surveys are commonly used and are a valuable technique for gathering information on quantitative data as well as attitudes and beliefs (Salant & Dillman, 1994). Their fundamental functions describe a population based on its principal characteristics relating to the given area of investigation and allow for testing of hypotheses and relationships. The questionnaire design in this research relies on social and psychological principles, in order to elicit information from householders concerning their attitudes, beliefs, intentions and behaviour in their apartments. Sustainability and liveability/satisfaction interpretations can then be made from these insights; from relating them to the buildings form, principally to their varying heights as the

Chapter 3 | 156 independent variable (and user experience as the dependent variable); and from relating them to theoretical expectations drawn from the literature review.

According to Salant and Dillman (1994), mail surveys are best suited for surveying people for whom a reliable address is available, and who are likely to respond in writing, and for surveys in which an immediate turnaround is not required, or for projects in which money, qualified staff and professional help are all relatively scarce. For these reasons a mail survey was considered to be an effective method for obtaining the greatest number of responses from the input of a single researcher. Evidently, face to face interviews were not considered for the same reason, and in any event individual apartments were not accessible because entries at the ground level of the buildings in the complex have secured access. Moreover, strata managers argued that the privacy of householders would be compromised if permission for entry was given without first gaining each individual household’s endorsement. However, permission to make physical observations of spaces such as corridors, entries and internal courts was obtained.

The survey questions themselves were developed after a review of the relevant literature on user experience of low and high rise residential buildings, of sustainable design principles and from the prior professional practice experience of the candidate and thesis supervisor. A separate range of interview questions were designed for the architect intentions/philosophy survey, phrased in terms understood by professionals. Considerable care was taken to word the user survey with a minimum of technical or academic phraseology, although assumptions are made that the respondents can relate to ideas and terminology such as energy and water efficiency, as well as comfort.

3.5.3. Survey method and questionnaire design The survey questionnaire was designed to minimise the effects of different potential errors that arise in the course of the administration. This section covers the majority of the issues that would increase the validity and reliability of the method as a whole. The questionnaire design, time for completion, wording used, all these were developed based on past empirical experiences from many researchers.

As Cook and Campbell (1979) mention, with any type of research it is necessary to invoke the issue of validity, geared to reduce the number of plausible alternative interpretations of the data. They further emphasized ruling out as many threats to validity as possible covering statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct

Chapter 3 | 157 validity, and external validity. In dealing with the specific validity of a mail survey as the main research method, critical issues include: sampling/survey error, measurement error or bias, and non response error.

Sampling/Survey error. Among the main disadvantages of mail-out surveys is the lack of control the researcher has over the completeness of the target population (which can lead to non-coverage error). In this study, all members of the population of a specific area/buildings are targeted and all have an equal chance of responding, which eliminates the possibility of the most common error: non-coverage. The selection of the precise setting was based on the research objective as explained previously. Therefore, generalisations from this work can be made only for specific settings and groups of a similar nature. Nonetheless, the issues of user satisfaction and of the sustainability of high rise residential buildings are of nationwide and even worldwide importance, and reflections can be made generally in this regard.

Measurement bias. Measurement error or bias can occur when an investigator collects data thus possibly resulting in poor construct validity. This potential error is a result of the fact that operations which are meant to represent a particular cause or effect construct may be in terms of more than one construct or treatment. In this regard, the main sources of measurement error or bias are the survey method, the interviewer, the respondent, and the questionnaire.

Survey method error: The prime advantage of the mail survey is that respondents can control question pace and sequence, and complete the survey in their own time. A turn- around period is nonetheless suggested, and pre-addressed stamped return envelopes accompany the survey. However, researchers have found that the same question asked by mail, telephone and face to face sometimes may yield very different answers (Schwarz & Sudman, 1992). This is an endemic issue with qualitative research. It is always relative to some extent. The larger the sample size the less this error type.

Interviewer error: Mail surveys provide a sense of privacy, making it easier for people to answer questions about beliefs and attitudes. They are also less susceptible to bias introduced by interviewers as well as to the tendency for respondents to give answers they think interviewers want to hear. This research asks respondents for their evaluation of their housing environment. Considering the sensitive types of questions to be asked (and inaccessibility to the site) a mail-out survey with a well defined questionnaire structure is predicted to be most practical, accurate means of

Chapter 3 | 158 measurement, thus minimising error due to the presence of interviewer (Salant & Dillman, 1994).

Respondents can deliberately or inadvertently answer incorrectly, thus increasing the measurement error thus affecting the response. There are four ways respondent error can take place. These are: encoding process and absence of knowledge; judgement of appropriate answer; respondent attention or motivation; respondent attention or motivation.

Encoding process and absence of knowledge: A respondent with short term residency in the study area may not have enough relevant knowledge to answer the question. To avoid this, the residents were asked about their length of stay and only respondents with over 6 months of residence were considered as valid responses. Since postal surveys rely on respondents understanding and answering the questionnaire, it must be easy to follow and the meaning of questions should be self-explanatory (De Vaus, 2002). Moreover, questionnaire jargon can mislead respondents into false responses. To avoid this, this survey used simple, comprehensible statements and more familiar terminology. Moreover, the sample in the survey showed medium to high levels of educational background, thus minimizing the concern for this type of error.

Judgement of appropriate answer: In an open question respondents may not be able to adequately evoke memories to summarise their judgements. To eliminate this problem open questions were kept objective pertaining to immediate experience of actual things or events (e.g. If you look at your dwelling from the outside what do you find most attractive or unattractive? Or: Would you say your attitude towards saving energy and water has changed since living here?).

Respondent attention or motivation: Some of the survey respondents may be unmotivated and provide inconsistent, unreliable reports of their opinions in the questionnaire. Therefore, the questionnaire was organised in a comprehensible and concise, and special format with photographs of the specific building and outdoor spaces on the cover to which the respondent could directly relate.

In surveys of specific and relatively homogenous groups, mail surveys seem to be about as good as other techniques – especially when the topic under investigation is of particular relevance and interest to the group (Dillman, 1978, 2000).

An introductory letter from the land developer stating the importance of the survey was provided in the questionnaire package to help motivate and assure residents.

Chapter 3 | 159 Evaluation apprehension: Respondents tend to be apprehensive about being evaluated by an investigator. Therefore, postal methods achieve better response rates for sensitive topics where anonymity is important (De Leeuw & Collins, 1997; Hox & De Leeuw, 1994). To further mitigate apprehension the cover letter emphasized anonymity and strict confidentiality of responses, and did not require respondents’ addresses. Moreover, the section which contains socio-economic information was presented as the last part of the questionnaire. The reasoning behind this is that the respondents after completing most of the questions have a clearer idea of the intent of the survey and gain some assurance so that they can divulge this information without hesitation.

Eliminating potential error originating from the questionnaire, properties of question structure such as length and order are also implicated. The amount of information quickly communicated in a long question may exceed the capacity of the respondent to retain it, multiple thoughts tend to contradict one another, and may cause confusion concerning the intent of the question.

Moreover, the number and order of the response categories are often presented to respondents considering 1) varying whether the attitude statement is positively or negatively worded, or 2) varying whether the positive or negative end of the response scale appears on the right or left. Considering the length of the questionnaire most of this survey employed positively worded or neutrally worded attitude statements converted into 5-point scales. Furthermore, the sequence of the questions was carefully considered and clustered into coherent sub-categories; and was also developed from pre-test feedback with a small sample of postgraduate students in the Faculty of the Built Environment at UNSW.

Properties of words in questions: Possible problems in this research were minimised relative to: 1) vaguely worded questions, 2) abbreviations or jargon that respondents may not understand, 3) objections to providing personal information (Kim, 2000). In this regard, pre-testing and the literature review were utilised to construct a valid questionnaire.

Questionnaire length: People tend to respond to mail surveys when they think the survey is worth their time, and that it will not be too difficult or take too long to complete (Dillman and Salant, 1994). Groves (1989) contends that a lengthy set of questions exceeds the capacity of the respondent to retain the information and that multiple thoughts tend to contradict one another. Dillman’s research with mail questionnaires shows that general public surveys have an optimal length of about twelve pages or 125

Chapter 3 | 160 items (Dillman, 1978; 2000). However, length seems to be less important in postal surveys of relevant topics in specialised populations.

Keeping this in mind, in order to get a better response rate, the survey was designed to be completed in 20-25 minutes and this was pre-tested.

Non-response error. This error is a problem if the following two conditions hold true at the same time: 1) too many people in the selected sample did not respond (either because they could not be reached or refused to participate), and 2) non-respondents were different from respondents in a way that pertains to the study focus (Salant & Dillman, 1994). Another problem associated with mail surveys is that some people may be more likely to respond than others, for example, people who already have an interest in the topic of the survey. Studies have shown that the response rate is closely related to respondent’s interests in the subject matter and education level (Fowler, 1993). This means that a mail survey with a low response rate may be biased significantly in ways that are related directly to the source of error. Given the length of the questionnaire and varying themes covered the response rate was expected to be modest instead of high.

Surveyors also cannot control whether mail surveys are actually answered by the targeted person and respondents complete a questionnaire from beginning to end. This may lead to item non-response. Again, this is endemic to all questionnaires. Care was taken to design a professional but simultaneously personalised and attractive-looking questionnaire to help improve the response rate.

3.5.4. Questionnaire structure and specific aim of the questions Questionnaire structure. The questionnaire was designed to be mostly structured questions. These were kept straightforward without having any vignette descriptions. However, the questionnaire terminated on an open-ended question relating to overall experience of living in the neighbourhood.

Open-ended questions. The reason for adopting this technique is in order to get original evaluations from users without influencing their judgements by the use of pre- structured phrases which obviously reflect research objectives. People might never have considered that possibility, or never used those words, whereas the responses to open-ended questions can be considered to be ‘phenomenologically valid’ i.e. to be a true reflection of the user’s reality. It was however, was more difficult to analyse the data, since a wide range of responses were received. The open ended questions were

Chapter 3 | 161 ultimately not included in the analytic design, since the responses were not always related to the research objectives.

The information the structured questions sought from respondents was based on the following categories:

 Type of occupancy & length of stay  Preferences of house form  Motivations: buying or renting the dwelling; the choice of the area and dwelling  Satisfaction of objective and subjective aspects: This includes aspects ranging from neighbourhood level to dwelling level. Aspects of design, comfortable conditions, and provision of spaces provided were included.  Aesthetic concord/disagreements with the designs.  View preferences and satisfaction.  Attitude & behaviour relating to energy, water & recycling issues (literacy and consciousness/ awareness).  Environmental fit: the relationship between importance and satisfaction is termed environmental fit. Outdoor spaces and courts were investigated.  Background information regarding the socio-economic criteria: age, gender, income, occupation & birthplace to be consistent

3.6. Analytic design of questionnaire

In the context of satisfaction research liveability is made operational in residential satisfaction. The study of residential satisfaction had been developing since 1960s in order to evaluate the quality of housing. Since then, researchers have increasingly examined the relationship between resident satisfaction and the physical and social aspects of the residential environments. Weidemann and Anderson extended the model proposed by Marans and Spreckelmeyer for understanding residents’ responses especially satisfaction to include behavioural intentions, behaviour and social aspects of the residential environment as well (Amérigo & Aragonés, 1997; Galster, 1987). They illuminate the importance of considering how assessments of both the physical and social components of the residential environment influence residents’ satisfaction.

Chapter 3 | 162 Similarly, research on residential satisfaction by Francescato et al. (1975, 1979) proposed that users’ satisfaction with where they lived was sufficiently important in itself to merit examination. They planned a model that can be interpreted as focusing on the affective response of residents to their housing environment. They conceived satisfaction, or affect for their home, as being a function of different categories of variables: the objective characteristics of the residents, the objective characteristics of the housing environments; and the users’ perceptions or beliefs about the aspects of their housing environment (mainly design aspects). The residential satisfaction questionnaire in this study furthers this type of investigation by soliciting responses on how satisfied residents are with the dwelling, neighbourhood and social components of their living environment.

3.6.1. Predictors of overall residential satisfaction - regression analysis and factor analysis Based on the model of residential satisfaction described in an earlier section, hierarchical multiple regression (standard multiple regression for each block) was performed to identify the predictor variables of overall residential satisfaction - which in turn contributes to liveability of the dwelling environment.

However, prior to performing regression analysis, data reduction measures were taken. Factor Analysis was used to reduce the data to more focused and, and therefore, more manageable proportions. The underlying assumption is that since every population is multivariate, “... groups need to be studied with as many variables as possible, with all variables simultaneously represented, preferably in a multivariate typology” (Taube, 1972:114). To have as many relevant variables as possible represented in the regression, factor analysis was performed. Select variables were entered individually in the regression because of their relative importance and their non association in terms of the effects they were measuring.

Analyses were performed using SPSS version 15 for factor analysis, regression & evaluation of assumptions. The term factor analysis is used here to refer to principal component analysis (PCA).

The rationale for utilising factor solutions and data suitability for the development of multivariate typologies is set forth here. This is followed by the discussion on the assumptions for regression analysis.

Chapter 3 | 163 3.6.2. Meeting assumptions - factor analysis & regression analysis Factor analysis assumptions. Factor analysis is an effective empirical method for generating potent variable clusters. In this research, factor analysis affords two distinct advantages. First, it provides a means by which data can be parsimoniously described by reducing otherwise diverse data to independent and discrete grouping. Secondly as Schmid (1960) has observed, ‘it affords a technique for determining the patterns, regularities, and basic structure of a large number of variables’ (cited in Taube, 1972: 114). Factor analysis cluster measures that share interdependency with a more basic, underlying hypothetical variable (Williams, 1968, 1992). In effect, factor techniques redefine the relationships among variables by ascertaining the common variances of variables.

Suitability of Data. Prior to performing factor analysis the sample size requirements and the suitability of data were assessed. Stevens (1996:372) suggests that the sample size requirements followed by researchers have been reducing over the years as more research is done on the topic. Stevens and others (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001) further suggest that 5 subjects per variable are needed as the minimum. In addition to this criteria, and more recent recommendations of minimum sample size (Field, 2005:640; Pallant, 2005:174), the sample for this research is considered adequate for factor analysis.

Using SPSS two statistical measures were also considered to assess the factorability of the data: Bartlett’s test of sphericity, and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) measure of sampling adequacy (Field, 2005:640; Pallant, 2005:174). The Bartlett’s test of sphericity was found to be significant (p<.05) hence the factor analysis is considered appropriate. KMO value of above 0.8 of this analysis is recognized as being ‘great’ (values below 0.5 require more data to be collected). So with this sample size (N=164) the factor analysis would give distinct and reliable factors.

The suitability of data for factor analysis was also assessed by the inspection of the correlation matrix, which revealed the presence of many coefficients of 0.3 and above (Costello & Osborne, 2005; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001).

Reliability. Variables that appear to be closely related may not have underlying validity when transformed into a composite index. Cronbach’s alpha indicates the level of correlation between the scale and all other possible item scales, measuring the same thing. As a consequence, an analysis of internal consistency reliability for the indices

Chapter 3 | 164 was performed using Cronbach’s alpha. In this study, the values of alpha of all factors were above 0.7, thus the scale can be considered reliable with this sample.

Assumptions of multiple regressions. Of interest is whether this study can generalise its findings outside of the sample. Although it can be useful to draw conclusions about a particular sample of people, it is equally important that we can then assume that the conclusions are true for a wider population. For a regression model to generalise we must be sure that the underlying assumptions are met, and to test whether the model does generalise we can look at cross validating it.

Pre-selection of predictors (Stevens, 1996:103) based on correlation was not done prior to the analysis which tends to make results sample specific and gives a considerable positive bias. However, the selection was based on a theoretical construct as described in an earlier chapter.

To draw conclusions about a population based on a regression analysis for a sample, several assumptions which must be met (Field, 2005; Pallant, 2005) are reported below.

Outliers, Normality, Linearity. Residual scatter-plot, normal probability plot and histograms of the regression standardised residuals were checked as a part of the analysis. To check the normality of residuals, the histogram and normal probability plot was used. In the histogram in Appendix 4, the distribution seems normal, since there is a bell shaped clustering of residuals towards the centre. The normal probability plot shows no major deviation. The normal probability plot shows samples clustered around a straight line, indicating normal distribution.

In the scatter-plot (Appendix 4) of the standardised residuals, the residuals are roughly a rectangular formation in distribution, with most of the scores concentrated at the centre. Since no specific pattern was observed, the assumptions of linearity and homoscedasticity were not violated. The presence of outliers can also be detected from the scatter-plot. However, Cook’s distance and Mahalanobis distance were inspected for the presence of outliers. In this study no cases was found to exceed the maximum value of Cook’s distance of 1 (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001: 69), which suggests no potential problem with outliers. With the use of a p<.001 criterion for Mahalanobis distance no outliers among the cases were found.

Multicollinearity. Regarding the issue of collinearity, tolerance and variance inflation factors (VIF) were investigated for acceptable values (Meyers, Gamst, & Guarino,

Chapter 3 | 165 2006:212 ; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001: 98). The problem with collinear variables is that they provide very similar information, and it is difficult to separate out the effects of the individual variable. Since each of the variables showed high tolerance and low VIF’s, it is concluded that there were no linear combinations among the independent variables. In addition, to identify multicollinearity the correlations between the independent variables were also checked. There were no correlated (above 0.70) independent variables, therefore all variables were retained (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2001: 84). Finally the Durbin-Watson static is considered, which informs whether assumptions of independent error were tenable. The closer to 2 that the value is, the better (Field, 2005:189), and for this data the value is 1.99, which means the assumptions are met, which means it is then feasible to continue further with regression analysis.

Sample size for regression analysis. For generalizability it is very important to have an adequate size of sample so it can be repeated with other populations. Green (cited in Field, 2005) recommends using two rules of thumb for the minimum acceptable sample size, the first to test the overall fit of the regression model and the second to test the individual predictors within the model. This study is interested to test both in the overall fit and in the contribution of individual predictors. In this situation Field (2005) recommends two methods of calculating the minimum sample sizes (for this research sample the two minimums are N=154 & 127), and to use the one that has largest value (for both methods see Field, 2005:173). Following Field’s suggestion in this 13 predictor regression analysis, the sample size N=164 (greater than minimum N=154) is found to be adequate.

3.6.3. Relationships between groups - chi-square tests & t-tests Chi-square tests. The chi-square test has been used to investigate whether personal characteristics, occupancy pattern and dwelling preference of residents in the study area differed in relation to height and complex grouping. The chi-square is appropriate for testing whether a statistical relationship exists between two categorical variables.

Even though a chi-square test may show statistical significance between two variables, the relationship between those variables may not be substantively important. A post- test gives this additional information by indicating just how significant and important this is. Many other measures of association are available to help evaluate the relative strength of a statistically significant relationship. In most cases, they are not used in interpreting the data unless the chi-square statistic first shows there is statistical significance (i.e. it doesn't make sense to indicate that there is a strong relationship

Chapter 3 | 166 between two variables when statistical test shows this relationship is not statistically significant).

In particular, here, Cramer's V and Eta were utilised as measures of association. Cramer's V is a useful indicator for a nominal-level data of any size of contingency table, while Eta is good for ordinal-level data. However, where the table is 2 x 2, Phi is used instead of Cramer’s V. These are not affected by sample size and therefore are very useful in situations where we may suspect a statistically significant chi-square was the result of large sample size instead of any substantive relationship between the variables. It is interpreted as a measure of the relative (strength) of an association between two variables. The coefficient ranges from 0 to 1. Close to 0 it shows little association between variables. Close to 1 indicates a strong & perfect association. In practice, we find that 0.10 provides a good minimum threshold for suggesting there is a substantive relationship between two variables (De Vaus, 2002: 261). In describing the strength of association, Cohen’s (cited in Pallant, 2005: 126) suggested guidelines are followed. Interpreting values between 0 to 1,

0 to .1 as insubstantial association.

.1 to .3 as low association,

.3 to .5 as moderate association,

.5 to 1 as high association.

T-tests. To find out whether there is significant difference between two groups t-tests for equality of means are carried out on satisfaction variables related to dwellings. Normally ANOVA is used in situations when we are comparing more than two groups (Pallant, 2005). An independent samples t-test tells whether there is a statistically significant difference in the mean scores for the groups (e.g. between lower floor and higher floor; between low-rise complex and high-mid-rise complex). In statistical terms, it tests the probability that the two sets of satisfaction scores came from the same population. Prior to the tests the assumption of homogeneity of variances are checked. It tests whether the variance of satisfaction scores for the two groups is the same, by using Levine’s test for the equality of variances. However, if the data violates the assumption of equal variance, an alternative t-value provided by SPSS is then used. This compensates for variances which are not same.

Chapter 3 | 167 In addition, eta–squared was used to indicate the strength of the difference between groups, (or the influence of the independent variable is tested). It also tests whether the difference could have occurred by chance. Eta-squared ranges from 0 to 1 and represent the proportion of variance in the dependent variable that is explained by the independent (group) variable. The guidelines for interpreting this value are (proposed by Cohen, 1988, cited in Pallant, 2005: 209):

.01= small effect,

.06= moderate effect,

.14=large effect.

Interpreting mean satisfaction scores. Together with the t-tests, the high and low mean scores were examined. Two approaches were taken to further explain the mean (M) scores:

In the 5-point Likert-type scales, mean scores of 4 and above are considered to represent being either satisfied or highly satisfied. Mean scores (M) above 4 show that a large portion of survey respondent satisfactions (approval or agreement) was very high in the response range - to those aspects of dwelling design.

On the other hand, mean scores near to 3 or below 3 imply lower satisfaction or higher dissatisfaction (disapproval/disagreement). If in any of the height groups and in the complex groups, a mean score equal to or below 3.5 (M ≤ 3.5) was found, it was further investigated. The reason for the low mean score was then illustrated by the graphs.

To explain the significance of scores and their meaningfulness in each subsection, discussions of graphs and results are included immediately after the analysis.

3.6.4. Environmental Fit (EF) Environmental Fit represents a measure of the congruency between the needs of an individual and the provisions of the environment (Van Harrison, 1978;Baillie, Griffiths, Huber, & Energy Technology Support, 1988). The differential between people’s preferences and their satisfaction is a measure of fit of the environment. It has been employed here to establish, first the expectations of residents in terms of the perceived importance (Imp) to them of issues – relating to both design of settings and the issues of conservation; secondly, to establish their evaluations of their experiences of the

Chapter 3 | 168 same range of issues i.e. their satisfactions (Sat); thirdly , the extent to which these measures accord with each other – their fit. This environmental experience evaluation technique has been discussed by Samuels & Ballinger and has been employed in studies in their studies relating to dwellings and institutions (Ballinger, Samuels, & ERDC, 1991; Samuels & Ballinger, 1989; Samuels & Ballinger, 1992).

Congruencies for each response are calculated, summed and averaged. The meaningfulness of EF evaluation lies in the scoring of each response to each item by Imp and its association Sat response. It is laborious, time-consuming, but the outcome is salient.

Scoring system The scoring system applied in the environmental fit (EF) analysis is as follows:

Only items scored as important are taken into consideration i.e. on the scale only items scored as > 3 ; the mid-point (3) is the indeterminate point, where respondents express ‘mixed feeling’ opinions and is thus also disregarded from the EF analysis. Where satisfaction > importance the EF analysis records a N/A score, which does not figure in the overall tally for EF.

The rationale behind this is that where importance is relatively low; i.e. a lower priority is accorded to the attainment of a preference, a higher degree of satisfaction is more readily attained. Logically, this should not be ‘rewarded’ (scored as better fit) in the EF analysis. A converted scale is used for EF calculation. When EF differential is calculated as zero, it represents a state of best fit or congruence, hence is scored as the equivalent of 5. The worst fit cases (4) are scored as 1 in the converted scale.

Table 3.6.1: Environmental fit (EF) score calculation.

EF Differential 4 3 2 1 0

1 2 3 4 5

EF Score Full misfit Best fit

Chapter 3 | 169 The higher the overall EF scores for an item, the better the overall fit. In the EF analysis, equivalence is given to all zero ratings i.e. where an individual expresses a very strong preference (Imp = 5) for an item and a very strong satisfaction ( Sat = 5) with its provision, this is taken to be equivalent, in terms of EF, of someone whose importance rating is less (e.g. 4) and their satisfaction rating is also similarly less (e.g. 4). In both instance, where EF differential= 0; EF = 5 and this would be interpreted as fit. For the purpose of analysis, the scales are considered to be equivalent of semantic differential scales (treated as interval scales).

3.7. Ethical considerations

Professional codes of ethics stress the importance of complying with ethical responsibilities towards humans, especially survey participants. As specified in the Guide to The Faculty of the Built Environment Human Research Ethics Advisory Panel (FBE HREAP, Version 4, October 2005) all issues and aspects were followed thoroughly. An application for this research project prior to the data collection stage was made and was ‘Approved with Conditions’ (subject to the applicant conforming to the specified conditions which were followed thoroughly, see Appendix 3) in accordance with the UNSW Human Research Ethics policy. This was necessary when research involves collection of data either from or concerning humans. In addition to the UNSW Ethics advisory, suggestions and recommendations by De Vaus (2002:59) are followed in this research and are elaborated as follows.

Voluntary Participation. It is very important to have voluntary participation for the survey and interviews as the survey takes time to answer, and seeks personal information about income, family and occupation, and private views. The project ethics information statement explicitly states ‘Your participation is completely voluntary’; and ‘If you decide to participate, you are free to withdraw your consent and to discontinue participation at any time without prejudice’.

Here in this study, voluntary participation does not conflict with the methodological principal of sampling as all the residents are selected for the survey. However only with the architect interviews where participants were selected, informed consent was taken

Chapter 3 | 170 prior to the survey. This also conforms to UNSW Human Research Ethics policy on privacy & confidentiality.

Informed consent. Based on the requirement of informed consent for the questionnaire survey and interview, the participants are informed about a range of matters relating to the survey (See Appendix 3, project information statement). This provides basic information about the research, type of questions asked and offers to answer any further questions. There was also a clause for ‘Revocation of Consent’ in the project information statement which can be used in case of cancellation at any stage of survey participation.

With the interviews, consent for participation was considered essential as the participants were a select few designers who actually worked with on the Victoria Park area. Prior consent for interviews and the permission for using the digital recorder were obtained. This was also approved as per privacy & confidentiality (FBE HREAP FORM 5), where it was agreed that,

Interviewees (Architects) will be informed of the audio recording prior to commencement. They have to complete the 'Project Consent Form' (FBE HREAP FORM 4), after agreeing to the audio recording of the interview.

A written signed statement was obtained after the completion of the interviews. Included in the consent form was their consent to quote their remarks. Argument for this can be made on the basis that interviewees should provide informed consent (De Vaus, 2002:61) after they have completed the interviews and they have exact knowledge of the information sought from them.

Anonymity & privacy. The most obvious way in which participants can be disadvantaged in survey research is if the confidentiality of responses is not honoured. Anonymity means that the researcher will not and cannot identify the respondent. The strictest standard of the principle of anonymity which essentially means that the participant will remain anonymous throughout the study - even to the researcher - was followed. In this research survey participants were assured that their identity and answers would remain anonymous. Since no identification numbers were used in the survey the question of confidentiality does not arise at all.

Chapter 3 | 171 Observation. The recordings in public places do not generally require the permission of the people who are in those public places. However, photographs are used without identifying any person. Photographs of identifiable people on private property are avoided, even if they were taken from public property.

Chapter 3 | 172 Chapter 4 : Results, analyses and discussions

4.1. Description of survey respondents and their housing related characteristics

This section contains data on socio-economic-demographic, occupancy pattern and housing experiences. Comparison with census data for Zetland was done to raise the quality of the collected data, and make it more reliable.

Most importantly, chi-square tests were performed to examine the effects of dwelling height and complex with regard to the resident’s socio-demographic-economic characteristics, occupancy pattern and housing experiences. This research has grouped high-rise and mid-rise together for statistical reasons, as explained earlier. Therefore whenever any significant variation arose, further analyses were also made by graphs comparing the three complex groups.

The key findings are:

With selected socio-demographic-economic characteristics no significant relationship exists with building complex groups or height groups. The chi-square analyses indicate that respondents are heterogeneously distributed all over the development - when age, gender, household number, household composition, place of birth and income are considered. However, there was significant difference only at p<.1 level for household number (in floor groups) and age groups (in complex groups). Coupled with weak effect sizes the differences were considered to be very minimal, which means statistically they can be disregarded (for Cohen's suggested guidelines see Pallant, 2005: 126). This led to the inference that overall there appears to be no strong relation between the socio-demographic-economic profile and the height of building form or the complex types.

Chi-square tests were performed to determine the relationship between occupancy pattern (tenancy, years want to live, and go up to dwelling) and the groups.

• The tests indicated that only one of the variables, ‘go up to dwelling’ tended to differ by the height groups at highly significant level.

• The tests indicated that years want to live, go up to dwelling, and tenancy tended to differ by the complex type.

Chapter 4 | 173 To examine the effects of dwelling height and complex with regard to the housing experience variables, chi-square tests were performed.

• The tests indicated that two of these variables, locality lived before and dwelling type if move again tended to differ significantly by dwelling height.

• Dwelling type if move again tended to differ by the complex type - at a highly significant level.

4.1.1. Descriptive characteristics – Socio-demographic-economic data

This section contains a description of the social, economic, and demographic characteristics of the sample. The study data was compared with recently published Australian Census Data 2006 for Zetland area and Australia as a whole (NSW data, where available). With a response rate of 17.5% the sample size was 166. For a population of 1000 a sample size required is 169 with confidence level of 95%, margin of error of 7%, and degree of variability of 50% (Israel, 2009). Though the sample allowed for meaningful analyses thus, the comparison was nonetheless necessary to raise the quality of the collected data, and thereby make it more reliable.

... if the characteristics of the population from which a sample is drawn are known we can simply compare the characteristics obtained in the sample with those of the population. Any differences between the sample and the population indicate the area of bias and the extent of the differences indicate the degree of bias (De Vaus, 2002: 84).

Therefore, this supporting data helps to theoretically generalise the sample data, since the study area is a concentrated and specific settlement in the suburb of Zetland. However, it should be noted that similar studies (City Futures Research Centre, UNSW, 2008) concentrated in Sydney had similar moderate response rates when compared to studies which covered populations distributed over larger areas around the country. On the other hand the comparison with national data (Australia and NSW) highlights the uniqueness of inner-city resident’s characteristics (inner areas & Zetland specifically) which are different from the average national population.

Responses by form of living environment. Table 4.1.1 summarises the responses from the eight building complexes in the study area. It lists the number of households and gross floor area in each of the complexes. This gives a picture in terms of density and form. High-rise complexes have mid-rise and low-rise forms included within their configurations, while the mid-rise complexes have low-rise forms within them.

Chapter 4 | 174 Table 4.1.1: Proportion of respondents by living environment in the Victoria Park. Typology of forms and complexes covered in the survey are also detailed. 2 Name of complex complex Name of form Built Height of Number of household Area (GFA) Floor Gross m Number of Respondents wise Complex Response 3 and 8 storeys with 9 storey 1 ARC corner 60 7123 19 4, 6 and 8 Medium-rise 2 NEST storeys 90 10170 15complex 21% 4, 5, 7, 9 and 15 3 FORM storeys 195 28791 23 5, 8, 9 and 18 High-rise 4 ESP storeys 194 20491 32complex 33% 5 ARIA 4 and 5 storeys 120 12000 23 6 NOVA 4 and 5 storeys 114 11316 20 2, 3 and 4 7 CENTRIC storeys 45 7962 13 Low-rise 8 ECO-1&2 4 storeys 126 13885 20 complex 46% 944* 111738 166 100% *Total number of household in the Victoria Park was approx. 1050 in 2006.

Responses by floor level groups and complex groups. During the site visits it was observed that within the walk-up range the apartments were carefully designed to maintain their link with the ground. Interviews with architects who had designed buildings in Victoria Park also re-established the fact that they also considered the ‘connection to ground’ idea in their design (Alexander, Ishikawa, & Silverstein, 1977; Jacobs, 1962). Conceptually, one of these architects defined the floor heights in terms of the height of native Australian trees. Extolling the exclusive characteristics of the low-rises, Chris Johnson an interview participant, who designed a section of the AIRIA building, expressed explicitly,

So that when people are looking at these houses…the predominance of the landscape is important, so the feeling here (looking at his sketch of trees and

Chapter 4 | 175 buildings) is that the height is equal to the tree tops and becomes something very pleasant….a kind of housing that really fits within the canopy of trees. I think that is something potentially very Australian and can in some ways replicate the house with it garden in a new manner. And so that’s what this particular housing type is like, not ten stories...

This convention has been accepted here to help distinguish the building typology, namely: the forms within the canopy of the trees are termed ‘low-rise’ and the others above tree height, ‘higher-rise’. Most medium size native Australian trees are from 15- 20m in height, which corresponds to about 4 floors in height (Fitzroy Gardens, 2009). The systematic observation of the study area corroborates the fact.

Respondents living on different floors were initially arranged into three groups. 70% of respondents were from lower floors (0–4, floors), 22% were from middle floors (5–8) and the rest 8% from higher floors (9-18). The actual number of middle and higher floors was far smaller than for the lower floors. Thus, when analysing for statistical significant difference between groups, throughout the study the middle floors and higher floors (5-18 floors) were collapsed into one group. Initially the complex-wise groupings were arranged in three groups where 46% of respondents were from low- rise complexes, 33% from high-rise complexes and 21% from mid-rise complexes. This grouping was further reduced to just two groups: low-rise complex and high & mid-rise complex when analysing the complex-wise distribution of different variables. Moreover, to maintain equality of variances in the statistical analyses a similarity of group sizes is necessary, especially for chi-square & t-tests. Analysis of variance, for instance, is reasonably robust to violations of assumptions, provided the size of the groups is reasonably similar [e.g. largest /smallest = 1.5, (Pallant, 2005: 198; Stevens, 1996: 249)]. According to Stevens, additionally, when we have a study where group size is small (e.g. N=20), then a non-significant result may be due to insufficient power what is this. However when the sample size is larger, then ‘power is not an issue’ (Stevens, 1996: 6).

Thus, reiterating: the final grouping (for chi-square & t-tests) was arranged as - lower floors group from ground to 4 floors (1-4 floors) and the rest beyond the walk-up range defined as higher floors (5-18 floors). Complex-wise groups were also crystallized as low-rise complex and higher rise complex (mid-rise–high-rise). However, given the variety of forms some of the low-rise complexes do have 5 floors; this is subsumed under the 5-18 floor rubric, for statistical convenience.

Chapter 4 | 176 Figure 4.1.1: Percentage of respondents by gender & age groups.

Age and Gender. A substantial percentage (40%) of the respondents was under 30 years of age. 27% were aged between 26-30 years and 15% were aged between 31 and35. By comparison, in Sydney the inner ring areas had a greater proportion of people aged between 25–34 years (23%) compared with the middle and outer rings (15% and 14%) respectively. The LGAs (Local Government Areas) in the inner ring includes: Ashfield, Botany, Lane Cove, Leichhardt, Marrickville, Mosman, North Sydney, Randwick, South Sydney, Sydney City, Waverley and Woollahra (ABS, 2006a). The study area is situated in Sydney City LGA. The median age of respondents there was 34, compared with 31 in Zetland suburb and 37 in Australia (ABS, 2006a, 2006b). A possible reason for this small difference is due to the presence of families in 247 separate house and semi-detached, row or terrace dwellings, other than the multi-storied dwellings, also living in the study area (Census 2001). So, as the mean national age is moving upward (ageing) over the years, the respondents and the area population of this inner suburban area remains relatively younger than the general population, given that younger people on average are more likely to live in apartments than in outer suburban areas with larger family homes.

A recent study using data from the 2006 Census shows that 20-34 year olds are always overrepresented in the apartment population in the inner, middle and outer zones of both Sydney and Melbourne when compared to the total population

Chapter 4 | 177 (Easthope, Tice, & Randolph, 2009). This is quite similar to the respondents of the study area.

Figure 4.1.2: Comparing the number of respondents by age groups.

Slightly more than half of the respondents were female (54%). Since there was almost a 50/50 split, gender bias was not an issue here. Figure 4.1.1 shows the age and gender distribution.

Household number. In this survey the mean number people per household was 2.11 whereas in the 2006 Census in Zetland this was between 2 to 3 (ABS, 2006b). Over the nine years to 2003–04 the average number of people per household in Australia fell from 2.7 to 2.5. In the study area, the households are thus smaller than the average, again reflecting demographic preferences.

Household composition. Figure 4.1.3 shows respondent household composition, where 59% of households were a family (couple, and family with children), 20% were lone person households and 21% were shared group households. Overall, the household composition indicates that only 21% have children. In the 2006 Census, in Zetland, 51% of occupied private dwellings were family households, 22% were lone person households and 14% were group households. More smaller families have located in the study area (ABS, 2006b).

Chapter 4 | 178 Figure 4.1.3: Household composition.

Compared with areas near the Sydney CBD (Sydney SLA, statistical local area), whereas half of the households in Zetland were family compositions only about one- quarter (29%) reside in the near CBD areas (ABS, 2006b). The proportion of families with children was also much higher in Zetland (28%) compared to near CBD areas (19%).

Figure 4.1.4: Respondent’s occupation.

Respondent’s occupation. Figure 4.1.4 shows the proportion of the population by occupation. The dominant occupational category of the sample was Professional and Managerial (74%) combined. In the 2006 Census, occupation for employed persons usually resident in Zetland were Professionals 33.6%, Managerial 19.0% (and combined, 51.6%), Clerical and Administrative Workers 14.6%, Sales Workers 9.1% and Technical and Trades 7.2% (ABS, 2006b). This trend of a higher number of highly educated groups has been continuing since 1991 and indicates that there has been a significant increase in the proportion of the workforce in the professional and para- professional areas, in this area (South Sydney, 2002).

Chapter 4 | 179 Professional and managerial combined were clearly the dominant occupation categories in both data sets; especially so in the study area. (Sydney city also contains a high proportion of managers and professional workers). This indicates the comparatively higher educational level and, by implication, higher average income levels in the study area compared with national data. Overall, only 33% Australia-wide were from the Professional and Managerial Category, indicating the difference of general population with that of inner areas of a major city.

Figure 4.1.5: Respondent’s place of birth.

Place of birth. Attitude and housing preferences vary according to people’s background and culture. It is important thus to study a respondent’s birth-origin i.e. where do they come from, what sort of cultural background were they brought up in, etc. In this survey, the vast majority of the respondents are born in Australia (62%). In terms of cultural groupings, 79% of the respondents were from Australia, , North America and European countries, whereas only 16% were from Asian countries. Among people from the Asian countries represented e.g. Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong, it is likely that the respondents would have experienced high-density city living before, which might well have influenced their choice to reside in this inner-city medium density precinct. Overall, in this survey, 38 % were born overseas; even more, 41% in Zetland, in the 2006 Census, were born overseas (ABS, 2006b). The national overseas born statistic is only 22%. On the other hand there is considerable difference between residents born in Australia in inner Sydney near the CBD (Sydney Statistical Local Area, SLA) with that of Zetland suburb and the study area.

A cosmopolitan population resides in the study area. It probably reflects the evolving yet distinctive population mix in other inner city medium-high density precincts in Sydney. The study could have implications wider than its boundaries. But this

Chapter 4 | 180 generalisation should not be based on broad based inner city population but on areas which are not ‘in but near the CBD’. Extrapolating from the study area findings to other similar areas is thus not unreasonable.

Figure 4.1.6: Household income groups.

Income. The median household income of the entire sample was in the range of $80,000 - $100,000 per annum. This is similar to the Census 2006 median household income of $89,492 for Zetland suburb, which is nonetheless much higher than the Australian median household income of $53,404. In Sydney (C) - Inner (Statistical Local Area), the Zetland median weekly individual income for persons aged 15 years and over who were usual residents was $895, compared with $466 in Australia. The median weekly household income was $1,721, compared with $1,027 in Australia. The median weekly family income was $2,008, compared with $1,171 in Australia.

This all indicates the higher income level of the study area (and Zetland as a whole). Earlier data (South Sydney, 2002) identifies a trend of gentrification in the Green Square area and the immediate surrounds (postcode areas of Alexandria and Beaconsfield – 2015, Waterloo and Zetland – 2017 and Rosebery – 2018) with increasing proportions of higher income households reflecting increasing housing prices. The respondents here are represented by only 20% of moderate and lower income groups (that is, gross household income per annum of lower than $60,000), indicating a reduced moderate and lower income group within the development. This trend has been continuing since 1991, as indicted by data from 1991 and 1996 Censuses (South Sydney, 2002). However, it is not possible to accurately compare income at each Census (as the categories change slightly). Again, the category for higher income in that document was a little lower (that is, gross household income per annum of greater than $50,000) than the range of $60,000 in this research.

Chapter 4 | 181 Discussions on socio-economic &demographics. The results which follow should be understood in light of these socio-economic and demographic characteristics. Perception, attitudes and behaviours are influenced by all these factors. Again, efforts have been made with each characteristic to demonstrate that interpreting from these results to other similar precinct types and locations would seem permissible, but not to typologies outside this range – although this shouldn’t be dismissed necessarily. Given that this Victoria Park development is a type of settlement being strongly advocated and delivered in many areas of Sydney now, the study gains further relevance.

Interestingly, shared households were noticeably more prevalent in the study area; one possible explanation may be student renters studying at the universities in the surrounding areas (UTS, UNSW & Sydney University). However, this explains only 6% of the 21% shared household of total respondents (i.e. if we look at occupation: only 6% were students). There could be a further way of sharing arising out necessity, being evidenced here - those who share rental costs and share the same lifestyle aspirations satisfied by locating in an inner city precinct.

However, an overall lack of social diversity (socio-economic mix in terms of type of occupation, income of households and level of education) within the Victoria Park area is a phenomenon that is affecting most inner areas under gentrification (Boddy, 2007; Bounds & Morris, 2006). The gentrification process evolving since the 1990s in inner areas near the CBD is also seen in areas surrounding the CBD similar to Zetland (second wave gentrification). The area is also in transition from its traditional manufacturing industries to more modern employment and residential uses. This social phenomenon and its socio-physical implications have been discussed in the literature review: inner city revival section.

To maintain social diversity within the Green Square area by ensuring households earning low to moderate incomes can live in the area close to employment and council services, South Sydney City Council developed the Affordable Housing Development Control Plan (DCP) (South Sydney, 2002). The aim is to provide dwellings which are affordable to very low, low to moderate, and moderate income households at a reasonable rental cost. All development within Green Square is required to provide affordable housing either in form of land or in contributions to the cost for construction of these forms. In the Victoria Park precinct master plan, areas have been designated for affordable housing. These are currently only approved for development, thus these

Chapter 4 | 182 forms of subsidised housing are not within the focus of this study; and, in any event, it does not intend to evaluate social forms of housing.

4.1.2. Differences in characteristics relative to height & complex

Chi-square tests were performed to examine the effects of dwelling height and complex with regard to the resident’s socio-demographic-economic characteristics. Variables entered were: age, gender, household number, household composition, place of birth & income. Age was collapsed into three groups. Place of birth was separated into Australian and overseas born.

Table 4.1.2 & Table 4.1.3 list the two sets of chi-square statistics (X2), effect size and p- value. In describing the strength of association, Cohen’s (cited in Pallant, 2005: 126) suggested guidelines are followed (explained in section titled Analysis design for questionnaire).

Effect of dwelling height. Chi Square tests indicated that of five variables of socio- demographic-economic characteristics, only household number (X2 (2) = 4.637,p<.1) tended to differ significantly by dwelling height. For household number, Cramer’s V statistics was 0.168. This represents a very low association between the height and household number. With weak (low) effect size, it reveals that larger households tend to stay on higher floors, counter-intuitively. But, for two-person households the percentage of residents living on higher floors and lower floors are almost equal.

It is interesting that for other socio-demographic-economic characteristics no significant relationship exists with height groups. This is quite salient when it comes to income groups, where we observe the percentage of middle income within the range of $40,000-60,000 & $60,000-80,000 is almost identical. The higher income percentages are a little higher for higher floors than lower floors. However, in the lowest income range there is a difference between higher floors & other floors. Overall, there is no evidence to suggest that people on higher floors have lower incomes.

The Table 4.1.2 shows that respondents aged between 31-50 are differently distributed in the complex groups, but the differences as a whole were not statistically significant.

Chapter 4 | 183 Table 4.1.2 shows the distribution of Australian born and overseas born respondents in terms of floor level and complex type. They were equally distributed on higher and lower floor levels. Also no appreciable variation was noted when complex form was considered.

Effects of dwelling complex. Chi Square tests (Table 4.1.3) were performed to determine if complex groups were distributed differently across the complex variables.

The tests indicated that only age tended to differ by the complex type: Age 3 group (X2

(2) = 6.845,p< .05) being significant. For age, Cramer’s V statistics was 0.204. This represents a low association between the complex groups and age. Nonetheless, it is evident from the analysis that respondents aged between 31-50 and below are distributed differently in the complex groups. Interestingly, for other socio-demographic- economic characteristics no significant relationship exists with complex groups.

No significant variation was noted (Table 4.1.3) when the distribution of Australian born and overseas born respondents was examined in terms of complex type. They were equally distributed in the complex groups.

Below are results of Chi-square tests (Tables 4.1.2 & 4.1.3) examining the effects of dwelling height and building complex on socio-demographic-economic characteristics.

Chapter 4 | 184 Table 4.1.2: Chi-square tests examining the effects of dwelling height on socio- demographic-economic characteristics.

Chapter 4 | 185 Table 4.1.3: Chi-square tests examining the effects of dwelling complex on socio- demographic-economic characteristics.

Chapter 4 | 186 Figure 4.1.7: Household income across three complex groups.

Also, no significant variation (Table 4.1.3) was noted when the distribution of income respondents was examined in terms of complex type. These were equally distributed. However, the responses were further studied by graphs to observe if any variations are noticeable when they are distributed in three groups. Interestingly there was a concentration of 100,001- 150,000 income groups in mid-rise complexes (Figure 4.1.7). High-rise complexes appear to be represented almost equally by all income groups.

Discussion. The chi-square analyses indicate that respondents are heterogeneously distributed all over the development - when age, gender, household number, household composition, place of birth and income are considered. However, there was significant difference only at p<.1 level for household number (in floor groups) and age groups (in complex groups). Coupled with weak effect sizes the differences were considered to be very minimal, which means statistically they can be disregarded (for Cohen's suggested guidelines see Pallant, 2005: 126). This led to the inference that overall there appears to be no strong relation between the socio-demographic- economic profile and the height of building form or the complex types (not significant / low level significance/significant but weak effect size). This finding is salient since it helps confirm that trying to design for specific socio-cultural groups is likely to be ineffective. This issue of designing only for specific groups has currently been viewed critically in a current study on apartment life in Sydney and Melbourne,

Chapter 4 | 187 Planning assumptions based on an ‘ideal type’ of apartment resident – young singles and couples and downsizing empty nesters – do not sufficiently capture the complexity of the apartment population (Easthope et al., 2009: 20).

Similarly, architect Bolles Wilson feels that attitude has changed towards inner-city lifestyle, which can attract various types of households. Instead of solely focusing on dwelling size the setting should be an important consideration:

Lifestyle preferences are determined by advertising, I would like to think people are capable of occupying any space in a creative way.

Respondent families with children show no relationship tendency with floor height or complex form. Again, this tends to contradict the assumption that high-rises are not for children - since the effect of setting was discussed in those responses. Here, importantly, it is possible that with the availability of designed green outdoor spaces for all age groups, parents and their children can spend time outdoors instead of being indoors all the time, which compensates for smaller spaces indoors, and less direct access to the outdoors. However, in a typical high-rise in a CBD area the connection with such outdoor spaces is rare, which increases the importance of having internalized common areas or indoor play spaces for children if high-rise residential is to be considered appropriate for children. Mixing of size and type of dwellings (number of bedrooms, duplexes, penthouse etc.) all over the study complex was also a factor in attracting families with children. This is an example in practice of a trend supported by government since the late 1990s for inner city precincts,

It was a policy decision to encourage families. Four or five years ago it was a young transient population – very few families or kids. This was not the balance we were seeking and we tried to fix it . . . influencing development to encourage families by creating a mix of units, numbers of bedrooms, larger storage spaces... (Bounds & Morris, 2006:37 )

This finding would tend to contradict Randolph’s observation that planning decisions on houseform have not been suitable for families with children,

‘In the process, its almost as if the family is being painted out of the vision of our new cities – or packed off to the fringe’(Randolph, 2006; 2009, p: 2).

Johnson, similarly in his interview asserted his own perception that,

Chapter 4 | 188 I did not expect a lot of these to be family houses and though that it was likely that a number of them will not have children. The ones that would work better with children would be the ground floor ones because they have gardens straight on the ground; or the top penthouse level ones, which also have quite big outdoor spaces facing north and potential to grow trees, landscape and things up there. So I think they also can work very well for families. But I would have only expected maybe 20% or something to be families. I think this is in line with the demographic projections, I mean the projection Salt talks about by 2030, that only ¼ of households will be more than two people. So ¾ of households will be one or two people. So these can certainly be very appropriate for those sorts of people.

Johnson’s assumptions of proportion of families were more or less correct, but his perception that families with children would prefer ground floor dwelling is arguable in this sample. The current study has found that families with children were around 20% (Figure 4.1.3), but there was no significant relationship of families with children to height or dwelling complex (Table 4.1.2 & 4.1.3). In other words families were selecting dwellings across dwelling types. This again reasserts Wilson’s perception that ‘people are capable of occupying any space in a creative way’, if the right environment is found. The analyses of respondent’s perceptions in later sections will further illuminate the salient predictors of dwelling preference reflected by the user’s dwelling satisfactions.

The finding of Australian born residents not selecting any height or form in their choice of residence again seems to query the common perception that Australians are not ready for higher density cities (Troy, 1995, 1996). Simply higher density is clearly not an issue for them in their selection in a medium-high density greened neighbourhood like Victoria Park near the CBD.

In sum, there also appears to be an equitable distribution of different income groups in the floor height groups or in the types of complexes. This could indicate an acceptance of high and low rise dwellings without evident preference – and a possibly salient insight for the design of future developments. For example the penthouse with large patios in a mid-rise building of 8 storeys is designed to attract high income residents. And there is the series of double-storey high apartments atop another mid-rise complex which may contribute to the attraction for high income earners to select higher floors (Tonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects, 2006). These seem to involve the dual aspects of views to the city and to the parks in the precinct.

Chapter 4 | 189 The overall perception of design in contemporary Australian planning circles refers,

But the key message of this presentation is not about design. It is to stress that we also have to understand the context in which higher density housing is developed, who ends up occupying it and why they are there. Urban designers and planners do not seem to fully appreciate that who owns and who lives in a building largely determines how well it functions as a community (Randolph, 2006: 2).

So it is actually design (here, in Victoria Park) which is contributing to diffusing social group specific characteristics. Besides the evident fact that high income households are attracted to high quality high-rise living, the variant nature and distribution of dwelling type here helps discount the stigmatisation of high-rise higher density as being unfriendly for children, or that only immigrants or families with lower incomes tend to live in high-rise buildings (Fincher & Costello, 2005; Weber, 2007). Overall, such objective social data here appear to be less relevant compared with the subjective data (see following sections) when their relationship with floor height or complex types are considered in a specific setting. Based on age, ethnicity, income or family composition we cannot assume to pre-judge who lives in high-rise or in low-rise. Nor can we assume who lives in higher floors or, in another study where connections between housing needs and social data have been similarly made, or argue for high density solutions to provide the widest possible range (Bunker, Holloway, & Randolph, 2005).

In Victoria Park,

Our residential apartments tend to offer a variety of plan types to give choice to prospective purchasers, allowing for differing patterns of living. We have found that the evolving social structures require that we consider a variety of family units, such as families, professional couples with no children, empty nesters, students sharing, people working from home, etc which has generated the need for a variety of unit typologies (Kevin Driver, interview).

The importance of amplifying diversity in gentrified neighbourhoods can be considered as an aspect of social sustainability. Talen (2006, 2008) emphasizes the importance of getting better acquainted with both the form of diverse places, as well as the evaluation of that form. Moreover, many studies of attempts to create diverse neighbourhoods consistently identify design as a key factor in their success. There are findings, for example, that ‘the size, design, condition, location and cost’ of mixed-income housing ‘are extremely important’ (Ding and Knaap, 2002). Galster found that design issues

Chapter 4 | 190 were critical for sustaining mixed income housing, especially site layout, concentration, development type and scale (Galster et al., 2003: 175). As the results indicate, a sense of diversity has to an extent been achieved here in this socially innovative higher density precinct. Notwithstanding, the inclusion of lower income populations is an issue that has to first be taken up by policies and strategies for inner areas, and cannot be dealt with by design alone.

4.1.3. Occupancy patterns of housing

Tenancy. A slight majority, 55% of the dwellings under study, are owned while 45% are rented. Therefore any bias in the responses regarding the dwelling environment was not an issue, from this point of view.

Though the typology is somewhat different, in Zetland 40% of occupied private dwellings were owned, 47% were rented (other types = 0.5 and not stated = 13.2%). Australia wide only 27% are rented while 65% are owned (ABS, 2006b). In NSW over two-thirds (68%) of all households owned their current dwelling (ABS, 2005). Thus, in contrast to national and state data, the sample tenure types are quite similar to Zetland.

Desire to own similar dwelling. Renters were asked whether they would like to own a similar dwelling (to the one they occupied at Victoria park). In response, a majority (58%) of renters responded positively, while only 15% replied negatively and 27% were undecided. The large majority seem satisfied, to this extent.

Length of residence. The average length of stay of respondents was 19 months, with length of stay varying from 4 months to 45 months for respondents overall.

The area under study is a relatively new development. The high-rise complexes in the sample were completed recently (more are going up now) while the low-rises are relatively older. With completion time varying from 6 months to 4 years prior to the survey, it was decided that only respondents with the minimum length of stay of six months would be considered in this research. And, since their experience of winter months was sought it was requisite that they had moved in at least six months prior to the survey. This would give them time to settle down, and to experience the neighbourhood amenities.

Chapter 4 | 191 Figure 4.1.8: Expected length of dwelling occupancy.

Expected length of occupancy. Another variable expected to affect environmental perception was expected length of apartment occupancy.

It was hypothesized that occupants who planned a longer term of residence would report more positive feelings towards their environment, even if possibly as result of their greater need to justify their decision (Conway, 1977: 171).

These residents must psychologically prepare themselves for a longer stay and cognitively adjust their beliefs to conform to the external realities of the situation. In other words, residents who anticipate shorter length of occupancy would have less need to distort their environmental perceptions in a positive direction than residents who anticipate a longer tenancy. Bias regarding expected length of occupancy was a possibility here. However, as the following section indicates the variation between short stay and long stay was not very high.

Years expect to stay. In the Victoria Park area, equal numbers (43%) of the respondents wanted to stay for 1-3 years and 3-7 years. If combined a vast majority (82%) of respondents expected to stay between 1-7 years; 14% even wanted to stay indefinitely.

Otherwise, 57% expect to live in the current dwelling for more than 3 years. No such comparable data on expectation was available for Zetland or Sydney city separately. In NSW State data it was found the 64% of households had lived at their current address for three years or longer, while 25% had moved in the previous three years (ABS, 2005).

Chapter 4 | 192 This was found to be different from a survey of medium density housing in Sydney in the early 80s, where the study found that a larger proportion of residents expected to stay indefinitely (Thorne, 1983). This further indicates satisfaction with these types of environments as liveable places. It also shows that people tend to be more mobile than two decades ago.

Figure 4.1.9: Respondents’ dwelling size- number of bedrooms.

Number of bedrooms. The vast majority (66%) of respondents were residing in 2 bedroom apartments, while 21% were from 3 bedroom larger apartments and the rest from 1 bedroom or studio apartments. Examining the plans it was also observed that the majority of the apartments were 2 bedrooms and 1 bedroom, so this is unsurprising (Appendix 2). The Figures 4.1.9 show the distribution over the floors and complexes. Both graphs clearly show the majority of the respondents are from two bedroom dwellings.

Go up to dwelling. To ascertain their internal travel habits respondents were asked about the use of stairs or lifts when they go up to their dwelling. About 21% use stairs

Chapter 4 | 193 solely, 5% use mostly stairs & sometimes lift, 17% use both and 57% use lifts solely. If combined, 43% use stairs in different capacities.

Discussion. The data indicate that the majority of renters prefer to own a similar dwelling type. This may be the reason they expect to stay for fewer years in their current dwelling, as seen in Figure 4.1.7. Since half responded positively, the dwellings where they are now living are preferred at some extent. The desire to own a dwelling has been the subject of many studies, where the overwhelming preference for home ownership was shown (Altman & Werner, 1985; Michelson, 1977; Morris & Winter, 1978). This trend characterises North American and also Australian households, this sentiment embedded historically and forcefully sustained by federal policies as well (Spearritt, 1978). But here, desire to be an owner seems linked with preference for owning a similar form.

It should however, be noted that for residents ‘similar dwelling’ may not imply simply the exact type of apartment they were living in but other similar forms in a similar setting.

More than half of the residents expect to live longer term where they are. However, there is also a strong tendency for mobility, reasonably common since in Census data this sense of mobility is also exhibited for the larger population.

On the other hand, the lower period of ‘anticipation of staying’ for renters may not represent any negative attitude towards higher density forms but the desire to be an owner; or the expectation of moving-on in a transitory population. The desire to go from being a renter to an owner profoundly influences decisions to move (Altman & Werner, 1985; Michelson, 1977) – where the potential pre-exists.

Bedroom number is indicative of apartment size. This was not put to chi-square test since it was understood from the plans that there would be variations with placement of larger apartments based on design decisions. The plans and real estate agent advertisements show that larger apartments in the form of penthouse apartments have higher value (REA Group Australia, 2010; Tonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects, 2006). Clearly, from the results, mid-rise complexes have a higher proportion of respondents from 3-bedroom dwellings. These are mostly located above 4 storeys, either on top floors of low-rise complexes or mid-rise complexes.

Chapter 4 | 194 Table 4.1.4: Chi-square tests examining the effects of dwelling complex/height on occupancy pattern.

Chapter 4 | 195 4.1.4. Differences in occupancy patterns relative to height & complex

Effects of dwelling height. Chi-square tests were performed to determine the relationship between occupancy pattern (tenancy, years want to live, and go up to dwelling) and the two height groups.

Table 4.1.4 – A, lists the Chi-square statistic and p-value. It shows that in higher and lower floor groups the proportion of type of tenancy (renters/owners) was not significantly different. How long the residents want to stay in the dwelling was also not significantly different.

Figure 4.1.10: Travel mode to dwellings by height groups.

Chi-square tests indicated that only one of the variables, ‘go up to dwelling’ tended to differ by the height groups at highly significant level, X2 (2) = 26.543 , p< .001. Cramer’s static is .40 out of maximum value of 1. This represents a moderately strong effect size.

This was expected since the respondents in higher floors beyond walk-up range would naturally always use lifts in comparison to lower floors. Further analysis also revealed within the lower floor group more than half of the residents do not always use lifts. More than a quarter (28%) of the respondents always uses stairs, while 28% tend to vary between stair and lift options.

As indicated (Table 4.1.4-A), respondents on higher or lower floors appear to have similar expectations of stay. However, complex-wise distribution in the next table shows more variations. Respondents from low-rise complexes expect to stay longer than high-rise complexes.

Chapter 4 | 196 Effects of dwelling complex. Chi Square tests (Table 4.1.4-B) were performed to determine if complex groups were distributed differently across the variables. The tests indicated that years want to live, go up to dwelling, and tenancy tended to differ by the complex type. Two of these variables, years want to live (X2 (2) = 15.748, p< .001) and go up to dwelling (X2 (2) = 19.764, p< .001) were highly significant, while tenancy was significantly at lower level (X2 (1) = 8.526, p< .05). Given the expectation that people ride up to higher floors, the salient finding here is that people expect to live for longer periods in the lower rise developments, possibly indicative of a preference after experience.

Figure 4.1.11: Proportion of tenancy by complex groups.

Figure 4.1.12: Travel mode to dwellings by complex groups.

Further analysis of the three types of complexes reveals (Figure 4.1.11) that there are more renters in high-rise than in low-rise buildings, while in the mid-rise complex the renter/owner distribution is almost equal; respondents in low-rise complexes are less transient than in high-rise and mid-rise complexes; and the travel behaviour up to

Chapter 4 | 197 dwelling is also different between the three groups. In midrise complexes 53% and in low-rises 40% respondents tend to always use the lift.

Figure 4.1.13: Years want to live by complex groups.

In midrise complexes 47% of respondents contemplate staying for 3-7 years, while only 25% respondents living in high-rise want to stay for the same period.

Discussion. The chi-square tests of tenancy indicate that the significant variations lie not in the floor height but in the complex groups. Possibly having larger dwellings above 4 storeys in mid-rises may have contributed to the higher number of owners. But complex-wise more renters are found in high-mid rise complexes. Detailed investigations of the three complexes show (Figure 4.1.10) an inverse relationship between owners and renters. Respondents from high-rise complexes tend to be renters. But in the mid-rise complexes the proportion was found to be equal. These insights are possibly indicative of investment preferences for rental properties in higher building forms amongst investors.

With regard to tenancy respondents those from higher complexes tend to express less interest for living longer in the same type. Again from detailed analysis it is seen that mid-rise complex residents were equally divided regarding expected length of occupancy. High-rise complexes tend to attract more transient residents than others. Almost three quarters of low-rise residents showed interest in living in the same dwelling for a longer period. Again, all this is open to interpretation in terms of liveability experience.

Chapter 4 | 198 Regarding the respondents mode of travel to their dwelling, the chi-square tests indicate highly significant relationship to the floors / complex groups. Unquestionably, unsurprisingly, residents in lower floors and low-rise complexes are using the stairs more and they tend to interchange or mix between lift and stair more than others.

It was hypothesized that residents walking up the stairs would reflect two further aspects of resident behaviour over and above the obvious. First, their attitude towards healthy living (wellbeing) and secondly, their concern for environment helping motivate their travel behaviour. Therefore the use of stairs could have both liveability and sustainable design consequences. There could be an argument for more of the low-rise types since walk-up forms are naturally within walking range. Again, a generalisation of this behaviour could also be expected in the lower floors of high and mid-rise complexes given people respond to the walk-up range. Yet, the figure indicating the dissimilarity between the three complex types, especially mid-rise and high-rise complexes, is important in comprehending this behavioural variation. Above 80% of residents from high-rise complexes are solely dependent on lifts, while low-rise and mid-rise complexes have 40% and 53% dependencies, respectively. This indicates a powerful disparity in spatial behaviour between high-rise complexes and other complex types.

Design variations of complexes in Victoria Park precinct contribute further to this behaviour. In low-rise complexes the number of entries is more than in mid-rise or high- rise complexes. Then there is the architect’s design decision of locating the stairs with views toward the inner courts, thus also allowing the travel or journey to be more pleasant compared to going up in a stair core (jointly designed as a fire-stair according to building codes) in high-rise buildings. The plans also reveal that mid-rise structures (of high-rise complexes and low-rise complexes) have stairs that rise up from the courts, indicating architects attempting to make stairs more connected to the surroundings. However, within high-rise structures this approach becomes virtually impossible, which reflects a limitation of high-rise forms. Then there is the internal layout of single loaded corridors in low-rise and mid-rise complexes. Popularly known as cross-over apartments among architects, these are also possible only in low-rise and mid-rise complexes. We can conclude that with mid-rise complexes various design attempts were made to make the lower floor residents use the stairs more. Overall, when other tests of comparing high-rise and mid-rises are made, this finding and its implications point to the liveability advantage of having more mid-rise forms and complexes - when considering higher density clusters. As far as design is concerned,

Chapter 4 | 199 the flexibility offered by low-rise forms can be extended to mid-rise forms, but not to the high-rise typology. Reminder: this research has grouped high-rise and mid-rise together for statistical reasons, as explained. Therefore whenever any significant variation arose, further analyses were made through graphs comparing visually the three complex groups.

Figure 4.1.14: Experiences of locality, respondents by previous locality.

4.1.5. Housing experiences: previous experience & current preference

Previous locality. Over two-thirds (68%) of respondents were from suburbs surrounding the central city and 11 % were from the central city. Only 15% were from outer suburban lower density areas, 4% from regional towns and 2% from rural areas. If these groups were combined, 79% have lived near or in a city while only one-fifth (21%) are from low density areas far-away from the city. One-fifth of the respondents have made the change to inner urban area while the rest have changed their locality within the city areas. In other words, Victoria Park accommodates an urban and pre- urban population.

Chapter 4 | 200 Figure 4.1.15: Experiences of dwelling type, respondents by previous dwelling type.

Previous dwelling type. Respondents were asked about the type of dwelling they lived in before they moved to Victoria Park. Half of the respondents (55%) came from medium or high density house forms. Collectively 45% are from other forms. This indicates that a slight majority of respondents have the prior experience of living in medium to high density forms. Respondents coming from other dwelling forms especially separate houses (detached houses, 24%) evidently now have a complete change of setting or living conditions. Of all residents, only 13% have lived in a high- rise previously.

Figure 4.1.16: Respondents’ dwelling preferences.

Dwelling preferences. Respondents were asked about the type of dwelling they would prefer if they move again. Nearly three-fourths (71%) of respondents prefer forms similar to the current ones while only 29% would choose other (separate house, villa, terrace etc.) forms. One third (36%) would prefer a mid-rise form. Respondents showing preference for the high-rise form was very small (11%).

Chapter 4 | 201 Figure 4.1.17: Dwelling preferences in height groups.

Figure 4.1.18: Experiences of locality across height groups.

4.1.6. Differences in housing experience relative to height & complex

To examine the effects of dwelling height and complex with regard to the housing experience variables, chi-square tests were performed. Table 4.1.5 A & B, lists the two sets of chi-square statistics (X2), effect size and p-value.

Effect of dwelling height. Chi Square tests (Table 4.1.5 A) indicated that two of these variables, locality lived before (X2 (2) = 6.957, p< .05) and dwelling type if move again (X2 (3) = 21.756, p< .001) tended to differ significantly by dwelling height. For locality lived before, Cramer’s V statistics was 0.205. This represents a low association between the height and the nature of area they lived in before moving to Victoria Park.

For dwelling type if move again Cramer’s V statistics is 0.366, which shows moderate effect size. The preference for future dwelling type varies with height. Residents on higher floors tend to prefer both high-rise and low-rise more than residents of lower floors. Residents living on lower floors tend to prefer mid-rise, low-rise and other (separate house, villa, terrace etc.) forms of dwelling in almost equal proportion, with only 5% choosing high-rise.

Effect of dwelling complex. As shown in the Table 4.1.5 B, only one of these variables, dwelling type if move again (X2 (3) = 26.059, p< .001) tended to differ by the complex type - at a highly significant level. For dwelling type if move again Cramer’s V statistics

(V=.401) shows moderate effect size, indicating that the highly significant value is unlikely to have happened by chance, and therefore the strength of the relationship is significant. Further analysis of the three type complexes reveals: that a half of residents in mid-rise complexes tend to prefer mid-rise; a third of residents (36%) living in high-

Chapter 4 | 202 rise complexes would prefer to move to another form (separate house, terrace and townhouse) while a quarter still prefer high-rise; with 29% preferring a mid-rise complex; 40% of residents in low-rise tend to prefer low-rise and 25% tend to prefer other forms. Among the residents of high-rise complex 75% tend to prefer different forms of dwelling other than high-rise.

The relationship between locality lived before and current dwelling complex was not significant. The figure shows that 67% of the respondents living in high-rise & mid-rise are coming from suburbs near central city, while 69% of low-rise respondents are from suburbs near the central city.

Figure 4.1.19: Future preference for dwelling forms in complex groups.

The relationship between dwelling type before moving and current dwelling complex was also not significant. It indicates that 40% of the respondents living in high-rise & mid-rise come from other forms (separate house, terrace and townhouse) while 50% living in the low-rise complex are from other forms.

Discussion. In this section chi-square tests (Table 4.1.5 A) reveal the relationship between the variable and the groups. Since the locality lived before shows weak strength we may choose to ignore the relationship. Only dwelling type if move again, showed a strong relationship to height groups and complex groups.

However, locality lived before and dwelling type before moving deals with respondent’s past housing experience. It is still deemed very important since their future expectation

Chapter 4 | 203 and satisfaction with current dwelling design and neighbourhood would be influenced by their past knowledge.

In locality lived before a majority of respondents come from suburbs near the city. This remains constant for height and complex groups. The study area Victoria Park, which is approximately 4-5 kilometres from the CBD falls into the category of a suburb near the city, within visual distance of the city centre. There is a likelihood that some of these respondents have experienced medium to higher density living previously. Importantly, respondents coming from outer suburbs and towns tend to prefer lower floors, which was quite natural since these were more connected with the ground. Another important aspect is that there is small number of outward movements desired from the Victoria Park precinct.

Dwelling if move again, was found to be highly significantly (p<.001) related to the height and complex groupings (Table 4.1.5 A & B). The strength (Cramer’s V) of the relationship was also moderate in both the groups indicating the variations to be very significant. Therefore the experience of their present dwelling type here in Victoria Park has strong bearings in their selection for future forms of dwelling. This again validates the importance of studying the satisfaction with their current dwelling environment, which this study has hypothesized from the beginning.

Dwelling if move again, is basically a preference for future dwelling form. Preferences are often about the physical environment that the respondents are not directly experiencing. The predominant view of preference is considered to be evaluative or affective in nature. Preference has been also viewed as a social indicator of the quality of a community (Altman & Werner, 1985). What this research hypothesizes is that if the environment the respondents are experiencing is not what they prefer, then the intention would be to move away from that environment. Therefore, if a resident living in a high-rise complex does not approve the life quality they would prefer something else, possibly a low-rise environment. Even though the resident may have a financial difficulty their preference would be to choose something idealistic for them in the current situation.

Interestingly almost one-third of residents living in lower floors would prefer a future dwelling in a mid-rise, low-rise or other form (separate house, villa, terrace etc.), while preference for high-rise was negligible. Here they tend to position mid-rise as appealing as low-rise or other low density forms. On the other hand a greater number (39%) of residents living in higher floors above four storeys also show liking for mid-rise,

Chapter 4 | 204 preferring it more than high-rise form (27%). But the residents living in higher floors tend not to prefer low-rise, while they tend to prefer other forms of dwelling. There is a clear preference for dwelling in a mid-rise when high-rise and mid-rise forms are compared. The variation is much more clearly illustrated in the graph showing the variable in two group clusters (Figure 4.1.17). The bars showing preference for mid-rise are almost similar, while in the low-rise and high-rise categories the responses were very much opposite.

Since Dwelling if move again was significantly related at high level to complex types the further breakdown of groups into three groups was made (Figure 4.1.19). If we observe the variation within three complex groups, residents living in low-rise complexes did not prefer (negligibly 1% preferred high-rise ) dwelling in a high-rise form at all, almost similarly the mid-rise complex residents (9% preferred high-rise) have a tendency of not preferring high-rise. One third of high-rise residents preferred other forms signifying a shift from the current form.

Arguments elaborated from such findings point toward provision of a higher number of mid-rise forms or complexes in medium density clusters. Also there is strong preference (one-third of respondents) for other forms (separate house, villa, terrace etc.). These other forms represent total changes of dwelling type possibly reflecting lifestyle change towards low density, because house, villa etc. are independent forms of dwelling.

Designs in Victoria Park anticipated the attitude to some extent, since it is observed that there is a considerable number of terraces planned in all the complex types. These terraces have separate & direct entry from street and are grouped separately in mid- rise, high-rise and low-rise complexes. The terraces vary between two to three storeys. But again, high-rise form should not be discarded altogether since a section still has preference for that form. Probably integrating the high-rise form with other forms within a complex design, as done in the study area, would make it most acceptable to users.

Architects, here, who are more aware of the potentials of various forms, tend not to codify a set of principles for designing various types of form of different heights and complexity. These should not be seen as mere forms but a composite of complex functions. Therefore, the design ideas that can be practised in low-rise are not applicable for high-rise forms. Understandably, high-rises do tend to have less flexibility than low-rise and mid-rises. In the interviews designers strongly asserted on the need for diversity in design for a diverse and dynamic demography,

Chapter 4 | 205 All different, no generalisations. (Peter Tonkin)

Good design cannot be codified. We do not have a list of rights and wrongs, the situation is always different - each design focuses its own rules, each building (if successful) finds its own character. (Bolles Wilson)

Victoria Park is unusual in that we have been involved with both mid rise and high rise within the same precinct. There are few fundamental differences in overall approach - we treat each stage in a different manner to the previous to ensure that there is not a monolithic nature to the architectural expression and to ensure variety. To this end we do not apply singular binding ideas to our work but operate in an evolutionary way. (Kevin Driver)

In response to another question Driver reiterated the same by his comprehnesion of the population & economic dynamics,

...These are not repetitive units simply stacked one on top of the other...

...One of the key factors in the success has been to adopt differing unit types, sizes and mixes throughout the development allowing for a cross section of people as opposed to a mono-culture. Additionally the demographics of those purchasing in Victoria Park has changed from phase to phase as the economic climate changes. (Kevin Driver)

Below are results of Chi-square tests (Table 4.1.5) examining the effects of dwelling complex/height on housing experience.

Chapter 4 | 206 Table 4.1.5: Chi-square tests examining the effects of dwelling complex/height on housing experience.

Chapter 4 | 207 4.2. Predictors of overall residential satisfaction - results, analysis, and discussion

This section illuminates the salient predictors of overall dwelling satisfaction.

It has been indicated in the preceding section that objective social data here appear to be less relevant compared with the subjective data (expectation and preferences) when their relationship with floor height or complex types are considered in a specific setting. This section furthers the argument and attempts to identify the predictor variables of overall residential satisfaction. Simple association between the height and building complex groups and the extent, to which they are satisfied with their housing, however, does not account for a large number additional factors which may have relatively more important effects housing satisfaction (Conway, 1977). As indicated in the framework (Table 4.2.5), it is hypothesized that, personal characteristics, objective environmental features besides the groups, and subjective perceptions of the dwelling environment may each, or may all play a significant role. Multi variates analysis, such as regression, is the technique used here analyse the complex issue of overall dwelling satisfaction.

4.2.1. Preparation of Dependent & Independent variables In order to identify a relatively small number of factors that can be used to represent relationships among sets of many interrelated variables, data collected from the surveys were subjected to principal component factor analysis. The distinct sets of Likert-scale survey items corresponding to neighbourhood & dwelling related satisfactions were subjected to separate principle component analyses with varimax rotation to reduce the items to a smaller number of variables.

In the decision concerning the number of factors to retain 2 techniques were utilized. The methods of factor extraction were eigen values greater than 1.0 and examination of the scree plot. An inspection of the scree plot revealed a break after the fourth component. However, it is up to the researcher to determine the number of factors that he/she considers best describes the underlying relationships among the variables. Tabachnick & Fidell (2001) recommend that researchers adopt an exploratory approach, experimenting with different numbers of factors until a satisfactory solution is found. Following this suggestion 4 factors were retained and 3 factors were used in regression.

An item-loading of at least 0.4 was established as the criterion by which variable loadings were selected to define the factor. Nunnaly (1967: 360) suggests that 0.3 is

Chapter 4 | 208 permissible by convention for interpretive identification. A more cautious approach was deemed advisable in the exploratory context of this study.

These final factors were then subjected to Cronbach’s internal consistency estimate of reliability. Only factors with alphas of 0.70 or greater were retained. Finally, new variables were then created for each factor by averaging each participant’s scores on the items comprising the factor.

Title for factors. The title for each factor has been selected to represent the central meaning of the factor based on the variable that loaded highly on it or that describes all of the variables as a whole. The choice belongs to the investigator. ‘Nothing in the logic of a factor analytic solution tells a researcher how to label a particular factor’ (Williams, 1968, p.165). In the present study, the salient variables with loadings of large magnitude on the respective 3 residential and neighbourhood satisfaction factors lend themselves to descriptive, summary statements.

Preparation of dependent & independent variables. The following brief discussion of each factor is preceded by the defining measures of the factor, listed in decreasing order of magnitude and followed by the rationale for the selection of its identifying label. Past studies on higher density dwelling satisfactions have been used as a basis for selection of the variables (Becker, 1974; Conway, 1977; Francescato, 1979; Lawrence, 1987).

Dependent variables (DV) selected for analysis. The 5 items of the overall residential satisfaction (DV) were subjected to principal component analysis (PCA). The questions were used to measure overall satisfaction with living environment, which includes aspects of dwelling, neighbourhood, lifestyle, location and aesthetics.

Residents were asked how satisfied they were with different elements and characteristics of where they live and about the problems with their subdivision and larger community. The 5 survey items were generated as the combined output of a review of literature, heuristic experience, content analysis of developer’s advertisements, and an observation of the area as well as a survey of residents and informal interviews with architects of the planned community. The goal was to identify major variables on issues associated with liveability - the dependent variables relating to dwelling design, aesthetics and neighbourhood features.

Factor analysis of the 5 dependent variables yielded one factor. The results of the single factor and reliability analysis of overall residential satisfaction are described in

Chapter 4 | 209 Table 4.2.1. Factor loadings were at least 0.68, with the factor accounting for 60% of the variation, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.83.

Table 4.2.1: Factor analysis results for DV - overall residential satisfaction

Item Standard Items Loadings Mean Deviation Lifestyle-image /activities .822 4.10 .778 Nhood living environ .817 4.25 .792 Appearance of the area/bldg .786 4.12 .839 Location of Nhood .749 4.33 .774 Dwelling/Apt .677 4.22 .776 Eigenvalue 2.99 Percentage of variation explained 59.85 Cronbach’s alpha .83 Note: Responses were recorded on a 5-point scale with 5 indicating the highest satisfaction.

Independent Variables (IV) selected for analysis. The original variables were selected not only on the basis of intuitive judgement but also in reference to prior, related research in which most of these measures had been utilised. The selected items were subjective responses of satisfaction with physical environmental features grouped together under ‘Victoria Park-Neighbourhood’, ‘Dwelling-overall’ & ‘Dwelling–other characteristics’. Variables relating to neighbour friendliness, good value & affordability were not included, but were instead retained as individual variables. Variables on which a high number of respondents indicated ‘Not Applicable’ were not included. Eventually 24 variables were subjected to factor analyses.

Factor analysis of the 24 items related to neighbourhood and dwelling satisfactions yielded four factors which explained 48% of the total variance. However, Factor 4 did not meet the Cronbach’s alpha cut-off value of 0.70. Since it did not have good internal consistency, this factor was not used in the regression analysis. The results of the factor analysis are given in Table 4.2.2, in which only saturations greater than 0.4 of each item in its corresponding component can be seen. A full list of variables and details are given in the Appendix 4.

Factor 1, satisfaction with security, management & facilities. The six measures, taken together demarcate the dimensions related to dwelling living, namely: fire escape safety, security, noise, facilities and management. This factor accounted for 14.57% of the variance and had a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.79.

Chapter 4 | 210 Table 4.2.2: Factor analysis results for Factor 1 - security, management & facilities

Item Standard Items loading Mean Deviation Security around/approaching/inside .739 3.53 1.159 Security (movement at night) .699 3.84 .880 Building Management (efficient, helpful) .633 3.62 1.069 Provision of community spaces .600 3.97 .945 Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) .585 3.97 .706 Underground parking area .523 3.75 .903 Noise from neighbouring dwellings .424 3.64 1.104 Eigenvalue 7.08 Percentage of variation explained 14.57 Cronbach’s alpha .79 Note: Responses were recorded on a 5-point scale with 5 indicating the highest satisfaction.

Factor 2, satisfaction with neighbourhood features. Factor 2 demarcates key aspects of the neighbourhood environment. Variables re appearance of street features (street furniture & landscape features) loaded quite highly. These measures along with crowding were chosen in the title as representative.

Table 4.2.3: Factor analysis results for Factor 2 - neighbourhood features

Item Standard Items loading Mean Deviation Appearance of your st./landscape .818 4.27 .735 Greenery/park/trees .694 4.29 .775 Condition of your street .679 4.31 .765 Feel crowded/too many people .550 3.88 .861 Privacy .431 3.96 .842 Eigenvalue 1.65 Percentage of variation explained 14.24 Cronbach’s alpha 0.78 Note: Responses were recorded on a 5-point scale with 5 indicating the highest satisfaction.

Chapter 4 | 211 Factor 3, satisfaction with dwelling design. The six measures, taken together reflect a summary of features of dwellings and associated design aspects. The highest loading measure involves satisfaction with layout; the lowest is satisfaction with the internal court. These six measures can easily be subsumed under a more general rubric of general satisfaction of dwelling design features.

Table 4.2.4: Factor Analysis Results for Factor 3 - dwelling design

Item Standard Items loading Mean Deviation Overall look of bldg/aesthetics .485 3.94 .757 Layout & design (apt) .738 4.18 .762 Entry corridor to dwelling .673 3.74 1.022 Place furniture .640 3.99 .795 Entrance to bldg street level .530 3.64 .943 Internal court .466 3.70 1.041 Eigenvalue 1.44 Percentage of variation explained 12.83 Cronbach’s alpha .75 Note: Responses were recorded on a 5-point scale with 5 indicating the highest satisfaction.

4.2.2. Regression analysis To estimate the influence of predictor variables on overall residential satisfaction (O- Sat) with the dwelling, three regression equations were estimated (Table 4.2.5 & Table 4.2.6). In each equation a base set of personal characteristics (age, income and tenure) and objective variables of dwelling environment (floor level, complex form and number of bedrooms, Ob Env) were included.

In each subsequent model the two variable groups listed under Perceptions, Assessment and Behaviour in Table 4.2.5 were added one at a time to observe both the relative contributions of the set of variables to the predictions of overall dwelling satisfaction, and the effect of the addition of each set on the importance of living on a different floor and dwelling complex. The results of entering these hierarchically in a standard regression analysis are presented in Table 4.2.6. This shows the results of adding each of the two groups of measures (P Soc-Eco-Con and P Env) to the base set of predictors.

In The Durbin–Watson statistic a value near to 2 (1.98 ) indicates that there appears to be no autocorrelation in the residuals from the regression analysis.

Chapter 4 | 212 Table 4.2.5: Matrix of explanatory Variables

Person/Household Objective Environmental Features Perceptions, Assessment and Characterises Behaviour : Social , Economic & Environmental Features HH Ob Env P Soc-Eco-Con Age Dwelling height: higher floor or lower Neighbourliness Income floor Conservation: Recycle Tenure Dwelling complex: high-rise, mid-rise, low- Economic: Investment (value for rise complex money) Size of dwelling: number of rooms P Env Neighbourhood and Dwelling: Factor1 Factor 2 Factor 3 Comfort

Step1: In the first equation predicting overall dwelling satisfaction using only the base set of variables (HH & Ob Env), only 7% (R2 = .07) of the total variations in dwelling satisfaction was explained (Table 4.2.6). The predictive power R2 indicates that the personal characteristics & information about objective features were insufficient in explaining overall residential satisfaction. Of the six variables entered, tenure appears as the only statistically significant (β = .22, p < .05) variable among the important variables. Though not significant, age (β= −.15) was the second most important variable, while the number of bedrooms (β= .12) was the third.

The salient aspect of this model was that data on objective features (Ob Env) of dwelling height (dwelling level), type of complex and size of the apartment were not showing any relationship at all to overall dwelling satisfaction.

Step2: Once perceptions and assessment of social, economic & conservation variables (P Soc-Eco-Con) were added, the percentage variance of the model increased markedly to 43% (R2 = .43). The F-value of the model was found to be highly statistically significant at the .001 level. Table 4.2.6, shows that of the nine variables entered only two variables appear as significant.

Chapter 4 | 213 In terms of relative importance among variables, the most important predictor was neighbourliness (β = .40, p < .001) followed by investment (β = .33, p < .001). The model indicates that perceptions of people living around the area & perception of the apartment as good value for money were significantly predictive of overall residential satisfaction.

Step3: In the final model an appreciable increase of predictive power R2 occurred when the respondents’ perceptions and assessments of their own residences and neighbourhood (P. Env) were also taken into account, such as satisfaction with dwelling layout, internal court or the greenery. At this stage the predictive efficacy of the model was found to be high with a percentage variance explained of 62% (R2 = .62). This was also a significant contribution as indicated by the F change (16.87, p < .001). Table 4.2.6 indicates that of the thirteen variables entered seven make a statistically significant contribution.

This provides strong evidence that in this model a relationship exists between the dependent variable (O-Sat), overall residential satisfaction, and the independent variables.

In terms of relative importance among variables, neighbourhood features (includes crowding) was the most important predictor, as indicated by a standardised coefficient of .36 (Factor 2, p < .001). That is, the greater the satisfaction with the neighbourhood features the greater the overall satisfaction.

Aspects of dwelling design (Factor 3, β = .20, p < .01) and neighbourliness (β = .20, p < .01) were the second strongest predictors. The more satisfied residents are with the dwelling layout, look of the building and people living around them, the more satisfied they are with their overall residential experience.

Age (β = −.19, p < .01), a personal characteristic, was also related to overall residential satisfaction. The negative direction suggests that respondents in their later age tend to have lower satisfaction compared to their younger counterparts.

Comfortable conditions in winter in the living-dining space (comfort, β = −.14, p < .05) was the next most important predictor, followed by the perception of the apartment as good value for money (investment, β = −.13, p < .05) and by ownership of the apartment (tenure, β = −.13, p < .05). This means greater satisfaction with winter comfort conditions and perception of higher value of investment returns can induce more satisfaction with the dwelling. On the other hand, overall satisfaction tends to

Chapter 4 | 214 decrease if the apartment is rented. Galster (1987) contended that homeownership proved to be directly related to the residential satisfaction.

Consistently in all models (Step1: Dwelling height, β = .00; Complex form, β = .00, Step2: Dwelling height, β = .00; Complex form, β = −.01, Step3: Dwelling height, β = .01; Complex form, β = .00) the level of dwelling or complex type and size of complex did not add appreciably to the understanding of overall satisfaction (Table 4.2.6).

Table 4.2.6: Significant predictors of overall residential satisfaction - hierarchical regression analysis results

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3

Person/Household + Perceptions and + Perceptions Characteristics + Assessment of and Objective Social , Economic Assessment of Environmental & Conservation Environmental features Issue Features HH & Ob Env + P Soc-Eco-Con + P Env βββ

Age -.15 -.07 -.19** Income .07 .05 .02 Tenure .22* .10 .13* Dwelling height .00 .00 .01 Complex form .00 -.01 .00 Number of Bedrooms .12 .03 .01

Neighbourliness .40*** .20** Recycling .08 -.02 Investment .33*** .13*

Factor1: Security, Management & -.01 Facilities Factor2: Neighbourhood .36*** Factor3: Dwelling Design .20** Comfort- winter .14*

R2 .07 .43 .62 F Change 1.7 31.53*** 16.87*** NOTE: Statistic reported is the standardized coefficient, β . *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Chapter 4 | 215 4.2.3. Discussion Most simply stated, these empirical findings suggest that perceptual and attitudinal data elicited from people about the residential environment, particularly the dwelling and neighbourhood features, are most helpful in accounting for their satisfaction with their housing.

It should be noted that none of the independent variables single-handedly show a strong relationship with the dependent variable (Table 4.2.6). The closeness of beta values demonstrates that the significant variables as a whole exert influence on overall satisfaction. Given the complexity of residential satisfaction this is comprehensible. From the outset this study had an understanding that overall residential satisfaction is likely to be a function of satisfaction with environmental, social and economic aspects. However, the focus has been to study the social aspects that correspond to design. This outcome underpins the conceptual framework elaborated earlier.

This finding contributes to an understanding from the literature review of the importance of ‘good design’ of a dwelling, which helps moderate the potentially negative effects of high-density living.

Since outdoor neighbourhood features (greenery, street and crowding) stand out prominently, it can be hypothesised that if the relationship between the inside and outside increases the physical and psychological connectivity between the two, it can increase the satisfaction of high-density living.

The importance of design features such as layout and the attention given to the design of different areas is also validated. These include: overall look of the building, layout and design of dwelling, corridor, furniture placement, entrance to building and internal court. These also circuitously imply the importance of the role of architects, landscape architects, urban planners and urban designers involved in designing residential environments.

The significant findings of features of neighbourhood and dwelling are very crucial for this research. The two groups of the variables as significant predictors imply the relevancy of continuing further with the analysis on the actual perceptions of the individual aspects.

Chapter 4 | 216 Contrary to past studies where management issues were highlighted, here it appears to be less important as a predictor (Becker, 1974; Francescato, 1979). Moreover, security and safety issues (as here defined) also were not significant. Since these complexes are run more efficiently and communally than in the past may have an effect. Probably residents nowadays have more representation on management boards which may contribute to the response.

What is more salient to the specific purpose of this study is the relative indifference of living on a different floor level (Dwelling height) or in a different form of building type (Complex type) to overall satisfaction with housing. As clearly demonstrated the dwelling level and complex typology were not having any significant affect on residential satisfaction. Once we take other variables of perception and assessment into consideration (Step 3), neither the fact that people live in a high-rise complex (or low-rise complex), nor the size of dwelling have apparent bearing on the satisfaction they derive from it.

The representative sample (upon which the analysis is based) does not include many people who live in very tall buildings. Thus the possibility that these residents experience great dissatisfaction with their housing, specifically because they are high has not really been tested. The high-rise forms here are only 20 storeys, where they are not designed as standalone forms devoid from setting. Moreover, the high-rise complexes here comprise of 3 storeys, 4 storeys, and predominantly high-rise forms arranged around a courtyard (see an earlier section of study area for detail). Victoria Park is a special case scenario, designed with sustainable landscaping and territorial enclosure in mind, etc. These results thus should not be generalized to other high or low rise buildings which are not part of a comprehensively designed complex. However, the results can be generalised to similar designed setting with close proximity to greenery in inner area edges.

On the other hand, for the respondents who have been studied, these results imply that living in a high-rise building (or low-rise), per se, has few, if any, properties which are uniquely associated with housing satisfaction or dissatisfaction. In other words, it is essentially perceptions of and attitudes towards features of the housing environment, rather than building height, which make a difference.

Logically thus, it is most likely that people's preferences and choice will be satisfied by wide-ranging design options. The analysis in the following sections, further investigates

Chapter 4 | 217 this notion is by looking into variable relating to various aspects of outdoor and dwelling features in relation to the height and complex types.

Chapter 4 | 218 4.3. Residents’ perceptions of aspects related to dwelling - Results, analysis, and discussion

4.3.1. Satisfaction with dwelling spaces- relationships with height /complex groups & interpreting mean scores Several questions are posed in this sub section of the research regarding the satisfaction of residents with their dwellings. For instance: is the dwelling height or complex type related to the satisfaction with an individual dwelling and satisfaction with individual spaces inside a dwelling? To what extent are the residents living in higher floors and lower floors satisfied with various aspects of their dwellings' design? To what extent are residents living in two differing complex building groups satisfied with various aspects of their dwelling design? Analyses examining these questions are presented here.

In order to deal with such aspects of dwelling design, appropriate variables are included in the questionnaire covering both subjective and objective elements of dwelling design. Architects rarely have insights into actual experiential aspects of dwelling use that they design, while users, when choosing a dwelling, at the outset naturally look into different aspects of the dwelling and estimate how appropriate it will be for their specific requirements. Users, like architects generally, consider: the look of the building from the outside, the layout design, size of the rooms in terms of furniture placement, windows sizes & operation, natural daylight, views from dwelling etc. Many of the aspects of design have been outlined in an earlier section of the literature review. However, as they experience the dwelling over time the occupants begin to feel just how comfortable and appropriate a space actually is. Over time they find out how these spaces feel and perform in summer and in winter – which the designer can only presume. Therefore, residents’ satisfactions with the physical aspects of design as well as physiological and psychological aspects of dwelling use are included in the questionnaire. Overall the look of the building (aesthetics), view from living room window, and privacy are considered here amongst different psychological aspects. Comfortable conditions in summer, and in winter, and natural daylight are considered to be both physiological and psychological aspects of a satisfactory and sustainable design of dwellings. These may often be seen as consequences of passive design features of ‘slimline’ or ‘cross over apartment’ schemes (see methodology for feature description).

Chapter 4 | 219 4.3.1.1. Comparing mean scores of dwelling height groups

Independent-samples t-tests were conducted to compare the satisfaction scores for lower floors and higher floors. The Table lists the t-value statistics, p-value and effect size. The tests indicate that only three of the 24 variables tended to differ significantly by the dwelling height. These were:

Living-dining natural daylight satisfaction scores were significantly different for lower floor (M=4.24, SD=.790) and higher floors (M=4.46, SD=.676, t(162)= - 1.736, p<.1). The magnitude of the differences in the means was noteworthy, but defined as small (eta-squared=.018). For interpretation of eta-squared see section on effect size in method of analysis for t-tests.

Living room view satisfaction scores differed highly significantly for lower floor (M=3.64, SD=1074) and higher floors (M=4.20, SD=.808, t(162)= -3.676, p<.001). The magnitude of the differences in the means was moderate (eta- squared =.063). Expressed as a percentage, 6.3% of the variance in living room view was explained by height.

The issue of view (view types) was given extra attention and was investigated in a separate section.

Kitchen ventilation satisfaction scores were significantly different for lower floor (M=3.01, SD=1.133) and higher floors (M=3.34, SD=1.171, t(162)= -1.706, p<.1). The magnitude of the differences in the means was defined as small (eta- squared =.018). As indicated by the lower mean score in both the groups, overall, ventilation in kitchen was causing discontent.

In the different height group: entry corridor to dwelling, storage space (overall dwelling), living dining size, bed natural daylight, privacy (balcony) varied to a small extent. But there was no statistically significant difference in the scores.

Discussion. Satisfaction with dwelling spaces in lower floor apartments was not different to higher floor dwellings. The analyses above indicate that there is little difference between the two height groups (1-4 Floors& 5-18 Floors). The tests indicate that only three of the 24 variables tended to differ significantly by dwelling height. Among the three variables, two of those which differed were at a very high satisfaction level (above 3.5). Hence there appears to be no overwhelming evidence of higher approval or endorsement by respondents for any of the height typologies.

Chapter 4 | 220 Only the meaningfulness of the three variables which were significantly different is assessed here. Logically, daylight – both an amenity and sustainability factor - in living/dining areas on lower floors would be less than in higher floors since there would more surrounding forms or vegetation in the lower levels. This was reflected in the significant difference in living-dining natural daylight satisfactions between the two height groups. However, the satisfaction means for both groups were far above 4, indicating high satisfaction. This means respondents in both lower floors and higher floors were satisfied with natural daylight, but higher floor residents were comparatively more satisfied. Probably passive design aspects of orientation and ‘slimline’ may have contributed to the overall agreement with daylight.

Differences between groups with living room view was highly significant. Clearly the strength of association (with moderate effect size) indicates the difference is quite pronounced. As indicated by the high mean score, having a view from the higher floors clearly delighted the respondents. However, residents in the lower floors were more exposed to views of greenery, streets and surrounding buildings. Having views of green courts can be expected to contribute to higher satisfaction among those residents. Therefore, which views are contributing to the higher satisfaction, which are disliked by residents or whether greenery is having any effect on lower floor residents’ satisfaction with views etc. becomes very important; and this aspect was also investigated separately.

Dissatisfaction with kitchen ventilation/exhaust was significant, with both groups tending to be near the neutral category. Residents in higher floors were less disturbed with ventilation issues; possibly they had better ventilation because of airflow. But with means near 3 (M<3.5), this aspect of dwelling design was a source of discomfort for both the groups as explained further in the next section.

4.3.1.2. Interpreting mean scores in dwelling height groups

Examination of the mean satisfaction scores for two floor groups in Table 4.3.1 reveals the following. The variables in the table are arranged in 5 subgroups based on area/space in a dwelling. Further analyses of low means below the threshold scores of 3.5 are done by investigating graphs of percentage of responses.

Overall dwelling subgroup. If we observe the Table 4.3.1 in the first subgroup overall dwelling, out of 8 variables 6 indicate higher means for both height groups. As

Chapter 4 | 221 indicated by the mean scores, which were near to 4.0 or above, the following aspects were rated favourably:

Overall look of bldg, layout & design, window sizes, window control, place furniture, & privacy.

Figure 4.3.1: Percentage of satisfaction by height groups of entry corridor and storage.

Only mean scores for entry corridor to dwelling & storage space, were near or below 3.5 (M ≤ 3.5). A reason for the low mean was further investigated and is illustrated by the Figure 4.3.1 above.

The graph indicates that the entry corridor was causing more dissatisfaction to higher floor respondents than to those in the lower floors. In the higher floor group 14% were either dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied. 28% tend to show mixed feelings in higher floors while 22% showed mixed feeling in lower floors. However, the mean scores did not differ significantly (0-4 floor, M= 3.81; 5-18 floor, M= 3.56).

Lack of storage space was also an issue to a substantial number of respondents in both the lower floors and higher floors group. 17-22% were either dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied and 23-30% expressed mixed feelings.

Discussion. Overall dwelling variables were mostly rated satisfactorily by respondents living both on lower floors and higher floors. These are mainly subjective responses of variables dealing with the design of physical features in the dwelling. Although architects would normally deal with these in designing multiple dwellings in a building, a user habitually becomes aware and is exposed to these aspects of design and might even consider these things before they move into a dwelling. The results suggest that respondents to some extent approve of the architects’ design ideas. However, entry

Chapter 4 | 222 Figure 4.3.1(i): Top. Design variation of corridors in the low-rise and mid-rise buildings. The spaces which overlook the courts are generally well lighted. The corridors are not repeated in all the floors. Bottom. View of corridors inside the high-rise structures. The corridors are double loaded, with apartments on both sides. Clearly high-rise corridors lack daylight since there is no connection to the exterior. All photographs were taken during daytime. Source: Rashid, 2006.

Chapter 4 | 222-i corridor to dwelling, storage space variables were not perceived as favourably as other variables.

This fluctuation of satisfaction in groups with entry corridor to dwelling in overall dwelling subgroups, being a very important design issue, should be of interest to designers in a post-occupancy sense. Regarding corridors, the graphs indicate that the proportion of dissatisfied respondents on higher floors was more than on lower floors.

Corridor design varies across the forms evaluated in the precinct. As understood in the literature review corridors as a social space has lost its credence in the past and the interviews reveal functional issues are given more importance nowadays. As observed by architect Bolles Wilson,

I like long corridors with a mirror at the end, most users don't - we try to put a window at the end. I like corridors that widen and narrow like an old city street - most clients don't.

However, and typically, high-rise structures tend to have more double loaded corridors. This means: a single corridor starting from the lift (stair core) runs through the layout and connects the apartments on both sides. The corridor therefore does not have any connection to the outside, tends to be darker if not narrower, and has to be lighted artificially. Lack of natural light tends to make this transitional space more psychologically negative, and require energy expenditure. There is a probability that this aspect here may be causing the dissatisfaction in the higher floors of the high- rises. Also, internal corridors are unsustainable in the sense that they do not allow apartments to be cross ventilated; and cooking odours are trapped there – impacting on liveability. Architects involved in the designs of Victoria Park have expressed concern with length of corridors generally. A long corridor with natural light and view tend to make it more favourable. When asked about the criteria considered for designing corridors most architects here indicated that they try to avoid long corridors and intend to provide natural light and views. Similarly Kevin Driver of Turner Architects explains,

Where possible we incorporate maisonette or single aspect single storey units where a corridor sits to the exterior of a building. This gives the opportunity for continuous glazing and ventilation and allows longer corridors to be well designed spaces. Where the corridors are double loaded we attempt to make them wider with natural light and ventilation at each end. Typically we modulate the length of the corridors with recesses to unit entries giving opportunities for

Chapter 4 | 223 colour, signage and seating as well as relief to the gun barrel effect that is otherwise possible.

However, as seen in the field observations in the high-rise buildings, corridors are more narrow and functional; while many of the ideas described by architects were only possible in the mid-rise structures.

A portion of residents feel dissatisfied and/or remained neutral, and were discontent with storage space in the overall dwelling subgroup. This negative perception for storage is shared both on higher and lower floors, as seen in the graph. However, higher floor respondents were more dissatisfied with storage space. Storage space even though not an important design aspect for a designer was seen as an important element of a dwelling in many classic studies from the user’s viewpoint (Lawrence, 1987; Michelson, 1970). Storage space is rarely thought-out by residents when choosing a dwelling. But over the years this could create stress and discourage users from staying for longer periods. Given the space limitation in higher density housing, designers tend to include less space for storage inside the dwelling. On the one hand, the designs advertised in Victoria Park tend to promote healthy living by advocating outdoor jogging or cycling, but do the designs include space for bicycles, or extra space for exercise items? If the designs include a garden on a balcony do they provide space for gardening tool storage? In many cases, an unground car park space might serve as an alternative storage space for items such as bicycles or other regular hobby items. On the other hand, there is a strong possibility that residents who live over years in higher density settings may have grown used to having less space for storage. They may eventually adapt their lifestyles to small storage spaces in apartments.

Living & dining subgroup. In the Table 4.3.1 mean scores of both groups for living- dining size and natural daylight was very high (M≥4); living room view means scores were 3.64 for lower floors and 4.20 for higher floors.

Only comfortable condition (summer) has mean scores below 3.5. Conditions in winter (0-4 floor, M= 3.62; 5-18 floor, M= 3.66), however, were rated more favourably than in summer (0-4 floor, M= 3.48; 5-18 floor, M= 3.36).

Chapter 4 | 224

Figure 4.3.2: Percentage of satisfaction by height groups of living comfortable condition.

In both height groups over half (56-60%) responded favourably to the comfortable conditions in summer in the living room. 18%-20% showed ambivalence to the summer conditions. To the rest of the respondents, summer conditions tended to cause uneasiness (dissatisfied & completely dissatisfied experiences) to different degrees, as shown in the above graph. 27% in higher floors and 20% in lower floors indicated complete dissatisfaction with conditions in the living/dining space in summer.

Discussion. Aspects of living and dining have been grouped together, since the dwelling layout plans in Victoria Park have combined these two functions into a single multiple-use space. This set of variables deals with subjective responses and psychological aspects of experiencing the space in the dwelling. Among the variables, comfortable conditions in summer was a subject of concern with a section of users of both height groups. Thermally uncomfortable people tend to rely on mechanical means to attain and maintain their comfort, thus implicating both sustainability and liveability.

In summer higher floor residents are less satisfied. Two variables that involve design are: air temperature and air movement/airflow. The possible reasons may be higher buildings have apartments on two sides of the corridor (double loaded), having thus no cross ventilation opportunity for the apartments. As elaborated in the literature review, so-called ‘cross-over’ unit designs are sometimes highlighted positively, illustrating apartments that have exposure from two sides of a building(Tonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects, 2006). This is mostly seen in the low-rise and mid-rise buildings. The orientation of the buildings is also a major factor contributing to exposure to sunlight and daylight. Most of the buildings and complexes evaluated here were oriented diagonally to the cardinal axis, which means no direct exposure to the west, an advantage in summer.

Chapter 4 | 225 In all the apartments the living/dining space was not directly exposed to the high summer sun since the designs have balconies. Apparently, though, responses suggest that the design approach of shielding via balconies from summer sun was not enough. Lower floor buildings have the advantage of having less exposed surface area and more shading due to large trees and surrounding buildings yet did not exhibit an appreciable variation in comfort compared to the higher floors.

However, extreme summer temperatures could be a reason for this dissatisfaction which nonetheless cannot be tackled fully by design. The residents in these dwellings are prohibited from using air-conditioners which may also have an impact on comfort level thereby generating displeasure in summer conditions. Winter conditions were however also causing discomfort but the average mean then was within the threshold of this study. In winter, respondents obviously have the option of using additional heating devices to attain comfort levels. On the other hand, human comfort is a complex phenomenon which tends to vary by individual, their mental state, physical conditions and past experiences and ‘accommodation’ factors all playing a role. Taking into consideration that almost 80% of respondents were not displeased with summer conditions in the living and dining space, a successful application of design features is apparent. Here, sustainable design affords liveability.

Figure 4.3.3: Percentage of satisfaction of kitchen ventilation.

Kitchen subgroup. The majority of respondents were satisfied with the design of kitchens (mean varying 3.78-3.80) in both groups. The Figure 4.3.3 clearly shows a sizeable proportion of respondents tend to be either neutral or dissatisfied.

However, in overall groups, satisfaction was much lower with kitchen ventilation. It was evident from the Figure 4.3.3, on the higher floors 58% were satisfied, 14% showed

Chapter 4 | 226 mixed feelings and the rest (28%) showed dissatisfaction. On the lower floors the discontent with kitchen ventilation was much higher than for the higher floors, where only 39% were satisfied or highly satisfied, while 28% were dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied.

Discussion. Satisfaction with kitchen ventilation in lower floors is the only variable to drop to the mean of 3, the lowest among the 24 variables tested here. The higher floors tend to fare better. However, the overall score of neutral suggests some ambivalence towards the issue. This should be of concern for designers, since the majority of the variables tend to be higher in approval (mean>3.5).

This issue was easily foreseen, by looking at the plans. If the layout plans are carefully observed, the kitchens in most apartment dwellings do not have an external window. Over the years the kitchen has evolved in its role in a dwelling. Nowadays most of the apartments tend to locate the kitchen at the heart of the layout, which is central to the plan. As seen in the plans, living dining and kitchen areas tend to merge into a single area. External window are nowadays also comparatively less prevalent in higher buildings with smaller apartments, since valuable externally exposed areas are given up to more liveable spaces of interior living.

On higher floors, the higher wind movement may have helped in dispersing the odours. But on the other hand, it would also lead to heated air produced in the kitchen area travelling through the apartment towards the balcony. This again may be a source of discomfort in the summer months.

Figure 4.3.4: Percentage of satisfaction by height groups of bedroom comfortable conditions.

Chapter 4 | 227 Bedroom subgroup. Mean scores for bedroom size (3.78-3.68), bed natural daylight (4.12-4.32) and built-ins (3.73-3.64) were high. Comfortable condition summer (3.33- 3.16) and comfortable condition winter (3.54-3.58), have mean scores equal to or below 3.5 (M ≤ 3.5).

Bedroom comfortable conditions in summer were causing dissatisfaction to 26% in the lower floors and 29% of the higher floors respondents. Mixed feeling was indicated by 15% in lower floors and 24% in higher floors. In both groups 47% & 58% respectively were either satisfied or highly satisfied with summer conditions. The rest, slightly more than one-quarter showed some degree of dissatisfaction or neutral feeling.

Comfortable conditions in winter were also causing dissatisfaction but to lower levels. Only 12-15% of the respondents were dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied with the conditions in winter and 21-30% tend to show mixed feelings.

Discussion. Bedroom dissatisfaction with summer conditions does not appear to be influenced by dwelling floor level. Apparently, though, as responses suggest, the design approach of shielding some of the apartments from summer sun was not enough. The issue which was causing discomfort to a section of respondents from both height groups needs to be addressed by architects, thus.

Balcony subgroup. With regard to the balcony, mean scores concerning adequate space and safety were above 3.5 for both groups. Safety mean scores for both groups were above 4, which was indicative of higher approval. This clearly shows that safety on the balcony was not an issue, even for residents in higher floors.

Figure 4.3.5: Percentage of satisfaction by height groups of balcony protection and privacy.

Chapter 4 | 228 Protection from sun/rain and privacy were also investigated. With regard to protection from sun/rain, 63% from the lower floors and 54% from higher floors were either satisfied or highly satisfied. On the other hand, 20% from lower floors and 26% from higher floors were dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied. 18% from lower floors and 20% from upper floors tend to show mixed feelings.

Balcony privacy mean scores were comparatively smaller for lower level floors than higher floors (0-4 floor, M= 3.54; 5-18 floor, M= 3.80). Even though the difference was not significant, the effect size was within the guidelines (proposed by Cohen, 1988, cited in Pallant, 2005: 209) and defined as minimum (eta-squared=.013). In the lower floors 18% of respondents were either dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied compared to 8% in higher floors.

Discussion. The balcony has emerged as an essential component relating to satisfaction in a dwelling in this higher density housing. In the Victoria Park ‘observatory’ all dwellings have at least one balcony. It was therefore investigated further in a separate section.

If combined, 20-26% showed displeasure with protection from sun/rain in balconies in both higher and lower floor groups. Consequently, if architects could innovate ways to protect the balconies, this would also increase the comfort level in the living-dining areas.

Since some balconies have clear transparent glass balustrades they tend to more invasive visually; thereby, privacy issues become paramount for some residents, especially in lower floors. Again these also give better visual connection to trees and greenery. However, the privacy issue for lower floors was not extremely low (M>3.5). The overall privacy of dwelling which was elicited before was also high, with means(M) near to 4.

4.3.1.3. Comparing dwelling complex groups

The t-tests indicate that only four of the 24 variables tended to differ significantly for the complex groups. These were:

Satisfaction scores for living-dining size were significantly different for low-rise complexes (M=3.88, SD=.929) and high and mid-rise complexes (M=4.18, SD=.747, t(162)= -2.289, p<.05). The magnitude of the differences in the means was small to moderate (eta-squared=.031) (Pallant, 2005: 209).

Chapter 4 | 229 Kitchen design satisfaction scores were significantly different for low-rise complexes (M=3.59, SD=.946) and high and mid-rise complexes (M=3.96, SD=.824, t(162)= -2.634, p<.05). The magnitude of the differences in the means was small to moderate (eta-squared=.042). Only 4.2% of the variance in kitchen design was explained by height. Respondents in mid & high-rise complexes showed higher satisfaction with kitchen design than in low-rise complexes.

There was a significant difference in kitchen ventilation satisfaction scores for low-rise complexes (M=2.95, SD=1.150) and high and mid-rise complexes (M=3.25, SD=1.141, t(162)= -1.675, p<.1). The magnitude of the differences in the means was defined as small (eta-squared=.017). As indicated by the low mean (below 3.5) scores in both the groups, overall ventilation in kitchen was causing discontent to sizeable proportions of respondents. With kitchen ventilation, respondents in mid & high-rise complexes showed higher satisfaction than in low-rise complexes.

Satisfaction scores for bedroom size were significantly different for low-rise complexes (M=3.91, SD=.738) and high and mid-rise complexes (M=3.62, SD=.994, t(162)= 2.129, p<.05). The magnitude of the differences in the means was small to moderate (eta-squared=.026).

In different complex groups, the overall look of the building, window sizes, comfortable conditions in winter (living & dining), and privacy (balcony) varied with small effect size. However, there was no statistically significant difference in those scores.

Discussion. The tests show that only four of the 24 variables tended to differ significantly for the complex groups but at a lower level (p<.05). Overall, there appears to be very little (non-significant) difference in satisfaction with low-rise complexes and the high & mid-rise complexes, with the exception of the kitchen subgroup. In the majority of variables, the satisfaction mean score was above 3.5, indicating that the differences in the other 2 variables are less important and confined to a specific functionality of design. These variations should not be construed as overall dissatisfaction with the design of the complex groups.

The dissimilarity between height groups and complex groups was explained in an earlier section. It was anticipated that the results for complex groups would be dissimilar to height groups. Especially lower floor groups and low-rise complex groups are not comparable or similar to any degree. Lower floor apartments, we recall, can be

Chapter 4 | 230 from any form of buildings while low-rise complexes are solely forms which are 5 storeys or below.

However, one variable: kitchen ventilation/exhaust satisfaction differed significantly in both height groups and complex groups, with high and mid-rise complexes being more favourable. In the first subgroup overall dwelling none of the variables differed significantly which indicates, in general in both complex groups, the satisfaction with the design related variables were almost similar.

The second subgroup, living dining size, differed significantly with residents of high-rise and mid-rise complexes being more content than those in low-rise complexes. In low- rise complexes the living-dining and balcony are designed in a single bay with the balcony being in the front. One possible explanation could be that with limited area apartments the balcony spaces take up a larger space, meaning less area for the living-dining space. Architects nowadays, instead of having a non-functional balcony, tend to design larger usable spaces as the balcony in low-rise complexes. In many instances these are denoted as outdoor spaces instead of balconies. One such approach is the loggia which was used in the bridging of interior and exterior spaces in early European buildings and is now reinvented and transformed to fit apartment dwellings in Australia. These larger balcony spaces are also called loggias for marketing proposes by developers and real estate agents. As architect Nick Turner explains,

The ‘loggia’ is now a more highly constructed terrace or more sophisticated balcony space that can be occupied as a room (SMH, 2003).

However high and mid-rise forms tend not to have larger balconies since stronger winds impact on higher floors and would make those less usable.

The kitchen sub group was the only aspect that differed with all the variables varying significantly. Aspects with kitchen were not seen to be favourable in low-rise complexes. As stated earlier it was anticipated that kitchens could be a source of discontent because living dining spaces are probably given more priority in apartment designs. Overall kitchen design satisfaction was high in high and mid-rise complexes. Displeasure with kitchen ventilation/exhaust was found to be universal but with high and mid-rise complexes faring much better than low-rise complexes.

Here bedroom size differed significantly with low-rise complexes being rated as more favourable. This is a reversal of living-dining size satisfaction which favoured high &

Chapter 4 | 231 mid-rise complexes. Bedrooms in high & mid-rise complexes are apparently smaller since apartment sizes are much smaller than low-rise apartments (see Appendix 2).

4.3.1.4. Interpreting mean scores in dwelling complex groups

Further examination of mean scores of the 5 subgroups (overall 24 variables) for different complex groups in Table 4.3.2 reveals the following:

Overall dwelling subgroup. In this subgroup out of 8 variables 7 were indicative of higher means for both groups. The mean (M) scores near to 4 and above show that a large portion of survey respondents’ satisfaction was very high in response to these aspects of dwelling design:

Overall look of bldg, layout & design, entry corridor to dwelling, window sizes, window control, place furniture, and privacy.

Only storage space among the overall dwelling features was an issue to a substantial number of respondents in both lower floor and higher floor groups. For both groups the mean was almost identical but just above 3.5. 16-20% were either dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied and 21-29% expressed mixed feelings. 55-58% expressed either satisfaction or high satisfaction.

Figure 4.3.6: Percentage of satisfaction by complex groups of storage.

Discussion. In contrast to height groups, none of the overall dwelling variables fell below the threshold of 3.5. Entry corridor to dwelling mean satisfaction was near to 3.5 in height groups but did not appear to be noticeable when complex groups were calculated. The effects of height became more neutralised in complex groups since, here, a high-rise complex is comprised of high-rise, mid-rise and low-rise forms all together. Therefore, dissatisfaction with specifics associated with height level can be dealt with by the mixing of forms. In other words, residents who might show displeasure

Chapter 4 | 232 with corridors in high-rises can have the option to select a similar dwelling in a mid-rise form where the corridors are treated differently.

Similar to the height groups, in this section overall dwelling variables were mostly rated satisfactorily by respondents living in both complex groups. These are mainly subjective responses of variables dealing with design of physical features which architects would normally deal with in designing multiple dwellings in a building. Therefore, this subgroup’s approval provides a strong vindication of the architect’s design impetus. However, issues of storage space/cabinets should be better dealt with since 16-20% of respondents did show displeasure.

Living & dining subgroup. This subgroup concerns aspects of living and dining together, since all dwelling layouts have combined these two functions into a single space. However, the shape and size of the spaces varies with individual dwellings. The mean score for living dining size and living room view was above 3.5, while the natural daylight score was well above 4.

The Figure 4.3.7 shows that summer conditions in living & dining tend to cause uneasiness to a sizeable proportion of respondents but to different degrees. In both complex groups just over half (58-59%) responded favourably to the conditions in summer in the living spaces. For both groups the mean was close for conditions in summer in living-dining spaces. 19-25% were either dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied and 18-22% had mixed feelings.

Comfortable condition (winter), had mean scores of 3.74- 3.53. 8-18% were either dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied and 23-26% expressed mixed feelings. 59-66% expressed either satisfaction or high satisfaction.

Figure 4.3.7: Percentage of satisfaction by complex groups of living comfortable conditions.

Chapter 4 | 233 Discussion. In this subgroup clearly summer comfort conditions were a mild irritant to a section of respondents of both complex groups since this factor went below 3.5, but only by a small amount. However, the winter dissatisfied group did not drop below the threshold level of average 3.5.

Figure 4.3.8: Percentage of satisfaction by complex groups of kitchen ventilation.

Kitchen subgroup. The respondents were satisfied with the design of the kitchen (mean varying 3.59-3.96). However, in both complex groups overall satisfaction was much lower with kitchen ventilation. It was evident from the Figure 4.3.8 that in high & mid- rises only 48% were satisfied, 22% showed mixed feelings and the rest (29%) showed dissatisfaction. In low-rise complexes the discontent with kitchen ventilation was much higher. 40% were satisfied or highly satisfied, while almost the same proportion (39%) were dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied.

Discussion. Satisfaction with kitchen ventilation in low-rise complexes is the only variable to drop below to the mean of 3, the lowest among the 24 variables tested here. The high-rise and mid-rise complexes appear to do better. The possible reasons for ventilation problems were discussed earlier.

Bedroom subgroup. Mean scores for bedroom size and built-in wardrobes were higher than 3.5. Bedroom natural daylight means scores were well above 4, which indicated very high satisfaction. Comfortable condition (summer) and comfortable condition (winter), have mean scores close to 3.5 or lower.

Chapter 4 | 234

Figure 4.3.9: Percentage of satisfaction by complex groups of bedroom comfortable conditions.

In both complex groups, conditions in summer were causing discontent to 24-30% of respondents, while 13-23% tended to show mixed feeling. In both groups 53-57% were either satisfied or highly satisfied.

Conditions in winter were also causing discomfort but to a lesser degree. 11-17% of the respondents were dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied with the conditions in winter, while 22-26% tended to show mixed feeling. 61-64% were either satisfied or highly satisfied.

Discussion. Respondents from both complex groups seem to experience discontent with summer conditions in bedrooms. Clearly, more needs to be done by designers to lessen the effect of climate (and hence energy use) on dwellings, since the major effort in this Victoria Park development is on passive design and sustainable features. Yet, if taken into consideration that almost three quarters of respondents were not displeased with summer conditions in living and dining spaces, the extent of the successful application of design features would then be apparent.

Balcony subgroup. Responses concerning the variables of adequate space, and safety were well above 3.5.

With protection from sun/rain in balcony, 55-65% were either satisfied or highly satisfied while on the other hand 19-25% were dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied. 16-20% tend to show mixed feeling. If combined 45-35% of respondents showed concern for better protection from sun/rain in balcony in complex groups.

Balcony privacy mean scores were comparatively smaller for low-rise complexes than high and mid-rise complexes (Low-rise, M= 3.51; high & mid-rise, M= 3.72).However even though it did not fall below the threshold of 3.5, balcony privacy was investigated

Chapter 4 | 235 since it is a very important aspect of apartment dwelling. The difference was not significant, the effect size however was within the minimum guidelines (eta- squared=.010). In the low-rise complexes, 17% respondents were either dissatisfied or completely dissatisfied compared to 13% in high-rise and mid-rise complexes. 59% of the low-rise respondents were either satisfied or highly satisfied compared to 69% of respondents of the high and mid-rise.

Figure 4.3.10: Percentage of satisfaction by complex groups of kitchen ventilation.

Discussion. Overall in this subgroup, the mean satisfaction was above 3.5. In Victoria Park all dwellings consistently have living-dining areas opening out to a balcony. Balconies vary, with different shapes and sizes. The balustrade design also varies with some providing transparency or solidity thereby affecting both privacy and security protection. Connectivity with outside is also determined by the design of the balconies. Conceptually, balconies in low-rise complexes were designed to be larger. It was therefore expected that balconies in low-rise complexes would fare better than higher complexes. As explained by architect Turner,

Loggias lend themselves to sites that need solar control and protection...by using them we are able to moderate the impact between external environment and the internal apartment...

In terms of marketing loggia-balconies has become a sought-after aspect of apartment users as a complementary lifestyle aspect…

these sliding louvers allow the loggias to be easily enclosed from the outside world whether you want to shut out the elements or enjoy your privacy...consumers are now routinely asking for this sort of integrated indoor

Chapter 4 | 236 outdoor living space to satisfy their desire for quarter-acre block lifestyle in an apartment space (SMH, 2003).

Protection from sun/rain for high and mid-rise complexes was lower than the 3.5 threshold. Given that high-rise complex balconies are comparatively smaller they offer less protection from natural elements. In addition it was not possible to use additional solar controls in higher floors of high-rise complexes because of wind intensity. However, in mid-rise complexes where the forms are of 8 storeys, the balconies are also larger than high-rise forms. There is possibly higher satisfaction with the balconies in mid-rise complexes.

Balcony privacy was lower in low-rise complexes since all the complexes did not have the additional advantage of sliding louvers that give extra privacy.

4.3.1.5. Shared perceptions across height groups and complex groups

Discussion. Out of 24 aspects of dwelling, only living room view was highly significantly (p<.001, with strong effect size) related to height (Table 4.3.1). Kitchen ventilation and living natural daylight varied but with much lower significance and effect size. Interestingly, all the variations tend to favour the higher floor dwellings. Based on the results we can, however, safely infer that variations between height groups were not sufficiently strong to suggest that lower height or higher height dwelling aspects tend to be more satisfactorily rated.

Similarly in complex groups, only 3 variables out of 24 varied significantly at p<.05 level, with living dining size and overall kitchen design with small-moderate effect size and bedroom size with small effect size (Table 4.3.2). Since the majority of the variations were not significant, we also can safely suggest that neither low-rise complex nor high & mid-rise complexes were rated satisfactorily when dwelling design aspects are considered.

The Figure 4.3.11 graphically illustrates satisfaction of the subgroups across complex groups and height groups. With the mean averages considered, all subgroups of dwelling except kitchen area are above the threshold of 3.5. Contrary to the popular perception that architects are preoccupied with the look or aesthetics, these responses further vindicate the role aware designers play in designing the various functions of a dwelling in higher density developments. Reflecting on the constraints, Bolles Wilson explains in the interview the difficulties generally faced when designing for varied requirements of anonymous users,

Chapter 4 | 237 One cannot design individual appartments for anonymous users. From our experience user requirements are highly standardised in Australia. Fridge size - number of bedrooms - amount of storage per apartment. I would like to believe that people prefer large open lofts that they can change around but most estate agents disagree.

Very tight and often revised parameters - the market is a hard task master. This was an enlightened client - nevertheless no one pays for irresponsible architecture - we never got away with it.

Kitchen subgroup discontent may be an expression of excessive control on architects where they may have limited freedom to explore design solutions. On the other hand in overall dwelling design subgroup (which includes layout and space use of the building) there was approval of the design schemes taken by architects. This indicates even within the limitations, architects if they are aware of users, are able to come up with creative solutions which tend to elicit greater approval among residents. Subgroup of living &dining, bedroom, balcony means were above 3.5, indicating approval on the variables included. However, individual variables which were below the threshold need attention, generally.

Evidently, kitchen subgroup was the lowest appreciated. Kitchens play an important role in the design of a dwelling. Kitchens, along with living dining spaces, have gone through transformations over time. However, it was anticipated that kitchens might be a source of discontent because living dining space are normally given more priority in apartment designs. This is also reflected in the sales brochures, where kitchens are seldom illustrated compared to living spaces. As stated,

...although work - and more diverse and complex work - is probably carried on in the kitchen than anywhere else in the home, architects and builders often relegate this room to postage-stamp size as their first line of attack against space problems (Mack, 1988: 58).

Interestingly, attitudes towards design aspects of the kitchens were found to be favourable. Contrary to that myopic thinking, here the architects probably have worked out the functionality and design requirements for apartment dwelling. Aspects like sufficient spaces for appliances, washing area, and cooking area appear to be working out for the majority of respondents. It must be understood that cooking is a source of aroma or odour, as well as generating heat from appliances in the kitchen, which was probably not seen as important aspects by the architects. Over time, when residents

Chapter 4 | 238 start using the kitchen, ventilation clearly becomes a source of displeasure - as this response to the variable indicates.

Within the living & dining and bedroom subgroups conditions in summer and conditions in winter and daylight are included. These were directly related to passive design features that had been extensively pursued in the SEPP 65, and in the Victoria Park Built Form Design Quality Objectives. The actual response rates were discussed earlier in detail, but given the importance of the issue it is once again elaborated, since the response were equally pervasive across groups.

Here across the groups almost 20-30% of the respondents were discontented with the conditions in summer and winter. The residents in these dwellings are prohibited from using air-conditioners which may also have an impact on comfort level thereby generating displeasure in summer conditions.

The urban reality of the cities along with population affluence and expectations challenge the passive ideals of design approaches (Soebarto, 1999). Therefore having higher satisfaction solely on passive approaches would seem too ambitious in the context of Victoria Park design. However, taken into consideration that almost 70% of respondents across the complex were not unsatisfied with summer conditions in the living and dining space, a successful application of passive design features is apparent.

Thermal comfort is the subject of a vast literature. As classically understood, thermal comfort includes: air temperature and temperature gradients, radiant temperature, air movement, ambient water vapour pressure, amount of clothing worn by the occupants, and levels of activity (Thomas, 2006). These however were not the subject of this work but the subjective response of overall comfort conditions - which was possibly affected by these and other factors - was elicited from users. Other factors influencing general comfort are light levels, the amount of noise and presence of odours. Individuals are also affected by such psychological factors as having a pleasant view, and having some control of their environment. Long before our understanding of comfort conditions Vitruvius (around 30 BC) wrote of the need of passive environmental controls through design,

...seek healthiness in laying out the walls of the city...will be rightly laid if the winds are carefully shut out from the alleys. For if the winds are cold they are unpleasant...(cited in Thomas, 2006: 54)

Chapter 4 | 239 Passive design therefore involves a consideration of the building’s shape and form and relationship with the climate, decisions typically made early in the design process as done in Victoria Park designs. Yeang (1999) suggests that a passive building responds through form, orientation, detail or system to its climate in a manner that either counters its negative climatic attributes or utilises positive ones, without consuming energy in the process. Architects were always conscious about the orientation and formal aspects of the design here in Victoria Park. As noted by the architects in the interview Bolles Wilson, ‘south facing apartments are of course inadvisable in Australia’ and by Kevin Driver,

As many of the buildings are slimline and many of the units are dual aspect it is relatively rare that units face in a single direction (certainly never just south). Solar shading is always considered especially to west and north and treatments are incorporated such as overhangs, balconies, sunhoods, shutters or helioscreens to temper the glare and solar gain.

Again some of the forms here do not have features of manually adjustable louvers that can be manipulated which may have neutralised the summer heat to some extent. In all the apartments the living/dining space was not directly exposed to the summer sun since the designs have balconies. Apparently, though, responses suggest that the design approach of shielding via balconies from summer sun was not enough.

The balcony shapes were also as factor. Deep balconies were more successful in blocking sun whereas linear ones failed to some extent. Moreover, the height of the building also becomes important; dwellings in higher buildings were always more exposed to the sun and wind than their lower counterparts of low-rise and mid-rise.

Below, are the results of T-tests (Table 4.3.1 & 4.3.2) and a graph (Figure 4.3.11) illustrating the shared perceptions.

Chapter 4 | 240 Table 4.3.1: T-test results, relationship between dwelling height typology with satisfaction of aspects of dwelling design

Chapter 4 | 241 Table 4.3.2: T-test results, relationship between dwelling complex typology with satisfaction of aspects of dwelling design

Chapter 4 | 242 Figure 4.3.11: Overview of perceptions across the subgroups of dwelling aspects by complex groups and height groups.

Mean scores of satisfaction on left shows difference between height groups. On the right the difference between the complex groups are shown. Yellow region indicates satisfactions below the threshold margin indicating concern areas. The threshold means score of 3.5 is however, well above the neutral means score of 3. Response categories for all variables were: 1 (completely dissatisfied), 2 (dissatisfied), 3 (mixed feelings), 4 (satisfied), and 5 (highly satisfied).

Chapter 4 | 242-i Figure 4.3.12: Similarity of internal Bottom. Plans of a two level apartment in the Airia, a low-rise complex layout, crossover scheme of Le in the Victoria Park. It has close similarity in layout arrangements with Corbusier’s Unité d'Habitation Corbusier’s scheme as above. The linear plan of the apartment also apartment with the Airia in the Victoria features crossover natural ventilation and has day light coming in from Park. both ends. Source: Kevin Driver, Turner + Associates, 2006. Top. Axonometric sketch of interior spaces of a two storeyed apartment in Bottom right. Airia, a view from the street. The formal feature was a Le Corbusier’s Unité d'Habitation. The materialisation of the garden apartment scheme. Here the apartments functions of living, dining and kitchen were set in a perimeter block formation, having no resemblance with has been grouped in a open plan in the Corbusian formal ideals. However, the concept of double height of lower level, while more private function balcony is to some extent is borrowed. The units are known as slimline of bedrooms are grouped in the upper dual aspect. level. Cross over ventilation was made possible in this scheme. The apartment Bottom. A layout scheme of an under construction mid-rise complex, is directly exposed to exterior on both Prominence in the Victoria Park, seen in a small model and in a real sides. The two levels on left are lighted scale demonstration apartment mock up as a part of marketing Source: by a double height balcony. Fieldwork, 2007.

Chapter 4 | 242-ii 4.3.2. View aspects - preferences & impact of view types The previous section has shown that there is significant difference between satisfaction with views from dwellings in lower floors and in higher floors. This section further explores the preference and satisfaction with various types of views especially those blended with greenery. Residents were questioned on the type of views they would prefer (ideally) from their dwelling. These categories were constructed from the literature, heuristic experience and from advertisements for the apartments. It is important to note that the views from living rooms are afforded through the balcony, since all dwellings have balconies in front of living spaces.

Interestingly, the findings indicate, in contrast to various theoretical studies, that park or street activities were the least preferred among view type preferences, amongst these residents, at least. Ideally, greenery clearly appears to be the most preferred view aspect. Natural content contributed substantially and differentially to resident’s satisfactions with nature and with their neighbourhood. In the context of their current dwelling in Victoria Park, the highest satisfaction was derived from greenery, then city view and greenery mixed with buildings. Views of built elements without greenery were overwhelmingly disliked, indicating a possible difference between the lifestyle aspirations of inner urbanites in Victoria Park from those in the CBD, where understandably there is less greenery.

4.3.2.1. Preferences of views

Analysis Results. Responses on the type of views the residents would prefer from their dwelling are hierarchically illustrated by the graph (Figure 4.3.2.1). In the questionnaire, residents marked the types of views they would normally prefer, and could select more than one view type.

Of different types of views, overwhelmingly 78% of the respondents showed a preference for greenery. 74% showed preferences for faraway views. Ocean view was the third preference with 60% selecting this category. A city view was preferred by 50%.

Chapter 4 | 243 Figure 4.3.2.1: Preferred views from dwelling.

Discussion. Almost all of the residents (95%) have preferences for various views since only 5% indicated that they have no preference for a view. This signifies the importance people attach to views from dwellings in higher density residential environments.

The category Activity on park or street was taken up from Jane Jacobs’s (1961) seminal work where she advocated dense, mixed-use neighbourhoods and frequently cited New York City's Greenwich Village as an example of a vibrant urban community. Also to improve the feeling of security in an area she proposed to get more ‘eyes on the street’ (a well-known phrase from Death and Life of Great American Cities).

... there must be eyes upon the street, eyes belonging to those we might call the natural proprietors of the street...

...Nobody enjoys sitting on a stoop or looking out a window at an empty street... Large numbers of people entertain themselves, off and on, by watching street activity (Jacobs, 1961: 36-37).

Contrary to Jacobs observations only a small group (12%) of residents here preferred to watch activities on street. However, she based her observation on a dense inner neighbourhood which obviously varied from Sydney inner areas that possibly offered a greater variety of enjoyable view options than ‘empty streets’. Jacobs also argues that wealthy people do not make good ‘eyes on the street’, which implies that the socio- economic composition may have an effect on the surveillability.

Chapter 4 | 244 On the other hand, as the following sections reveal, residents here are using the balcony spaces more for a greater variety of uses, which indirectly implies that there were also ‘eyes on the street’ and on open spaces while they were enjoying other activities on the balconies. Jacobs contention was, however, to foster a safe neighbourhood, which appears to have been achieved here.

The other categories of views: greenery, central city views and ocean views - very often illustrated in developers/agents advertisements in Sydney inner area developments have been indicated as preferable by the resident’s as well. It has been well established that Australians have a preference for living in areas near the beach or ocean. As Salt observes, people:

...challenged old thinking and enthusiastically embraced the inner city and the CBD. At the same time, we continue to pursue the aesthetics and ambience of a beach lifestyle (Salt, 2001:26).

The finding of the preferences for views of greenery was also supported by other studies in different residential contexts (Kaplan, 2001; Kearney, 2006). The greenery views, along with uninterrupted views, appear to be the most ideal view among the majority.

4.3.2.2. Impact of view types on levels of satisfaction with views

A one-way between-groups analysis of variance was conducted to explore the impact of view types on the levels of satisfaction of views (from the living room space).

Similar to other satisfaction variables in the questionnaire, the response was measured by 5-point Likert-type scales. The scale for the variable was: 1 (completely dissatisfied), 2 (dissatisfied), 3 (mixed feelings), 4 (satisfied), and 5 (highly satisfied).

Views were divided into three broad groups:

1. Building surrounds or street view. 2. Greenery blended with building or city view, 3. Greenery or city view. In the questionnaire, in the other category, respondents’ answers (open-ended) yielded the view types of greenery blended with building or city view and street view. Building surrounds or street view which had no greenery was combined in one group. It was

Chapter 4 | 245 anticipated that view of greenery or city view would give very much higher satisfaction than other view types and thus these two were placed in one group.

Figure 4.3.2.2: Means plot of view satisfaction showing difference between view types.

Analysis & results. The one-way between-groups analysis of variance indicated that there was very significant difference at the p<.001 level for the three groups (F (2), 161=30.939, p=.000). The effect size, calculated using eta squared was .278. The resulting eta squared was well above the large effect. In Cohen’s (Pallant, 2005: 209) terms 0.14 would be considered as a large effect, meaning the difference was robust.

Post-hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD test indicated that the mean score for group 1, building surrounds and street view (M= 2.957, SD=.977) was significantly different from group 2, greenery mixed with building or city view (M= 4.132, SD=.790) and from group 3, greenery or city view (M= 4.184, SD=.905). However, Group 2 did not differ significantly from group 3.

In the above means plot (Figure 4.3.2.2) the results are further elucidated. If we compare the mean scores from different groups, it can be observed clearly that there is substantial difference between group 1 and the other groups. Group 1 building surrounds and street view recorded the lowest mean score, while the other groups, greenery mixed with building or city view recorded second highest and greenery or city view recorded the highest score. Group 2 did not differ appreciably from group 3.

Chapter 4 | 246 Discussion. Building or street view is clearly a disliked aspect of view (Figure 4.3.2.2). However, it does provide opportunity for surveillability of the street, which means having eyes in public spaces. City view, greenery or greenery mixed buildings are strongly favoured by respondents. Only 29% of the residents are exposed to hard barren views of streets or buildings (Figure 4.3.2.3). Understandably lower floors of all the complexes tend to have more views to the streets or surrounding buildings.

Figure 4.3.2.3: Percentage of responses by view types.

On the other hand, greenness of the overall precinct is highlighted here, as indicated by responses from over two-thirds of the residents. Having green in outdoor spaces, street with trees and courtyards with greenery softens the hard views and probably contributes to the higher satisfaction. In some way, as indicated by the majority of the respondents, building designs appear to take have taken advantage of the view aspects.

The interviews brought out that architects have been well aware that ‘views’ are a sought-after and vital liveability feature, often marketed as a major attraction adding to the saleability of dwellings in higher density residential neighbourhoods. The interviews, revealed,

... (Victoria Park) has amazing views in all directions. Marketing tends to focus on the views of the city, but units that have aspects that include the south are more likely to be snapped up on completion as people soon realise that views towards Botany Bay are equally attractive. Also Victoria Park is unusual in the quantity of green space available. Note the western facade of Nova where the

Chapter 4 | 247 upper level units are skewed to the north to avail of views not only to the city but also to Tote Park ( Kevin Driver).

Architects can only provide the opportunity for specific behaviour, it depends on users to decode the intended meaning, in their experiencing of the environment.

In a higher density residential development, providing views is a complicated design exercise. With views, the issue of privacy also comes into question. In an earlier section privacy was shown to be satisfactory across both height and complex situations. Major decisions concerning the provision of greenery are normally taken at master plan level. However, architects of individual complexes in Victoria Park have their own design ideas on ways to integrate buildings with green elements. Overall, the responses from the users indicate that architects have successfully managed to take advantage of the greenery aspect.

4.3.3. Balcony aspects - activities & use All dwellings in Victoria Park have a common feature: every apartment has a balcony. However, the size, shape, type of protection from natural elements and privacy (or transparency) provided in designs varied from complex to complex. The elevation or exterior view of the built forms is here to a great extent articulated by the design of balconies.

In Victoria Park, architects, instead of providing a non-functional balcony, designed larger usable balcony spaces in various complexes. In many instances these are denoted as outdoor spaces instead of balconies. Architect Chris Johnson conjectures that the outdoor space which can be turned into gardens can fulfil the residents’ need for separate green space as in suburban detached houses (Johnson & Gerada, 2003).

Another approach is the loggia which was used in the bridging of interior and exterior spaces in early European buildings and is now reinvented and transformed to fit apartment dwellings in Australia. These larger balcony spaces are also called loggias for marketing proposes by developers and real estate agents (SMH, 2003).

Users are not passive receptacles experiencing the built environment statically. The user’s experience of the environment is itself transformed by the activities they perform in that environment; it is in fact a continuing process of transformation. Many unpredicted activities can be performed in balconies which the designer has not

Chapter 4 | 248 necessarily foreseen, as has been observed in the fieldwork. Assessing the type of activities and the frequency of actual use of balcony space is one objective of this study - as an indicator of liveability. With the increasing importance attached to balconies, it was necessary to revisit the aspects of balcony, in addition to the degrees of satisfaction that have been covered in the last section.

The findings were:

Balcony space emerges as a multi-purpose outdoor area within the dwelling. Above half (52-71 %) of the respondents indicated that the balcony is used for various types of enjoyable purposes.

The balcony space was extensively used across height groups and complex groups.

In the louvre use, floor-groups varied significantly, with higher floor residents utilizing the operable device more than the lower floors. However, the overall majority of the residents were using the device, with varying regularity, which indicates to some extent its successful utilization as an environmental control and lifestyle device.

4.3.3.1. Balcony aspects - activities

Respondents were asked to indicate the activities they prefer doing on the balcony. They had the option to select more than one type of activity. The responses are shown in the graph (Figure 4.3.3.1).

The categories were selected from fieldwork observations and my heuristic experience as a professional architect. It was clear that in a higher density living situation, the only connection with the outdoor environment was possible through the balcony. Various activities were anticipated beforehand, but the hierarchy of preferences were unknown.

In addition to enjoying the view or fresh air (71%), using the balcony as an outdoor space for sitting or having a BBQ was popular amongst the residents. Growing plants was also one of the liked activities (62%). Almost half (48%) of the residents used the balcony as a clothes drying area.

Chapter 4 | 249 Figure 4.3.3.1: Balcony activities.

Discussion. Overall, it is interesting to note how the balcony space emerges as a multi- purpose outdoor area within the dwelling as envisaged by designs of architects. Architects here not only see it as a single element of dwelling design but as integral part of the larger setting.

There is a hierarchy of outdoor space that starts with the private balcony, to semi public courtyard to public parks (Kevin Driver, Interview).

Since a majority indicated that they appreciate outdoor sitting or come out to enjoy the view/fresh air, associated design aspects may be considered to be important factors in higher density dwelling satisfactions. In the category Other Activities on the balcony creative improvisation of use by respondents was indicated. This included: children play area, pets area, outdoor entertainment for guests/friends, reading and smoking. On the other hand, less than half use this space for the utilitarian purpose of clothes drying or temporary storage, indicating again that it is seen more as a premium space for outdoor enjoyment. Also, it represents the front face of the dwelling, with associated self-imagery projections.

The varied activities also augment the potential presence of people on balconies which indirectly helps make the surrounding parks and streets surveillable throughout the day, and even at night, thus fostering a safer neighbourhood. During the fieldwork, when walking through the precinct a constant feeling of being discreetly watched was felt, even though not many people were seen on the balconies.

Undoubtedly the architects involved in the designs were very conscious of the balcony space and indicated these to be a ‘crucial’ element (Peter Tonkin, Interview).

Chapter 4 | 250 Loved balconies are well tended, vertical gardens - unloved balconies collect satellite dishes and air conditioners. (Bolles Wilson)

Chris Johson in the interview however cautioned against having balconies on higher floors, since wind conditions, especially near Sydney harbour, makes them less usable. However, the highest floor in Victoria Park was only 20 storeys, which is quite low compared to the high-rise residential towers (around 40 storeys) in the CBD.

Certainly projects like World square - a very tall building - do not have balconies. Or even Norman Foster’s building next to the town hall and St Andrews Cathedral, generally does not have balconies.

Nonetheless, survey responses also indicate that users (almost half) tend to use the space for inconspicuous clothes drying, by using low height drying rails which are not fully visible. There is however a restriction imposed from the management on drying clothes on the balcony which are visible above the railing level (Landcom, 2003: 8). This can be interpreted as both or either sustainable and economic behaviour since electric dryers consume high amounts of energy. As reported by the California Energy Commission, a clothes dryer is typically the second-biggest electricity-using appliance after the refrigerator (California Energy Commission, 2010). According to DOE EIA (USA) statistics from 2001, in the US refrigerators consumed the most electricity (14 percent of total electricity use for all purposes), followed by lighting (9 percent), clothes dryers (6 percent), freezers (3 percent), and colour TV’s (3 percent) (Department of Energy (USA) 2009). In Australia, EnergyAustralia indicates that the clothes drying figure is relatively low because most residents already have good habits in the laundry, washing in cold water (around 70%), and mainly using the clothes dryer as a backup in wet weather (EnergyAustralia, 2010). In the interview architects here affirm that design decisions on the balcony shape, size, or the level of transparency of balustrade are not trivial matters but have wider implications for liveability and sustainability as indicated in the survey. As posited,

...much debate occurs as to whether the balustrade should be solid or glass. The former hides potential clutter from those outside the building and offers privacy, while the latter offers views down into parks. Ultimately each building has a range of both of these for choice and to enable the design of the exterior to be driven sometimes by both interior demands and the external presence given by the building at an urban level.

and,

Chapter 4 | 251 ...different treatments to balconies, wall planes and windows can therefore make a composition that responds directly to the context, be it street, plaza or park (Kevin Driver, Interview).

4.3.3.2. Balcony use and relationship with dwelling height or complex type

Although the balcony is an important element included in all dwellings in Victoria Park, the design, shape and size vary with height and complex types. Balconies are used for various functions but how often the residents in a higher density setting tend to use balconies is ascertained here.

Balconies with a deep design automatically serve to protect the space from exposure to the natural elements works as a climate control device. In some complexes, moreover, architects used movable shading devices or operable louvers on east and west facades to control natural climatic elements. On the other, the louvres could also function as privacy controlling device for balconies on lower floors. Since this is a fairly new design element - which is gaining popularity among designers in Australia and Sydney, its desirability or effectiveness with users in various complexes and heights was therefore considered very important to gauge in the research.

Independent-sample t-tests were conducted to compare the balcony use and operable device use scores (means) for lower floors and higher floors and complex types. Responses of rate of recurrence were measured by 5-point Likert-type scales. The categories for the two variables were: 1 (hardly ever), 2 (sometimes), 3 (mixed), 4 (almost everyday), and 5 (everyday). 1 was considered lowest use while 5 was seen as maximum use.

Chapter 4 | 252 Figure 4.3.3.2: Balcony use by height groups.

Figure 4.3.3.3: Louvre use in balcony by height groups.

Analysis & results: Impact of dwelling height. The results of independent-sample t- tests of balcony use and louvre use were as follows:

The tests indicated that balcony use scores were not significantly different for lower floors (M=3.63, SD=1.192) and higher floors (M=3.90, SD=1.074, t(162)= -1.367, p=.173).

Scores for louvre use in balcony for lower floors (M=2.32, SD=1.466) and higher floors (M=3.32, SD=1.519, t(78)= -2.775, p=.007) were significantly different at p<.05 level. The magnitude of the differences in the means was moderate to large (eta- squared=.090). Expressed as a percentage (multiplying eta square by 100) 9% of the variance in louvre use in the balcony was explained by height.

In the louvre use in balcony, means below 3.5 were further investigated as illustrated by the graphs (Figure 4.3.3.3) showing percentage of responses in each rate of recurrence.

The low mean for both groups meant that the controlling device was used less frequently. It is clear that two-thirds (66%) of survey respondents living on lower floors rarely used the mechanical device compared to one-third of residents living on higher floors. On the other hand, 56% of higher floor residents used the devices frequently compared to 28% of lower floor residents. In low-rise complexes 42% respondents use it rarely.

Chapter 4 | 253 Discussion. No significant variation was observed in balcony use between respondents of higher floor or lower floors. Overall across the height groups (Figure 4.3.5) the balcony was extensively used (above 60% were regular user) with only a very small percentage (2-5 %) indicating rarely using the space.

In both groups the mean score was above 3.5, which indicates higher usage. However, the mean score of 5-18 floors (M=3.90) was a little higher than for the 0-4 floors (M=3.63), which meant residents in higher floors tend to use the balcony more than lower floors (Figure 4.3.3.2).This could relate to the self-evident fact that the higher one lives the further away from the ground one is, and so access to the natural environment diminishes proportionally, and outdoor balconies would be likely to be used more frequently, in compensation.

In louvre use floor groups varied significantly, with higher floor residents utilizing the operable device more than the lower floors. Evidently the graph shows (see Figure 4.3.3.3) a reverse pattern of use between the height groups. One possible reason for the variation in louvre use is that the higher floors were exposed more to the sun because of the height, where sunlight can reach even when at a low angle in the sky. In addition, lower floors have the advantage of trees blocking the sun. However, an overall majority (60-80%) of the residents were using the device with varying regularity, which indicates to some extent it’s utilization in blocking the sun.

Analysis & results: Impact of complex types. The independent-samples t-tests which were conducted to compare the balcony use and operable device use scores (means) for complex types, indicated that there was no significant difference in scores.

The results were as follows:

Balcony use scores was not significantly different for low-rise complexes (M=3.59, SD=1.459) and high & mid-rise complexes (M=3.82, SD= 1.253, t(162)= -1.270, p=.173). Levene’s test indicated unequal variances (F= 3.937, p= .049) so degrees of freedom were adjusted from 162 to 146.

Louvre use in balcony was not significantly different for low-rise complexes (M=2.39, SD= 1.459) and high & mid-rise complexes (M=2.84, SD= 1.598, t(78)= -1.308, p=.195).

Chapter 4 | 254 Figure 4.3.3.4: Balcony use by complex groups.

Figure 4.3.3.5: Louvre use in balcony by complex groups.

Both groups were further investigated as illustrated by the graphs in Figure 4.3.3.4 & Figure 4.3.3.5. Balcony use frequency was clearly higher in both complex groups. Louvre use in balcony, means were low for the two groups. The means indicate more use by the controlling device in higher rise complexes than in the low-rise complexes, but the difference was not statistically significant. The graphs (Figure 4.3.3.5) indicate that 43% of high & mid-rise complex respondents tend to use the devices either almost everyday or everyday, while only 28% low-rise complex respondents tend to use it at the same frequency. Over one-third of respondents use it rarely in both the groups.

Chapter 4 | 255 Discussion. Balconies were used at almost similar frequency in low-rise complexes and high & mid-rise complexes, since the mean scores were not significantly different. In both groups the mean score was above 3.5, which indicated higher usage (almost everyday) across groups. However, the graphs (Figure 4.3.3.4) indicate that high and mid-rise complex residents tend to use it more than low-rise groups.

In the louvre use complex groups did not vary significantly (Figure 4.3.3.5). Overall a majority (above 60%) of the residents were using the device in varying frequencies. This could perhaps reflect the responsiveness of the residents in controlling the environmental aspects.

Chapter 4 | 256 Figure 4.3.3.6: Various types of movable devices are used for environmental control in the balconies. The devices are used in the Low-rise structures and the Mid-rise structures. Bottom, a lower structure of a high-rise complex facing North- West utilises a curtain type device for blocking the afternoon sunlight. The two photos on different days in the late afternoon show the use variations with varying intensity of sun light. Source: Rashid, 2006.

Chapter 4 | 256-i 4.4. Environmental experiences of outdoor spaces – results, analysis & discussion

The initial observations reveal the open green spaces as a central concept in the master plan. In the regression analysis outdoor space has been one of the predictors of overall satisfaction with the dwelling setting. It merits investigation in a separate section. Past studies (see literature review) have indicated strong connections with well being of users and satisfaction of dwelling environments with outdoor space and greenery. If residents use outdoor spaces frequently, this is taken to indicate the functionality of the design, and a vindication that these spaces have ‘served their purpose’.

The results here indicate that irrespective of the building forms or complex types, residents strongly appreciated the importance of having outdoor green open spaces of parks and courts.

Overall, in the height groups and the building complex groups, users were highly satisfied with the parks. Regarding courts, higher floor users tend to be less satisfied. But again they were not dissatisfied with the courts. In general the satisfaction means across groups for courts were much lower than for the park. Regarding Environmental Fit (EF) there appears to be congruence between importance and satisfaction in user perception of the utility of both parks and courts.

4.4.1. Evaluation of environmental experience The Environmental experience evaluation technique is an elaboration on questionnaires which inquire only about satisfaction, or only about preference or importance (Ballinger & Samuels, 1991; Samuels & Ballinger, 1989; Samuels & Ballinger, 1992). It is of little meaning to know that an individual or group is satisfied with an issue when the issue might be or little relevance to them. Similarly, to know that an issue is important without knowing if the same individuals are satisfied with environmental provisions relating to that issue, is to understand only half of the situation as experienced by users. However, importance is not ascertained in all circumstances. It would be quite superfluous to ask about the importance of dwelling spaces (e.g. living-dining, bedroom, balcony etc.) since this is self-evidently pre- established.

Chapter 4 | 257 This section deals with environmental experiences of respondents with outdoor spaces of parks and courts in the precinct. It is hypothesized that user’s preferences, attitudes and expectations, would be reflected in their importance estimations. The rating scales applied are 5-point scales with a central point representing a ‘Mixed feelings’ evaluation which is similar to a ‘neither/nor’ or ‘neutral’ evaluation. This technique allows for respondents to be unsure about their satisfaction or the importance of a specific issue. It is not equivalent to ‘Not Applicable’, which allows a respondent to have no opinion, or no experience regarding an issue and not force them to answer spuriously on the scales.

Responses of rate of recurrence (use) were also measured by 5-point Likert-type scales.

The Environment Fit (EF) calculation was then generated, as a measure of the congruence between importance and satisfaction, for each variable, and on average (mean, M). Individual variables was evaluated and compared – and each group was then evaluated relative to each other, on any number of items, or overall.

4.4.1.1. Importance of parks and court

The respondents were asked how essential were the parks and the court to all the members of dwelling? Irrespective of where they live, almost everyone (combined 97%; 72% very important; 25% important) felt parks were essential to them and to other members in their dwelling.

In comparison to the parks the response to courts was a little lower but clearly shows the importance attached as well. Regarding the internal court in their respective complexes 84% indicated its essentialness (42% very important; 41% important). 9% had mixed feeling, and only 7% found courts to be not important.

The means graph reveals that the importance (imp) mean scores for parks and courts did not differ much among floor groups. Although importance attached to parks was much higher than importance in courts, the mean scores for court importance were well above 4.

4.4.1.2. Satisfaction of parks & court - relationship with height & complex groups

Dwelling height. Independent-samples t-tests were conducted to compare the satisfaction with parks and court mean scores for the floor groups.

Chapter 4 | 258 There was no significant difference in park satisfaction scores for lower floor s(M=4.30, SD=.690) and higher floors (M=4.36, SD=.776, t(162)=-.507, p=.613).

Satisfaction scores for courts did not differ significantly for lower floors (M=3.79, SD= 1.004) and higher floors (M=3.54, SD=1.034, t(161)= 1.439, p= .152). The magnitude of the differences was defined as being small (eta-squared=.013). Even though the difference was not significant, the effect size was within the minimum guidelines (proposed by Cohen, 1988, cited in Pallant, 2005: 209).

Building Complex type. To compare the satisfaction with parks and court mean scores in relation to complex groups, independent-samples t-tests were conducted. The tests reveal:

There was no significant difference in park satisfaction scores for low-rise complexes (M=4.40, SD=.637) and high & mid-rise complexes (M=4.25, SD= .773, t(162)= 1.366, p=.174). The magnitude of the differences was small (eta- squared=.011).

Satisfaction scores for court also did not differ significantly different for low-rise (M=3.81, SD=.961) and higher & mid-rise (M=3.63, SD= 1.059, t(161)= 1.136, p= .257).

The means graphs shows that court satisfaction scores were much lower that park satisfaction scores. In both the graphs the park scores were well above 4, indicating very higher satisfaction with the parks.

Figure 4.4.1: Parks & court - satisfaction by height groups.

Chapter 4 | 259 Figure 4.4.2: Parks & courts - satisfaction by complex groups.

In the response categories it was observed that almost a quarter of respondents tend to indicate mixed feeling re satisfaction with courts (both height groups & complex groups). This shows that a portion of respondents remained neutral regarding the satisfaction of courts. What's more, the proportion of responses for court dissatisfaction and complete dissatisfaction was immediately obvious, when compared to park dissatisfaction, which was negligible.

4.4.1.3. Use of parks and court – relationship with the height & complex groups

Dwelling height. Park and court use variables did not differ significantly by the height groups. T-tests indicate:

Park use was not significantly different for lower floors (M=3.28, SD= 1.374) and higher floors (M=3.14, SD= 1.262, t(163)= .609, p= .544).

There was also no significant difference in court use for lower floors (M=2.33, SD= 1.262) and higher floors (M=2.30, SD= 1.015, t(163)=.151, p=.880).

Though statistically not significant the differences of use between height groups were noticeable in some use frequency categories in the graphs (see, sometimes category, Figure 4.4.4).

Complex type. The t-tests indicated that park and court use variables did not differ significantly by the complex groups.

Chapter 4 | 260 Scores for park use was not significantly different for low-rise (M=3.34, SD= 1.419) and high & mid-rise (M=3.15, SD= 1.266, t(163)= .937, p=.350).

Court use was not significantly different for low-rise (M=2.17, SD= 1.215) and high & mid-rise (M=2.45, SD= 1.158, t(163)= -1.504, p=.134). The magnitude of the differences in the means was noticeable but small (eta-squared=.014). Expressed as percentage, 1.4 %, of the variance in court was explained by complex types.

Though statistically not significant the differences in use between complex groups were noticeable in some frequency categories (Figure 4.4.5). Within two complex groups respondents in low-rise forms tend to use parks more than respondents living in high & mid-rise complexes. Respondents in low-rises tend to use parks more frequently (regularly) than high & mid-rise respondents. However, 27% of high & mid-rise complex respondents tend to use parks at least once a week, which was almost twice the rate of low-rise.

Figure 4.4.3: Use of parks & courts by height groups.

Figure 4.4.4: Use of parks & courts by complex groups.

Chapter 4 | 261 Overall, the means for court use were much lower than for park use. Comparing park and court use (Figures 4.4.3 & 4.4.4), it was observed:

Respondents numbers indicating ‘never use’ were higher for courts than for parks. Less than one-tenth never use the parks. 18-29% indicated ‘not using the courts at all while only 4-7% indicated ‘never being in the parks’. On the other hand respondents who indicated using the parks on a regular basis were four times more when compared to regular users of courts. Only 4 - 9% were regular court users while 22- 35% were regular park users.

Discussion. Overall, park use clearly has a higher frequency of use than courts. As observed in the systematic observation courts were not designed to accommodate different type of activities. Probably, having a large park nearby also may have contributed to this low use.

4.4.1.4. Environmental Fit (EF) - relationship with the height & complex groups

The rationale and scoring system applied in the environmental fit (EF) analysis was described earlier in detail (see methodology). In this section congruencies (EF) for each response were calculated, summed and averaged. A few important calculation points follow:

The meaningfulness of EF evaluations lies in scoring each response to each item by Imp and its association Sat response.

Only items estimated as important (imp=4,5) are taken into consideration (where imp <3, the EF analysis records NAP). Satisfaction cannot be greater than importance (Where satisfaction > importance, the EF analysis records NAP). The total EF score was thus divided by the number of valid scores, not the total number of scores. Some distortion could eventuate as a result.

EF should be seen as the measure of congruence of valid scores only. EF scores therefore do not necessarily express overall dissatisfaction or overall importance. Valid responses for EF analysis were for parks N=149 & for courts N=125.

Chapter 4 | 262 Figure 4.4.5: Experience evaluations across groups. Comparative analysis of means, importance, satisfaction & EF. Note, only numbers of valid responses were considered in EF calculations.

The mean scores in the graph (Figure 4.4.5) shows that the Environmental Fit scores for parks were around 4.5 in both height and complex groups. It shows that irrespective of floor level or complex type the overall park EF score indicated tendencies towards best fit.

Chapter 4 | 263 Overall, court EF mean scores were around 4-4.2 (Figure 4.4.5). The result shows that irrespective of floor level or complex type the overall park EF score indicated an inclination towards fit. These scores were much lower if compared to park scores, which merits further investigation into EF score responses.

Independent-samples t-tests were conducted to compare the EF scores of court mean scores for the floor groups. There was no significant difference in court EF scores for lower floors (M=4.23, SD=.961) and higher floors (M=4.03, SD= 1.127, t(123)= 1.033, p= .304).

For the complex groups there was also no significant differences in court EF scores for low-rise (M=4.23, SD=.914) and high & mid-rise complexes (M=4.12, SD= 1.092, t(123)= .636, p= .526).

Figure 4.4.6: EF scores in percentage by height groups.

Figure 4.4.7: EF scores in percentage by complex groups.

Chapter 4 | 264 Figure 4.4.8: Top. View of internal courtyards in low-rise complexes. Middle right & bottom. Courts in mid-rise & high-rise complexes. Observations reveal that all the courts were well lighted naturally and the maintenance was good. Note, the extent of actual use by the residents could not be ascertained, by visual observation. In most cases, landscape designs give an impression that space active use is discouraged. Source: Rashid, 2006.

Chapter 4 | 264-i Figure 4.4.9: Outdoor activities during late afternoon, near the recycled stormwater sculpture in the central park. The project by Jennifer Turpin & Michaelie Crawford won the 2003 Planning NSW Award for design. Source: Rashid, 2006.

Chapter 4 | 264-ii Figure 4.4.10: Lifestyle aspect, residents and their pets enjoying the outdoor spaces which is a common feature in the precinct. Top. Opportunity for social interaction between residents, while exercising their pets. Middle. Residents walking their dogs. Bottom right. Enjoying the view. Source: Rashid, 2006.

Chapter 4 | 264-iii Figure 4.4.11: Outdoor activities indicate presence of families with children in the precinct. Source: Rashid, 2006.

Chapter 4 | 264-iv Figure 4.4.12: BBQ gatherings on weekends, in the southern part of the central park indicate social contact between residents. Since, this is not a gated community, residents from surrounding areas can also enjoy the public facilities. Source: Rashid, 2006.

Chapter 4 | 264-v Reviews of response percentage of EF scores were done to comprehend the relative difference between park and court EF scores (Figure 4.4.6 & 4.4.7). If compared with park EF scores, court scores in mixed and misfit (incongruence) categories were obviously higher (51%).

Discussion. Parks were overwhelmingly rated highly in importance, satisfaction, use & EF scores. Compared to the parks the courts were rated lower in satisfaction, use & EF scores.

Interestingly no significant different was indicated in the satisfaction, use or EF mean scores in the height groups or complex groups. In the interview, the architects elaborated on the issue of scale & zoning of public and private realms:

Internal courtyards are very difficult in high-rise buildings; in low-rise and mid- rise they provide a secure zone - a sort of gated community where residents hopefully interact (Bolles Wilson).

On the environmental issue and its connection to the form:

in courts...sunlight is crucial, and relates to height and scale (Peter Tonkin).

While, regarding the master plan guidelines for perimeter block design around courts:

There is a masterplan in place for the development that gives lots of a particular size and proportion with a tendency towards perimeter block forms. The resulting courtyards can clearly change in character depending on both the depth and height of the buildings around them and the degree to which there are balconies, fenestration, etc. We test a variety of options before a final layout is settled upon and the negative space of the courtyard is as important as the positive forms of the buildings. Clearly overshadowing becomes more critical the higher one builds. The provisions of SEPP 65 and the Residential Flat Design Code are a good basis as a rule of thumb to ensure that buildings do not become too high for the proportion of the courtyards. Also typical in Victoria Park are sight lines into and through the courtyards from the public realm to engender a sense of connectivity (Kevin Driver).

Re: the functional issue of parking space underneath courts:

Chapter 4 | 265 Note that the higher rise lots require more cars and as the water table is very high this tends to push some parking to the ground level with active uses to the perimeter meaning that the courtyard is on a first level podium (Kevin Driver).

Most importantly, the parks in the precinct are seen to be congruent to user needs, avoiding becoming ‘lost spaces’ as is a common tendency in higher density neighbourhoods (Frey, 1999: 87). The utility of the park as a sustainable parameter is once more reinstated, confirming studies that have shown their contribution to both user well being and the ecological sustainability of the city (Chiesura, 2000; Andersson, 2006).

Chapter 4 | 266 4.5. Pro-environment activities - results, analysis, and discussion

4.5.1. Introduction This study is interested in the overall liveability of higher density settlements, wherein lifestyle issues are deemed to be as relevant as direct energy use. In investigating the behavioural changes of people due to in-built design potential, and their attitude in moving to an environmentally sustainably designed settlement of Victoria Park, it delves into whether the morphology is creating conditions and opportunities for the reshaping of lifestyles by the users themselves.

In line with other studies, this research realizes that indirect resource use needs to be calculated at global level (macro), and reasons that no complete benefit can be estimated by calculating energy consumption (from bills) or direct energy use at local level by households alone. The same reasoning can apply to water use or actual amount of recycling. However, being a case study research program, focused on a specific inner city location, these global aspects are naturally beyond its scope.

This section of the study concentrates down onto attitudes & behavioural actions related to energy and water conservation and recycling to the extent that these can be met by users at residential level.

In addition to this, and given the rising concern among Australians regarding different environmental issues (water related issues feature prominently DECC 2006), it similarly inquires about behaviours related to specific energy and water saving actions and devices (e.g. clothes drying, star rated appliances and shower heads). Respondents also assess the extent to which they are satisfied with their pro-environmental activities. It should be noted that only saving energy had some economical benefits, while other activities were mostly considered as activities required by environmentally conscious citizens.

The research reported here measures the importance and the satisfaction of pro- environmental behaviours simultaneously; and gauges overall attitude which could take place and/or be displaced to other indirect pro-environmental behaviours. In sum: it attempts to grasp the extent to which the residents consider sustainable issues while considering the sustainable appropriateness of the designed residential environment.

Chapter 4 | 267 4.5.2. Importance & satisfaction Importance. The respondents were asked how important pro-environmental activities for them and their family members were. The variables were:

to recycle; to save energy; to save water; to reuse water; to notice rating of water appliances; to have star rated appliances; Given the lack of water in the catchment area due to the lack of sufficient rain in the years prior to the survey, water issues were given high importance here.

Regarding energy saving, water saving and recycling, respondents rated these overwhelmingly (91-93%) as either important or very important.. The congregated responses for important or very important were, for having star rated appliances = 83%, performance of water appliances = 90%, and reuse water = 73%.

Figure 4.5.1: Attitudes change since moving to the area.

Attitude. The respondents were asked whether their attitude towards energy & water has changed since living in the Victoria Park precinct.

The majority of residents (78%) indicated that their attitudes were pre-existing.

Figure 4.5.2: Satisfaction of behaviours related to recycling.

Chapter 4 | 268 Figure 4.5.3: Satisfaction of behaviours related to energy saving measures.

Figure 4.5.4: Satisfaction of behaviours related to water saving measures.

Satisfaction. Respondents were asked to estimate their level of satisfaction with recycling, saving energy and saving water.

With recycling, 85 % indicated they either satisfied or highly satisfied, while with saving energy the response was 61% and with saving water 62%. Almost a quarter showed mixed feeling regarding the activities of water saving & energy saving.

4.5.3. Environmental Fit (EF) of pro-environmental behaviour The Environment Fit (EF) is generated, for each variable (Figure 4.5.5, 4.5.6, & 4.5.7).

The significance lies in the percentage scores of highest best fit and the second highest category, fit. Clearly, recycling shows a comparatively higher best fit (58%) while energy saving & water saving measures showed 41%. Another important aspect is the percentage of mixed and misfit categories for energy saving (combined 20%) & water saving measures (23%) compared to recycling, which is only 9%.

Chapter 4 | 269 Figure 4.5.5: EF scores of recycling behaviour in percentage.

Figure 4.5.6: EF scores of energy saving behaviour in percentage.

Figure 4.5.7: EF scores in percentage of water saving behaviour.

Chapter 4 | 270 Discussion. Respondents seem concerned by the environmental problems faced by Australians and globally.

However, it appears from the results that many of the in-built sustainable opportunities that might have encouraged residents to be more proactive were largely not noticed at all. Among these were the hidden state of the art WSUD approach - retaining stormwater through the swale retention system and its re-use for watering the greenery - and maintaining the ecological balance that existed before any urban habitation in these inner areas (Wong, 2006). Environmental approaches taken by Landcom, especially noticeable ones such as irrigating the parks and trees, quite prominently advertised, obviously, did not have any effect on respondent’s perceptions. Moreover, in the individual design schemes,

Environmental strategies underpin all of our work. These considerations are not only better for the wider environment, but directly improve the amenity for residents and encourage physical and social wellbeing. These include appropriate material choice, slimline building forms that allow for cross ventilation (thereby reducing the need for air conditioning), responding to the need for appropriate orientation, stormwater harvesting / filtration / re-use, gas- boosted solar hot water, deep soil planting (to aid water runoff into the aquifer), and solar shading that can incorporate screening for privacy (Interview, Kevin Driver).

The architects are very aware of the importance of sustainable lifestyle which to some extent can be shaped by the design issues of the built environment. As posited,

Sustainable design is politically correct right at this moment. It was not a political issue at the time of the Victoria Park - why? Australia is known internationally as one of the world's most environmentally irresponsible countries. It is good that this has become an issue. Buildings alone cannot solve global problems - our lifestyle is not sustainable (Bolles Wilson).

The educated inner urbanite’s attitude might have been changed by providing information about the sustainable efforts made in the precinct. Moreover, knowledge of these measures taken here could have motivated behavioural changes in the community (Greenfield & Williams, 2008; Lenzen & Smith, 1999). It is clear that more

Chapter 4 | 271 needs to be done to create conditions for the reshaping of lifestyles towards more pro- environmental behaviour (Lund, 1998).

Chapter 4 | 272 Chapter 5 : Conclusions

... This we know. The earth does not belong to man; man belongs to the earth. This we know. All things are connected like the blood which unites one family. All things are connected.

Whatever befalls the earth befalls the sons of the earth. Man did not weave the web of life; He is merely a strand in it. Whatever he does to the web, he does to himself.

(From a speech delivered by Chief Seattle in 1854 when his ancestral lands were transferred to the Government of the USA; cited in Shipman, 1977: 4)

People-environment relations (attitudes, preferences & satisfaction) are multi- dimensional and complex. No single discipline or perspective can understand and explain these relations in a multi family dwelling setting in a comprehensive way. Moreover, the long term liveability of housing, in other words its social sustainability, the focus of this study, is a complex issue which encompasses many aspects at many levels. At the outset of this research, given the exploratory nature of the enquiry, an interdisciplinary methodological approach using multi-methods was therefore deemed to be necessary. The methodological thrust has been essentially on user perceptions. Furthermore, a construction of a multi disciplinary conceptual framework of liveability and sustainability was done prior to the analytic study (See Appendix 1).

This thesis commences by focusing on inner urbanites and their lifestyle aspirations. Then it attempts to comprehend the setting, form of housing and future housing demands in the existing areas of the inner city. Emphasis is put on elucidating the emergence of ideas of ‘good design’, which ultimately became adapted as a sustainable design approach to higher density housing. These aspects of design which through legislation were brought into the development approval procedures have the potential to shape current city form. Critical to the liveability of the dwelling environment, but missing in these approaches were the building occupant’s perspective. Again, no matter how energy and water efficient a building might be, it becomes a waste of resources and potential detriment to the community if the dwelling environment does not provide a satisfactory living experience. Having found evidence for the user perception gap, the three research questions of the thesis emerged:

Chapter 5 | 273 To what extent do the height and building complex design in a higher density inner city residential precinct affect liveability experiences?

Are the sustainably designed aspects of such places also experienced as liveable?

To what extent do designer/architects of the study area consider social sustainability vis-à-vis users in their environmental design intent?

The contribution to knowledge this research offers is to provide in-depth assessments and post-occupancy evaluations elicited from people living in the study precinct buildings (in Victoria Park, Sydney) complemented by an assessment of the intentions of a representative range of designers of the precinct. In other words: indicators of liveability experiences in places intentionally designed with environmental sustainability in mind.

Given the contemporary trends towards inner city higher density residential environments, in Sydney for instance, the work is pertinent and timely.

Among the sustainable design aspects which were considered here the issue of built form was seen as a foremost factor. Where other studies might commonly focus on height alone, this work scrutinises two aspects: both height in itself and the related design of complex groups of buildings. Building complex type, as used in this thesis, assumes the integration of the setting within the perimeter block type of the built form. Complexes also indicate variations in density and size. Both height and complex type characteristics of this precinct were parameters always under consideration, and substantially elaborated in this work.

The following discussion hinges on the findings of the research, and then broadly synthesizes the relationships with design issues and architect intentions. These findings, and the generic understandings pertinent to the research, point to the fact that attitudes, preferences and satisfaction are based on a multitude of factors. The explanations are not simple or clear-cut; yet it is not possible to treat the statistically significant relationships in a cause and effect manner. Rather, sets of associations are developed; more appropriate when the inevitable fuzziness of human-environment relations are being examined. Moreover, this work refrains from providing a set of specific design guidelines, while broad suggestions are however laid down. Importantly, this research is not a deterministic endeavour. Directions for future research are considered in conclusion.

Chapter 5 | 274 5.1. Key findings - implications The key finding of this research is:

There appears to be no overwhelming evidence of higher approval or endorsement by respondents for any of the height or building complex typologies. Salient to the specific purpose of this study is the relative indifference - of living on a different floor level or in a different form of building type - to satisfaction.

Overall, in the chi-square analyses conducted - inclusive of variables of both subjective and objective elements of dwelling design - there appears to be very little (ie non- significant) differences in satisfaction experiences on lower floors and higher floors, in both low-rise and high to mid-rise complexes. Likewise, the regression analysis clearly demonstrates that the dwelling level and complex typology were not having any significant affect on overall residential satisfaction. The salient aspect of the regression analysis is that data on objective features of dwelling level, and type of complex were not showing any relationship at all to overall dwelling satisfaction. Logically thus, the most plausible explanation is that people's preferences and choices will be satisfied by wide-ranging design options, which includes various height and arrangements of building blocks. In other words, diversity in housing design is a fundamental aspect for liveability. This finding illuminates limitations of current thinking of sustainable design understanding of higher density urban form which the literature reviews have suggested. It highlights that, instead of searching for one definitive sustainable higher density urban form, the emphasis should be on an array of forms which are suitable for a particular locality of the inner city.

On the other hand, high approval for design features across all height & building complex typologies further vindicates the perimeter block configuration, which is a universal aspect of the studied precinct. The literature review has shown that currently the perimeter block principle is seen more as a design solution for sustainable urban housing than as a generic urban design schema. The advantage of this building block configuration is that it allows for a range of forms within a single complex, thereby increasing the formal diversity. The literature review indicates that the perimeter block with internal courtyard is capable of providing the complexity required to afford diversity, and thus liveability potential. For instance, within the articulation of the structure in Victoria Park high-rise, mid-rise, low-rise and street front units all coexist. The high-rise and mid-rise complexes include some measure of mixed use functions, inclusive of dwellings and shops and small offices on street level. In terms of

Chapter 5 | 275 architectural diversity, even in a single block, each side/facade is frequently treated differently (elevation, surface treatment, balcony, privacy etc.) by architects, often relating to degrees of exposure to the public realm. By not having the same architect commissioned for all block designs, the precinct avoided being stylistically monotonous or repetitive. Consequently, the inherent design variations and complexity were main aspects of the Victoria Park apartments. Even the lower floor dwellings in the low-rise structures are different to the lower floor dwellings in the high-rises.

The perimeter block designs in the precinct follow the traditional notion of the preindustrial era of maintaining direct connection between dwellings and the public domain. The literature review shows too that perimeter buildings give the most effective relationship between building volume and usable open space. Overall, the empirical findings further contribute to an understanding of the importance of integrating these ‘good design’ aspects of a dwelling setting, which helps moderate the potentially negative effects of high-density living.

An important finding of this study was that regardless of density level, the presence of nature views and the reduction of views of neighbours’ dwellings reduced negative perceptions of the precinct and residents were likely to feel more satisfied. Since outdoor neighbourhood features stand out prominently in the importance of user perceptions here, the study suggests that if the relationship between the inside and outside increases the physical and psychological connectivity between the two, it can increase the satisfaction of high-density living.

Subjective responses to variables dealing with the design of physical aspects in the dwelling layout were mostly rated satisfactorily by the respondents living both on lower floors and higher floors, in low-rise and high-mid-rise complexes. The variables were related to various objective and subjective aspects of general dwelling features - overall dwelling aspects (look of the building, layout design, window sizes, window control, furniture placement, storage & privacy), living dining space (size, comfortable conditions in summer & winter, natural daylight, view), bedroom spaces (size, comfortable conditions summer & winter, natural daylight, storage), kitchen (design & ventilation) and balcony (adequate space, protection from sun/rain, safety, privacy). Contrary to the perception that architects are 'form givers' and preoccupied with the look or aesthetics, these responses further vindicate the complex aspects adept designers understand when designing higher density dwellings. However, architects can only make conjectures for anonymous users while the experiential aspect remains solely with the users. Over time the users find out how these spaces feel and perform

Chapter 5 | 276 in summer and in winter, a primary component of long term liveability – which the designer can only presume. Comfortable conditions in summer, in winter, and natural daylight, often seen as consequences of passive design features of ‘slimline’ or ‘cross over apartment’ schemes, were also evaluated - all considered to be both physiological and psychological sustainable design aspects of dwellings.

Compared to other variables related to the dwelling, the response related to comfortable conditions in summer were not as satisfactory as others. Though not wholly pessimistic, the results suggest more needs to be done by designers when it comes to tackling climatic aspects by passive means, since the major focus in this particular development is on passive design and sustainable features. It should be remembered, though, that residents in these dwellings are prohibited from using air- conditioners, which may also have an impact on comfort level thereby generating displeasure in summer conditions. Attaining satisfaction solely by passive approaches would also seem too ambitious in the context and reality of the Victoria Park designs. On the other hand, human comfort is a complex phenomenon which tends to vary by individuals, their mental state, physical conditions and past experiences and ‘accommodation’ factors all playing a role. Therefore, it has been identified here for future research considerations. Taking into consideration that almost two-thirds of respondents were not displeased (highly satisfied, satisfied and mixed) with summer conditions in the living and dining space in height groups and building complex groups, a somewhat successful application of design features is apparent. Here, to a certain extent sustainable design affords liveability.

Lastly, the majority of residents indicated that their attitudes towards the environment were pre-existing. Asked whether their attitude towards energy and water had changed since living in the Victoria Park precinct, the results suggest that many of the in-built sustainable opportunities that might have encouraged residents to be more proactive were largely not noticed at all. These findings are relevant for Victoria Park, since it was expected beforehand that along with a preference for an inner urban lifestyle the residents would exhibit some kind of empathy towards the environment because of the specific and publicized connectedness to designed outdoor green areas in the precinct. Summarising the literature of the previous sections, this research concludes that the focus therefore has to be not only on the efficient design of architectural (and urban) form (whether high-rise/low-rise/detached) but on lifestyle aspirations, and public education and knowledge transfer to householders, and incentives, and ultimately on understandings of how to satisfy deep-rooted liveability/habitability factors without

Chapter 5 | 277 removing the same opportunities for later generations. As indicated, the users were clearly motivated by the design and not the implied ecological ideals.

5.2. Implications for policymakers and practitioners The literature review exposes a lack of specific guidelines in past strategies and policies for sustainable design issues for architecture in the Sydney context at least. Even though architects along with other professions are responsible for the design of the built environment, their involvement was minimal. It was not until 2002 through SEPP 65 (State Environmental Planning Policy) that the role of architects was brought to the forefront through a personal initiative by the then NSW Premier. Along with the policies, various tools for 'good design' were then published based on expert designer’s recommendations. However, the perimeter block was not explicitly supported. The studied precinct is a unique design paradigm where all the complexes were arranged in perimeter block configuration; consequently, this work helps re-establish the effectiveness of this design resolution in Australian cities, and could be used to support initiatives in future by policymakers.

Moreover, the lack of open space and overall liveability in future (sustainability) were the issues with utmost importance for people participating in a feedback forum for the current metropolitan strategy for Sydney. A majority of Sydney residents would prefer more open green spaces. The nature of open spaces is also a major factor determining how the space is perceived. There is a strong likelihood that a barren space would not produce the same psychological effect as an effective and active green outdoor space. Therefore, the metropolitan plans should spell out how and where open spaces are to be provided. Similarly, this research has shown that where open spaces of parks and other outdoor spaces are integrated within the designed residential setting, a satisfactory outcome is achieved.

Overall there appears to be no strong relation between socio-demographic-economic profile and the height of building form or complex types. Based on age, ethnicity, income or family composition planners or policymakers cannot assume to pre-judge who lives in high-rise or in low-rise buildings, nor can they assume who lives on higher floors or lower floors near the ground. These findings are salient since it confirms that attempting to design specific typology for specific socio-cultural groups is likely to be ineffective. A common generalisation of people’s lifestyles attaches labels to the type of people who prefer to live in inner area multi storied dwellings. ‘Empty nesters’, ‘career professionals couples’, ‘childless couples’, ‘singles’, 'young urban professionals' for example label users according to social formations, and designs were accordingly

Chapter 5 | 278 created to fit these lifestyle preferences. Perhaps, we now have to add another new label to what we have already attributed to the people living in the apartments. As shown through the literature review, we have to be aware that territories shift, functions alter, group compositions change through time. Thus diversity is an inherent component allowing social systems to adapt to change, and both research and practice need to incorporate this idea. Nonetheless, broad assumptions of the socio- demographics of residents of inner areas can be made since the lack of socio- economic mix in terms of type of occupation, income and education is a phenomenon that is affecting most inner areas under gentrification. With all this data, inner urbanite lifestyle aspirations, values, images, ideals, activity systems and social arrangements can be conceptualised by policymakers. Accordingly, housing choices and preferences can be broadly identified and conjectured into the future design schemes embracing varied formations.

The interview component of the research indicates that these Victoria Park architects clearly considered social aspects in their design conjectures. These architects are experienced, and also involved in teaching at tertiary level, which might explain the awareness shown for user experiences. This may certainly not be case for all architects, especially the young aspiring ones who do generally tend to be more egotistic and probably are prone to be ignorant of the critical importance of user’s feedback. Hence, the findings presented in this research can also help inform architect comprehension; it is not a merely statistical exercise of significance.

Final comment. This research contributes to our understanding of how higher density inner area housing, perceived by both public and policymakers more favourably these days, can be both liveable and sustainable. And that any approach toward a specific form would be unsustainable, while suggesting that an intricate integration of varied form types, as in Victoria Park, is a more appropriate model.

To begin to answer the question ‘what is the most sustainable urban dwelling form’, rather than asking the potentially divisive question simplistically we need to redefine the strategy to include lifestyle approaches and liveability factors relating to these forms as a whole, or holistically.

Moreover, the research signifies that attempts made to design the context around buildings eco-sensitively and integrate greenery into the setting, as well as to introduce variety in building height and layout, would be likely to satisfy a wide range of users - and be socially sustainable as a form of dense urban living.

Chapter 5 | 279 Lastly, this provides systematic evidence that design and aesthetics (linked to urban values) are two critical factors among other significant preferences in higher density urban housing. Design does matter.

5.3. Future directions During the course of the thesis, particular questions, issues, and dilemmas were encountered. These were identified as topics which were beyond the scope of this work.

Accepting the inevitable limitations of the methodology and satisfaction models employed, given the complexity of person-environment relationships, this study would suggest that further studies are required. Firstly, there may well exist some limitations in the generalisation of the findings to other residential developments. Given this study sample contains eight projects, all perimeter blocks with courts within an integrated precinct, it is not representative of the population within the Sydney metropolitan area. Bearing this in mind, future studies on sustainable design could expand the same survey to a more diverse and greater number of alternatively-designed apartment complexes of various configurations, to test their relationship to liveability. However, the size of the resident sample in this study can provide confidence that most of these findings should be applicable to future projects, generally if not specifically. The present research could also have been further enhanced by a larger sample.

Secondly, there are some constraints on the use of the model to predict resident satisfaction. Although the study variables measuring personal and physical characteristic as well as subjective evaluation are sufficiently comprehensive to account for a large portion of the variance in resident satisfaction, perhaps it may be necessary in further studies to include other variables of design characteristics not examined in this study. It would, for instance, be relevant to include design aspects when inquiring about comfort experiences of the spaces. The shape of the room, its window sizes, duration of sunlight, usage time, etc. may affect comfort conditions within the rooms. Moreover, thermal comfort is by itself a complex issue which has comprehensive theoretical and methodological approaches, which could be further pursued.

Thirdly, since the area studied was a relatively new complex, the aspect of age of complexes could be a factor. Older housing environments, for instance, could engender higher satisfactions though sense of belonging or friendships, or long usage affect the quality of the housing, negatively or positively.

Chapter 5 | 280 The research acknowledges that the reality of a situation lies in the mutual relationships between its elements – physical, spatial, temporal, social, cultural and personal; and that sustainable design has both environmental and human factors to consider. A continual monitoring of user attitudes and preferences cannot help but lead to greater satisfaction with type and quality of housing provision in Australia, especially in inner areas of the cities destined to be the major focus of urban occupation. This research was conducted at one temporal point, so the need for continued research arises to monitor changes in resident perceptions and satisfactions over time, which could provide useful information to designers, developers and policymakers.

What has also been determined here is that architectural education suffers from a lack of a research culture. To address this problem the profession must establish and/or augment the research tradition of social aspects in architectural education. By doing so, academics and practitioners could have a better understanding of the links between architecture and behaviour, in particular, the relation between architecture designed to be sustainable, in principle - the inevitable approach required now and in the future - and associated liveability factors. In which case, architecture should view research not as a constraining exercise, but as a valuable resource of information that can bridge the gap between academia and the profession, and architecture and the social sciences.

Chapter 5 | 281 References

AAP & SMH. (2002). Crackdown on ugly flat syndrome. AAP, cited in National News, The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH), retrieved 2008, from http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/09/12/1031608296123.html Abraham, L. E., Fisher, T. A., Hessmann, K., & Schmitz-Guenther, T. (1999). Living spaces : sustainable building and design. Kœnemann: Cologne, Germany. ABS. (1996). Housing Stock: Inner city residential development. Australian Social Trends, 1999 , Australian Bureau of Statistics, retrieved 2008, from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/ ABS. (1998). Housing and Lifestyle: Smaller households, larger dwellings. Australian Social Trends, 1998, retrieved 2008, from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/ ABS. (1999). Housing Stock: Inner city residential development. Australian Social Trends, 1999 , Australian Bureau of Statistics, retrieved 2008, from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/ ABS. (2004). Housing and Lifestyle: High Rise Living. Australian Social Trends 2004, Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2008, from http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/ ABS. (2005). Summary of Findings: Current Dwelling. Housing Choices, NSW, Oct 2004 , Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2008, from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/ ABS. (2006a). Housing in Sydney – Consolidation and Spread. Australian Social Trends 2006, Australian Bureau of Statistics, retrieved 2008, from http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/webpages/statistics ABS. (2006b). QuickStats : Zetland (NSW State Suburb). Census 2006, Australian Bureau of Statistics, retrieved 2008, from http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/D3310114.nsf/home/Census+data ABS. (2007). Water Use and Conservation in the Garden and Outside Environmental Issues: People's Views and Practices, retrieved 2007, Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2008, from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Products/ ABS. (2008). Population: capital city growth rate up, . Regional Population Growth, Australia, 2006-07 , Australian Bureau of Statistics, retrieved 2008, from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/ AIA COTE. (2009). AIA COTE Definition of Sustainable Design Newsletter of the Committee on the Environment (COTE), retrieved 2009, from http://info.aia.org/nwsltr_cote.cfm?pagename=cote_a_200608_define AILA. (2004a). The 2004 AILA (Australian Institute of Landscape Architects) National Awards in Landscape Architecture. Retrieved 2006, from http://www.aila.org.au/awards/2004/ AILA. (2004b). National and State Project Awards in Landscape Architecture. Retrieved 2006, from http://www.aila.org.au/awards/2004/environment/eco12/eco12.htm AILA. (2008). NOVA Apartments. AILA project directories, retrieved 2010, from http://www.aila.org.au/projects/nsw/McGregor-nova/overview.htm Akbari, H. (2002). Shade trees reduce building energy use and CO2 emissions from power plants. Environmental Pollution, 116(Supplement 1), S119-S126. Akbari, H., Kurn, D. M., Bretz, S. E., & Hanford, J. W. (1997). Peak power and cooling

References | 285 energy savings of shade trees. Energy and Buildings, 25(2), 139-148. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M. (1977). A pattern language : towns, buildings, construction. Oxford University Press: New York. Altman, I., & Werner, C. M. (1985). Home environments. Plenum Press: New York. American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). American Psychological Association: Washington, DC. Amérigo, M., & Aragonés, J. I. (1997). A theoretical and methodological approach to the study of residential satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17(1), 47-57. Andersson, E. ( 2006). Urban landscapes and sustainable cities. Ecology and Society (1), 11(1). ARC. (2010). ARC: By-Laws. Retrieved December 20, 2010, from http://www.medium- density.com/arc/bylaws.html Architecture Australia. (2003). Radar awards. Architecture Australia. From http://www.architecturemedia.com/ Baillie, A. P., Griffiths, I. D., Huber, J. W., & Energy Technology Support, U. (1988). Thermal comfort assessment : A new approach to comfort criteria in buildings; final report. Energy Technology Support Unit (ETSU): Harwell. Baksh, M. (1989). The Spot Observations Technique in Time Allocation Research. Field Methods, 1(2), 1-3. Ballinger, J. A., Samuels, R., & ERDC. (1991). A National evaluation of energy efficient houses : attitudes and experiences, thermal and environmental comfort, and energy consumption : final report, December 1991. Energy Research and Development Corporation (ERDC, Australia): Sydney. Becker, F. D. (1974). Design for living; the residents' view of multi-family housing. Center for Urban Development Research: [Ithaca, N.Y. Bell, P. A. (2001). Environmental psychology (5th ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum: Mahwah, N.J. Bentley, I., McGlynn, S., & Smith, G. (1985). Responsive environments : a manual for designers. Architectural Press: London. Berry, D., & Kneebone, D. C. (1997). Australia at the crossroads : roads in the community : a summary. Austroads: Sydney. Birrell, B., O'Connor, K. B., Rapson, V., & Healy, E. (2005). Melbourne 2030 : planning rhetoric versus urban reality. Monash University Press: Melbourne. Blair, J., Fisher, M., Prasad, D., Judd, B., Soebarto, V. I., Hyde, R., et al. (2003). Affordability and Sustainability Outcomes of ‘Greenfield’ Suburban Development and Master Planned Communities—A Case Study Approach Using Triple Bottom Line Assessment. . Sydney: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, UNSW-UWS Research Centre. Blair, J., Fisher, M., Prasad, D., Judd, B., Soebarto, V. I., Hyde, R., et al. (2003). Affordability and sustainability outcomes of 'greenfield' suburban development and master planned communities - a case study approach using triple bottom line assessment: Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute. Blowers, A. (1993). Planning for a sustainable environment : a report. Earthscan: London.

References | 286 Boddy, M. (2007). Designer neighbourhoods: new-build residential development in nonmetropolitan UK cities?the case of Bristol. Environment and Planning A, 39(1), 86-105. Bohl, C. C. (2000). New Urbanism and the City: Potential Applications and Implications for Distressed Inner-City Neighborhoods. Housing Policy Debate, 11(4), 761-801. Bounds, M., & Morris, A. (2006). Second wave gentrification in inner-city Sydney. Cities, Vol. 23, No. 2, 99–108. Boyd, R. (1960). The Australian Ugliness. Cheshire: Melbourne. Bridge, G. (2001). Estate Agents as Interpreters of Economic and Cultural Capital: The Gentrification Premium in the Sydney Housing Market. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25(1), 87-101. Broadbent, G. (1973). Design in architecture; architecture and the human sciences. John Wiley & Sons: London, New York,. Broadbent, G. (1988). Design in architecture : architecture and the human sciences. D. Fulton: London. Bryant, M. (2003). Greening Sydney - Constructed Ecologies. Paper presented at the Restoration of Urban Ecosystems Seminar - Proceedings. Bunker, R., Gleeson, B., Holloway, D., & Randolph, B. (2002). The local impacts of urban consolidation in Sydney. Urban Policy and Research, 20(2), 143-167. Bunker, R., Holloway, D., & Randolph, B. (2005a). Building the Connection Between Housing Needs and Metropolitan Planning in Sydney, Australia. Housing Studies, 20(5), 771-794. Bunker, R., Holloway, D., & Randolph, B. (2005b). The expansion of urban consolidation in Sydney: Social impacts and implications. Australian Planner, 42(3), 16-25. Burnley, I. H., & Murphy, P. (2004). Sea change : movement from metropolitan to arcadian Australia. UNSW Press: Sydney. Burns, J. R. (2004). Apartment living : Australian style. Hardie Grant Books: South Yarra, Vic. Burton, E. (2000). The Compact City: Just or Just Compact? A Preliminary Analysis. Urban Studies, 37(11), 1969-2006. Butler-Bowdon, C., Pickett, C., Dupain, M., Sierins, E., & Historic Houses Trust of New South Wales. (2007). Homes in the sky : apartment living in Australia. Miegunyah Press in association with Historic Houses Trust: Carlton, Vic. CABE. (2005). Better neighbourhoods: Making higher densities work - Literature review. Publications- Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, 2009, from http://www.cabe.org.uk/publications/ CABE. (2007). A sense of place What residents think of their new homes. Publicatio -m Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, retrieved January 15, 2010, from http://www.cabe.org.uk/publications CABE. (2009). Good design: the fundamentals. Publications retrieved January 15, 2010, from http://www.cabe.org.uk/publications/good-design CABE/DTLR. (2001). By Design: Better Places to Live: A Design Companion to PPG3. Publications- Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, retrieved January 15, 2010, from http://www.cabe.org.uk/publications/ California Energy Commission. (2010). Clothes Dryers. Consumer energy center,

References | 287 2010, from http://www.consumerenergycenter.org/home/appliances/dryers.html Cameron, R., & Salinger, P. (1984). Above Paris : a new collection of aerial photographs of Paris, France. Cameron: San Francisco, Calif. Cardew, R. V. (1980). Flats in Sydney: the thirty per cent solution? In Roe J. (Ed.), Twentieth century Sydney : studies in urban and social history. Hale & Iremonger in association with the Sydney History Group: Sydney. Carson, D. H. (1975). Man-environment interactions : evaluations and applications. Halsted Press: New York. Cherulnik, P. D. (1993). Applications of environment-behavior research : case studies and analysis. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge ; New York. Chiesura, A. (2004). The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landscape and Urban Planning, 68(1), 129-138. Churchman, A. (1999). Disentangling the Concept of Density. JOURNAL OF PLANNING LITERATURE, 13(4), 389-411. Churchman, A. (2003). Is There a Place for Children in the City? Journal of Urban Design, 8(2), 99-111. City of Sydney. (2011). City of Sydney- A Snapshot. Retrieved January 14, 2008, from http://www.sydneymedia.com.au/html/2280-city-of-sydney---a-snapshot.asp Coleman, A. (1985). Utopia on trial : vision and reality in planned housing. H. Shipman: London. Coley, R. L., Sullivan, W. C., & Kuo, F. E. (1997). Where Does Community Grow?: The Social Context Created by Nature in Urban Public Housing. Environment and Behavior, 29(4), 468-494. Communities Scotland. (2004). Case Study 13 - Car-free Sustainable Housing, . Sustainable Housing Design Guide for Scotland, Communities Scotland, The Scottish Government, 2008, from http://www.archive2.official-documents.co.uk Congress for the New Urbanism. (2001). Charter of the Congress for the New Urbanism-1996. Retrieved January 14, 2008, from http://www.cnu.org/charter Congress for the New Urbanism. (2009). The Canons of Sustainable Architecture and Urbanism. Retrieved February 24, 2010, from http://www.cnu.org/charter Conway, D. (1977). Human response to tall buildings. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross: Stroudsburg, Pa. Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation : design & analysis issues for field settings. Houghton Mifflin: Boston. Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 10(7), 1-10. Crowley, K. (2002). Book Review, Australian Urban Planning: new challenges, new agendas. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 4(1), 101-102. Daly, M. T. (1998). Reshaping Sydney: the inner city revival Urban Policy and Research, v.16, no.1, Mar 1998, 59-63. Davis, S. (1977). The Form of housing. Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York. De Leeuw, E. D., & Collins, M. (1997). Data collection method and survey quality: An overview. In Lyberg L. (Ed.), Survey measurement and process quality (pp. 199- 220). Wiley: New York.

References | 288 De Vaus, D. A. (2002). Surveys in social research (5th ed.). Allen & Unwin: St. Leonards, N.S.W. DECC. (2006a). What is sustainability? Who Cares about the Environment?, Department of Climate Change, January 18, 2009, from http://www.climatechange.gov.au/climate-change/impacts/water-resources.aspx DECC. (2006b). Who Cares ? 2006. Who Cares about the Environment?, Department of Climate Change, January 18, 2009, from http://www.climatechange.gov.au/climate-change/impacts/water-resources.aspx DECC. (2009). Water resources. Impacts of climate change, Department of Climate Change, January 18, 2009, from http://www.climatechange.gov.au/climate- change/impacts/water-resources.aspx Delaney, B. (2002). Putting an end to the 'ugly flat' syndrome. Publications, 2008, from http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/07/16/1026802694366.html Denzin, N. K. (1970). The research act; a theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Aldine Pub. Co.: Chicago,. Denzin, N. K. (1978). Sociological methods : a sourcebook (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill: New York. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks. Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency. (2010). Technical Manual: Design for lifestyle and the future. Retrieved January 29, 2010, from http://www.yourhome.gov.au/technical/fs52.html Department of Energy (USA) (2009). End-Use Consumption of Electricity 2001, U.S. Energy Information Adminitration, Statistics and analysis. Residential, Retrieved January 29, 2010, from http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/recs2001/enduse2001/enduse2001.html Department of Planning. (2005). City of Cities: A Plan for Sydney's Future. METROPOLITAN STRATEGY, retrieved January 18, 2009, from http://www.metrostrategy.nsw.gov.au Department of Planning. (2005). Housing. City of Cities: A Plan for Sydney's Future ; Metropolitan Strategy, NSW Government, retrieved January 18, 2009, from http://www.metrostrategy.nsw.gov.au/dev/uploads/paper/housing/ Department of Planning. (2005). Housing Sydney City:KEY DIRECTIONS. City of Cities: A Plan for Sydney's Future ; Metropolitan Strategy, NSW Government, retrieved January 18, 2009, from http://www.metrostrategy.nsw.gov.au/dev/uploads/paper/housing/ Department of Planning. (2005). Housing: STRATEGY FOR SYDNEY. City of Cities: A Plan for Sydney's Future ; Metropolitan Strategy, NSW Government, 2008, from http://www.metrostrategy.nsw.gov.au/dev/uploads/paper/housing/ Department of Planning. (2005). Supporting Information, City of Cities: A Plan for Sydney's Future. Metropolitan Strategy,NSW Government, retrieved January 15, 2009, from http://www.metrostrategy.nsw.gov.au Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys : the total design method. Wiley: New York. Dillman, D. A. (2000). Mail and Internet surveys : the tailored design method (2nd ed.). John Wiley: New York ; Chichester. Dovey, K., Woodcock, I., & Wood, S. (2005). Contradictory Characters: Place-Identity

References | 289 and the Post-Suburban City. Paper presented at the E-Proceedings of ‘Post- Suburban Sydney: The City in Transformation’ Conference, Sydney. Dowling, R., & McGuirk, P. (2005). Master-planned Estates and Suburban Complexity. Paper presented at the Post-suburban Sydney Conference, 2005. Dutcher, D. D., Finley, J. C., Luloff, A. E., & Johnson, J. B. (2007). Connectivity With Nature as a Measure of Environmental Values. Environment and Behavior, 39(4), 474-493. Easthope, H., & Judd, S. (2010). Living well in greater density Retrieved 2011, from http://www.shelternsw.org.au/docs/rpt10livingindensity-sb42.pdf Easthope, H., Tice, A., & Randolph, B. (2009). The Desirable Apartment Life? ARC Project DP0773388 The Demand for Higher Density Housing in Sydney and Melbourne Working Paper 5 , retrieved January 18, 2010, from http://www.fbe.unsw.edu.au/cf/research/cityfuturesprojects/higherdensity/DP0223 388WorkingPaper5(DesirableApratmentLife).pdf EcoLibrium. (2005). Mandatory Energy Efficiency in the BCA: What You Need to Know (EcoLibrium). Elkin, T., McLaren, D., & Hillman, M. (1991). Reviving the city : towards sustainable urban development. Friends of the Earth: London. EnergyAustralia. (2010). In the laundry. Energy efficiency at home, 2010, from http://www.energyaustralia.com.au/State/NSW/Residential/Energy-efficiency-at- home/In-the-laundry.aspx Fagan, R. (2000). Industrial change in the global city: Sydney's new spaces of production. In Connell J. (Ed.), Sydney : the emergence of a world city (pp. xvi, 381 p.). Oxford University Press: Melbourne. Farr, D. (2008). Sustainable urbanism : urban design with nature. Wiley: Hoboken, N.J. Fay, R., Lamb, R., & Holland, G. (2002). Does Compressing Australian Suburbia Achieve Ecologically Sustainable Development? Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 19(3), 218-230. Field, A. P. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications: London. Field, A. P., & Hole, G. (2003). How to design and report experiments. Sage publications Ltd.: London ; Thousand Oaks, Calif. Fincher, R., & Costello, L. (2005). Narratives of high-rise housing: placing the ethnicized newcomer in inner Melbourne. Social & Cultural , 6(2), 201 - 217. Fitzroy Gardens. (2009). Fitzroy Gardens : Significant Trees in the Gardens. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from http://www.fitzroygardens.com/Index%20Page.htm Florida, R. L. (2002). The rise of the creative class : and how its's transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. Basic Books: New York. Forsyth, A., & Crewe, K. (2009). New Visions for Suburbia: Reassessing Aesthetics and Place-making in Modernism, Imageability and New Urbanism. Journal of Urban Design, 14(4), 415 - 438. Fowler, F. J. (1993). Survey research methods (2nd ed.). Sage Publications: Newbury Park. Francescato, G., Weidemann, S., Anderson, J. R., and Chenoweth, R. (1975). Evaluating residents’ satisfaction in housing for low and moderate income

References | 290 families: A multi-method approach. In Carson D. H. (Ed.), Man-environment interactions : evaluations and applications. Halsted Press: New York. Francescato, G. (1979). Residents' satisfaction in HUD-assisted housing : design and management factors. U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research: Washington. Freestone, R. (2000). Planning Sydney: historical trajectories and contemporary debates. In Connell J. (Ed.), Sydney : the emergence of a world city (pp. 119– 143.). Oxford University Press: Melbourne. Freestone, R., Butler-Bowdon, C., & Randolph, W. (2006). Talking about Sydney : population, community and culture in contemporary Sydney. UNSW Press: Sydney. Frey, H. (1999). Designing the city : towards a more sustainable urban form. E & FN Spon: London ; New York. Frey, H. (2007). Preface. In Thwaites K., S. Porta, O. Romice & M. Greaves (Eds.), Urban sustainability through environmental design : approaches to time-people- place responsive urban spaces (pp. xv, 168 p., 116 p. of plates). Routledge: London ; New York. Futagawa, Y. (2002). Studio talk : interview with 15 architects. A.D.A. Edita: Tokyo. Galster, G. (1987). Identifying the Correlates of Dwelling Satisfaction: An Empirical Critique. Environment and Behavior, 19(5), 539-568. Gans, D. (2006). The Le Corbusier guide (3rd ed.). Princeton Architectural Press: New York. Gans, H. J. (1962). The Urban Villagers. Free Press: New York. Gans, H. J. (1967). The Levittowners (Abridged ed.). Pantheon: New York. Gans, H. J. (1972). People and plans : essays on urban problems and solutions (Abridged ed.). Penguin: Harmondsworth. Garreau, J. (1992). Edge city : life on the new frontier (1st Anchor Books ed.). Anchor Books: New York. Gatersleben, B., Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2002). Measurement and Determinants of Environmentally Significant Consumer Behavior. Environment and Behavior, 34(3), 335-362. Gifford, R., Hine, D. W., Muller-Clemm, W., Reynolds, D. A. J., & Shaw, K. T. (2000). Decoding Modern Architecture. Environment and Behavior, 32(2), 163-187. Gifford, R., Hine, D. W., Muller-Clemm, W., & Shaw, K. T. (2002). Why architects and laypersons judge buildings differently: cognitive properties and physical bases. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research19(2), 131-147. Gilbert, H. (2001). A Case Study in Contemporary Development: How does it measure up to the principles of classic urban design theorists? . Paper presented at the 7th Annual Pacific Rim Real Estate Society Conference, Adelaide, Australia. Gleeson, B. (2005). Towards a New Australian Urbanism Paper presented at the Paper presented to Urban Development Institute of Australia, 19 August 2005. Queensland, Port Douglas., Gleeson, B., & Low, N. (2000). Australian urban planning : new challenges, new agendas. Allen & Unwin: St Leonards, N.S.W. Gray, R., Gleeson, B., & Burke, M. (2008). Urban Consolidation and Household Greenhouse Emissions: Towards a Full Consumption Impacts Approach. Urban

References | 291 Research Program publication series, Griffith University(20). Greenfield, C., & Williams, P. (2008). Communicating sustainability: the limits and possibilities of ecological campaigns in a Federal election year. [Paper in: Communication and Politics. Greenfield, Cathy (ed.).]. Communication, Politics and Culture, 41(1), 142-166. Gutman, R. (1972). People and buildings. Basic Books: New York. Hassell. (2000). Victoria Park Refined Master Plan: Built Form Design Quality Objectives. Sydney. Hassell. (2002). Victoria Park Public Domain. Retrieved 2006, from http://www.hassell.com.au/en/projects/milestones/prj/86.html# Heisler, G. M. (1985). Energy Saving With Trees. Journal of Arboriculture, 12(5), 113- 125. Herzog, T. R., & Strevey, S. J. (2008). Contact With Nature, Sense of Humor, and Psychological Well-Being. Environment and Behavior, 40(6), 747-776. Hinds, J., & Sparks, P. (2009). Investigating Environmental Identity, Well-Being, and Meaning. Ecopsychology, 1(4), 181-186. Holden, E., & Norland, I. T. (2005). Three Challenges for the Compact City as a Sustainable Urban Form: Household Consumption of Energy and Transport in Eight Residential Areas in the Greater Oslo Region. Urban Studies, 42(12), 2145- 2166. Holloway, D., & Bunker, R. (2006). Planning, Housing and Energy Use: A Review -- Practice Reviews. Urban Policy and Research, 24(1), 115-126. Holyoak, J. (1999). Finding future urban form. The Architects' Journal, 210, 48. Homenuck, H. P. M. (1975). An analysis of social and psychological effects of high rise. [Ministry of State for Urban Affairs]: Ottawa. Hox, J. J., & De Leeuw, E. D. (1994). A comparison of nonresponse in mail, telephone, and face-to-face surveys. Quality & Quantity, 28(4), 329-344. Israel, G. D. (2009). Determining Sample Size. Electronic Data Information Source of University of Florida, retrieved January 15, 2009, from http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pd006#TABLE_2 Jacobs, J. (1962). The death and life of great American cities. Jonathon Cape: London. Jacobs, J. (1972). The economy of cities. Penguin Books: Harmondsworth. Jager, M. (1986). Class definition and the esthetics of gentrification: Victoriana in Melbourne. In Smith N. & P. Williams (Eds.), Gentrification of the city (pp. xiii, 257 p.). Unwin Hyman: Boston ; London. Jenks, M., Burton, E., & Williams, K. (1996). The Compact city : a sustainable urban form? (1st ed.). E & FN Spon: London ; Melbourne. Jenks, M., Williams, K., & Burton, E. (2000). Achieving sustainable urban form. E & FN Spon: London. Johnson, C. (2002a). Design by Numbers, Martyn Hook Interviews NSW Government Architect Chris Johnson. Monument Magazine, Accessed from Comment on current issues, NSW Government Architect, NSW Department of Commerce, retrieved June 20, 2006, from http://www.govarch.dpws.nsw.gov.au/comment.htm Johnson, C. (2002b). The Greening Of Sydney: The NSW Government Architect Wants

References | 292 To Take Garden Apartments To Another Level. The Sydney Morning Herald, Accessed from Comment on Current Issues, NSW Government Architect, NSW Department of Commerce, retrieved June 20, 2006, from http://www.govarch.dpws.nsw.gov.au/comment.htm Johnson, C. (2002c). I see green. The Sydney Morning Herald, by Chris Johnson, retrieved June 20, 2006, from http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/10/25/1035504879446.html Johnson, C., & Gerada, M. (2003). Greening Sydney : landscaping the urban fabric. Government Architect Pubs.: Sydney. Johnston, J., & Newton, J. (2004). Building Green: A guide to using plants on roofs, walls and pavements. London Ecology Unit, Greater London Authority: London. Judd, B., & Dean, J. (1983). Medium density housing in Australia. RAIA Education Division: Canberra. Kamp, I. v., Leidelmeijer, K., Marsmana, G., & Hollander, A. d. (2003). Urban environmental quality and human well-being Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study. Landscape and Urban Planning, v. 65, 5–18. Kampen, A. v. (2010). Here Comes the Sun – Utopian Architecture in Le Corbusier’s Cité Radieuse. Space is the place Retrieved March 10, 2011, from http://litspat.medialoperations.com/author/anouk/ Kaplan, R. (2001). The Nature of the View from Home: Psychological Benefits. Environment and Behavior, 33(4), 507-542. Kaplan, R., & Kaplan, S. (1989). The experience of nature : a psychological perspective. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge ; New York. Kazdin, A. E. (1979). Unobtrusive measures in behavioral assessment. Journal of applied behavior analysis, 12(4), 713-724. Kearney, A. R. (2006). Residential Development Patterns and Neighborhood Satisfaction: Impacts of Density and Nearby Nature. Environment and Behavior, 38(1), 112-139. Kearney, A. R., & Winterbottom, D. (2006). Nearby Nature and Long-Term Care Facility Residents -- Benefits and Design Recommendations. Journal of Housing For the Elderly, 19(3), 7-28. Kim, J., & Kaplan, R. (2004). Physical and Psychological Factors in Sense of Community: New Urbanist Kentlands and Nearby Orchard Village. Environment and Behavior, 36(3), 313-340. Kim, W. (1997). Effects of dwelling floor level on factors related to residential satisfaction and home environment in high-rise apartment buildings. Unpublished 9815772, Texas A&M University, United States -- Texas. King, R. (1971). Perception of residential quality : Sydney case studies. Ian Buchan Fell Research Project on Housing, : [Sydney]. Knowles, C. (2004). Opening Address-The Hon Craig Knowles MP, Minister for Infrastructure & Planning Minister for Natural Resources. Retrieved 2006, from www.metrostrategy.nsw.gov.au Komossa, S. (2009). Towards new architectural and urban models;The dutch urban block, public domain and city economy. Paper presented at the The 4th International Conference of the International Forum on Urbanism (IFoU), The New Urban Question – Urbanism beyond Neo-Liberalism.

References | 293 Kvale, S. (1996). Interviews : an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, Calif. Lambla, K. (1998). Abstraction and theosophy:Social housing in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. Architronic, 7(2), 1-13. Landcom. (2001). Landcom annual review 2001. Retrieved December 10, 2004, from http://www.vicpark.com.au Landcom. (2002). Victoria Park, Green Square, Zetland, Best Practice for Waste Management. Landcom: Sydney. Landcom. (2003a). Energy Smart Communities Policy. Retrieved December 10, 2005 from http://www.vicpark.com.au Landcom. (2003b). Sustainability Report 2003. Retrieved December 10, 2005, from http://www.vicpark.com.au Landcom. (2004). Sustainability Report 2004. Retrieved December 10, 2005, from http://www.vicpark.com.au Landcom. (2005a). Victoria Park life- Advertorials. Retrieved June 18, 2006, from http://www.vicpark.com.au Landcom. (2005b). Victoria Park news. Retrieved June 18, 2006, from http://www.vicpark.com.au Landcom. (2006). Victoria Park news - Advertorials. Retrieved June 18, 2006, from http://www.vicpark.com.au Lang, J. T. (1974). Designing for human behavior: architecture and the behavioral sciences. Dowden Hutchinson & Ross: Stroudsburg, Pa.,. Larice, M. A. (2005). Great neighborhoods: The livability and morphology of high density neighborhoods in urban North America. Unpublished Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, United States -- California. Lawrence, R. J. (1987). Housing, dwellings and homes : design theory, research and practice. Wiley: Chichester. Lawrence, R. J. (2000). Sustaining human settlement : a challenge for the new millennium. Urban International Press: North Shields [England]. Lawson, B. (2006). How Designers Think : The Design Process Demystified (4th ed.). Architectural Press: Oxford. Le Corbusier. (1931). Towards a new architecture (translated in 1986 from the thirteenth French edition and with an introduction by Frederick Etchells). Dover Publications: New York. Le Corbusier. (1947). The city of to-morrow and its planning, by Le Corbusier, translated from the 8th French edition of Urbanisme, with an introduction, by Frederick Etchells. The Architectural Press: London. Lenzen, M., Dey, C., & Foran, B. (2004). Energy requirements of Sydney households. Ecological Economics, 49(3), 375-399. Lenzen, M., & Smith, S. (1999). Teaching responsibility for climate change: three neglected issues. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 15-16(1999- 2000), 65-75. Lewis, M. (1999). Suburban backlash : the battle for the world's most liveable city. Bloomings Books: Hawthorn, Vic. Ley, D. (1996). The new middle class and the remaking of the central city. Oxford

References | 294 University Press: Oxford. Lund, H. (1998). Environmental accounts for households: A method for improving public awareness and participation. Local Environment: The International Journal of Justice and Sustainability, 3(1), 43 - 54. Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. MIT Press: Cambridge [Mass.]. Lynch, K. (1981). A theory of good city form. MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass. Mack, L. (1988). Living in small spaces. Little, Brown and Co.: Boston. Macsai, J., & Hidvegi, A. J. (1982). Housing (2nd ed.). Wiley: New York. Marcus, C. C. (1970). The adventure playground : creative play in an urban setting and a potential focus for community involvement. Institute of Urban & Regional Development, University of California: Berkeley, Calif. Marcus, C. C. (2000). Site planning, building design and a sense of community: An analysis of six Cohousing schemes in Denmark, Sweden, and the Netherlands. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 17(2), 146-163. Marcus, C. C., & Barnes, M. (1999). Healing gardens : therapeutic benefits and design recommendations. Wiley: New York. Marcus, C. C., & Francis, C. (1998). People places : design guidelines for urban open space (2nd ed.). Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York. Marcus, C. C., & Sarkissian, W. (1983). The medium-density housing kit : guidelines and resources for designing better housing at higher densities. Social Impacts Publications: Milsons Point, N.S.W. Marcus, C. C., & Sarkissian, W. (1986). Housing as if people mattered : site design guidelines for medium-density family housing. University of California Press: Berkeley. Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals' feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(4), 503-515. Mayer, F. S., Frantz, C. M., Bruehlman-Senecal, E., & Dolliver, K. (2009). Why Is Nature Beneficial?: The Role of Connectedness to Nature. Environment and Behavior, 41(5), 607-643. McCall, G. J. (1984). Systematic Field Observation. Annual Review of Sociology, 10, 263-282. McGuirk, P. M., & Dowling, R. (2007). Understanding master-planned estates in Australian cities: a framework for research. Urban Policy and Research, 25(1), 21-38. McGuirk, P. M., & O'Neill, P. (2002). Planning a prosperous Sydney: the challenges of planning urban development in the new urban context. Australian Geographer, 33(3), 301-316. McLennan, J. F. (2004). The philosophy of sustainable design : the future of architecture. Ecotone: Kansas City, Mo. Mcneill, D., Dowling, R., & Fagan, B. (2005). Sydney/Global/City: An Exploration. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29(4), 935-944. Mendler, S., Odell, W., & Hellmuth Obata & Kassabaum. (2000). The HOK guidebook to sustainable design. J. Wiley: New York ; Chichester. Menin, S., & Samuel, F. (2003). Nature and space : Aalto and Le Corbusier. Routledge:

References | 295 London ; New York. Merry, S. E. (1981). Defensible Space Undefended. Urban Affairs Quarterly, 16, 397- 422. Merry, S. E. (1981). Urban danger : life in a neighborhood of strangers. Temple University Press: Philadelphia. Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. J. (2006). Applied multivariate research : design and interpretation. SAGE Publications: Thousand Oaks. Michelson, W. (1977). Environmental choice, human behavior, and residential satisfaction. Oxford University Press: New York. Michelson, W. M. (1970). Man and his urban environment: a sociological approach. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.: Reading, Mass.,. Mikellides, B. (1980). Architecture for people : explorations in a new humane environment. Studio Vista: London. Moore, S., Trulsson, N. B., & Moore, T. (2001). Living homes : sustainable architecture and design. Chronicle Books: San Francisco. Morales, D. J. (1980). The Contribution of Trees to Residential Property Value. Journal of Arboriculture, 6(11), 301-302. Moriarty, P. (2002). Environmental Sustainability of Large Australian Cities. Urban Policy and Research, 20(3), 233-244. Morris, E. W., & Winter, M. (1978). Housing, family, and society. Wiley: New York. Moughtin, C., & Shirley, P. (2005). Urban design : green dimensions (2nd ed.). Architectural Press: Boston. Murphy, F., Freadman, R., Tridgell, S., Zott, D., Collis, C., Parkes, G., et al. (2004). Jas review of books. Journal of Australian Studies, 28(82), 131 - 168. Murphy, P., & Watson, S. (1997). Surface city : Sydney at the millennium. Pluto Press: Annandale, NSW. Myers, D. (1988). Building Knowledge about Quality of Life. Urban Planning Journal of the American Planning Association, 54(3), 347-358. National Water Commission. (2005). Capital city water use Australian Water Resources 2005, 2009, from http://www.water.gov.au/WaterUse/index.aspx?Menu=Level1_4 Neilson, B. (2005). Post-Suburban Sydney: Concluding Remarks. Paper presented at the E-Proceedings of ‘Post-Suburban Sydney: The City in Transformation’ Conference, Sydney. Newman, O. (1972). Defensible space; crime prevention through urban design. Macmillan: New York,. Newman, O. (1980). Community of interest (1st ed.). Anchor Press/Doubleday: Garden City, N.Y. Newman, O. (1996). Creating defensible space. U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research: Washington D.C. Newman, P., & Kenworthy, J. R. (1999). Sustainability and cities : overcoming automobile dependence. Island Press: Washington, D. C. Newman, P. W. G. (1999). Sustainability and cities: extending the metabolism model. Landscape and Urban Planning, 44(4), 219-226. Newton, P. (1997). Re-shaping cities for a more sustainable future exploring the link

References | 296 between urban form, air quality, energy and greenhouse gas emissions. from http://www.deh.gov.au/atmosphere/airquality/publications/urban-air/pubs/tg6.pdf NSW DECCW. (2009). Residential Rebate Program. Sustainability funding , NSW Goverment Department of Climate Change and Water, retrieved June 15, 2009, from http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/rebates/index.htm NSW Department of Planning. (2002). Residential Flat Design Code. Programs and Planning Services, retrieved June 15, 2009, from http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au NSW Department of Planning. (2008). Residential Flat Design Code. Programs and Planning Services, retrieved June 15, 2009, from http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au NSW Department of Planning. (2008). SEPP-65 and BASIX Relationship for Multi- Units. Programs and Planning Services, retrieved June 15, 2009, from http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. (2001). Residential Flat Design Pattern Book NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning: Sydney. NSW DIPNR. (2004). Improving Flat Design :a progress report. Urban Design Advisory Service, Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources, retrieved June 15, 2009, from http://www.planning.nsw.gov.au NSW DUAP. (2001). Residential Flat Design Pattern Book. NSW Department of Urban Affairs and Planning: Sydney. NSW Legislation. (2008). Issue of occupation certificates. State Environmental Planning Policy No 65—Design Quality of Residential Flat Development, retrieved June 15, 2009, from http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au Nunnally, J. C. (1967). Psychometric theory. McGraw-Hill: New York,. Oh, S. (1999). The Relationship Between Residential Satisfaction And Apartment Forms: A Case Study In The Seoul Metropolitan Area, Korea. University of Washington. Pacione, M. (1990). Urban liveability: A review. Urban Geography, 11(1), 1-30. Pallant, J. F. (2005). SPSS survival manual : a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS (2nd ed.). Allen & Unwin: Crows Nest, N.S.W. Panerai, P., Castex, J., Depaule, J. C., & Samuels, I. (2004). Urban forms : the death and life of the urban block. Architectural: Oxford. Paris, C., Beer, A., & Sanders, W. (1993). Housing Australia. Macmillan Education: South Melbourne. Pears, A. (2005). Does higher density really reduce household energy requirements ?: It depends. Urban Policy and Research, 23(3), 367-369. Peattie, L. (1983). Realistic planning and qualitative research. Habitat Intl., 7(5/6), 227- 234. Perin, C. (1970). With man in mind; an interdisciplinary prospectus for environmental design. MIT Press: Cambridge. Perkins, A. (2003). Commentary on the Paper “Embodied and Operational Energy Consumption in the City” by Troy, Holloway, Pullen and Bunker, Urban Policy and Research, 21(1), March 2003 Urban Policy and Research, 21(3), 281 — 285. Phillips, C. (2003). Sustainable place : a place of sustainable development. Wiley- Academy: Chichester ; Hoboken, NJ. Property Council of Australia. (2002). Victoria Park - Zetland, Master Planning Is Good

References | 297 Business. Retrieved June 19, 2005, from http://www.propertyoz.com.au/data/national/advoc/design%20dividend.htm#Victo ria%20Park%20-%20Zetland Property Council of Australia. (2003). Flying high. from http://www.propertyoz.com.au/Article/NewsDetail.aspx?p=56&mid=1022 Property Council of Australia. (2005). Bringing the environment into planning. from http://www.propertyoz.com.au/Article/NewsDetail.aspx?p=56&mid=745 Randolph, B. (2006). Creating a socially sustainable higher density Sydney. Publications, 2009, from http://www.fbe.unsw.edu.au/cf/news/2006/mayorsforumhandouts.pdf Randolph, B. (2006). Delivering the compact city in Australia: current trends and future implications. Urban Policy and Research, 24(4), 473-490. Randolph, B. (2009). Creating a socially sustainable higher density Sydney. Publications, retrieved June 15, 2010, from http://www.fbe.unsw.edu.au/cf/news/2006/mayorsforumhandouts.pdf Randolph, B., & Troy, P. (2008). Attitudes to conservation and water consumption Environmental Science & Policy, 11(5), 441-455. Rapoport, A. (1975). Toward a Redefinition of Density. Environment and Behavior, 7(22), 133-158. Rapoport, A. (2000). Theory, Culture and Housing. Housing, Theory and Society, 17, 145-165. REA Group Australia. (2008). Sold properties, New South Wales -Zetland. from http://www.realestate.com.au/realestate/agent/southsydneyrealty REA Group Australia. (2010). Buy properties, New South Wales -Zetland. retrieved June 15, 2010, from http://www.realestate.com.au/realestate/agent/southsydneyrealty Reiss, A. J. J. (1971). Systematic observation of natural social phenomena. In Costner H. (Ed.), Sociological Methodology (pp. 3-33). Jossey-Bass: San Francisco. Rodiek, S., & Schwarz, B. (2005). The role of the outdoors in residential environments for aging. Haworth Press: New York. Roseth, J., & Auster, M. (1983). Small-scale medium density housing : design guidelines for small-scale infill development in established residential areas. Dept. of Environment and Planning: Sydney. Rykwert, J. (2004). The seduction of place : the history and future of the city. Oxford University Press: Oxford., [England]. Salant, P., & Dillman, D. A. (1994). How to conduct your own survey. Wiley: New York. Sale, K. (1980). Human scale. Coward, McCann & Geoghegan: New York. Salt, B. (2001). The big shift : welcome to the third Australian culture : the Bernard Salt report. Hardie Grant Books: South Yarra, Vic. Salt, B. (2003). The big shift : welcome to the third Australian culture : the Bernard Salt report (2nd ed.). Hardie Grant Books: South Yarra, Vic. Samuels, R. (1994). An environmental design and environmental psychology approach to security - interactional environmental criminology Sydney: Solarch, School of Architecture, University of New South Wales, Australia.o. Document Number) Samuels, R. (1995). Defensible design and security : university campuses. Australian

References | 298 Govt. Pub. Service: Canberra. Samuels, R., & Ballinger, J. A. (1989). Environmental Fit and Solar Efficient Architecture. Paper presented at the Joint ANZES/ANZAScA Conference, Solar Buildings in the 90s, Hobart, Australia, July. Samuels, R., & Ballinger, J. A. (1992). Quality and Efficiency in Lighting: Social and environmental responsibility. Unpublished Final Report to Pacific Power. Solarch, UNSW. Samuels, R., Randolph, B., Graham, P., McCormick, T., & Pollard, B. (2010). Micro- urban-climatic thermal emissions : in a medium-density residential precinct. City Futures Projects . Retrieved June 15, 2011, from http://www.fbe.unsw.edu.au/cf/research/cityfuturesprojects/heatisland/ Sassen, S. (1991). The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton University Press: Princeton. Sassi, P. (2006). Strategies for sustainable architecture (1st ed.). Taylor & Francis: New York, NY. Sbriglio, J. (2004). Le Corbusier : The Unité d'habitation in Marseilles and the four other unité blocks in Rezé-les-Nantes, Berlin, Briey en Forêt and Firminy (Bilingual original ed.). Fondation Le Corbusier: Paris. Schoenauer, N. (2000). 6,000 years of housing (Rev. & expanded ed.). W.W. Norton: New York. Schumacher, E. F. (1999). Small is beautiful : a study of economics as if people mattered. Hartley & Marks Publishers: Washington. Schwarz, N., & Sudman, S. (1992). Context effects in social and psychological research. Springer-Verlag: New York. Searle, G. (2004a). The limits to urban consolidation: a framework to assessing limits. Australian Planner, 41(1), 42-48. Searle, G. (2004b). Planning Discourses and Sydney's Recent Metropolitan Strategies. Urban Policy and Research, 22(4), 367 — 391. Searle, G. (2006). Is the 'City of Cities' Metropolitan Strategy the answer for Sydney? [Practice Reviews.]. Urban Policy and Research, 24(4), 553-566. Searle, G. (2007). Sydney’s urban consolidation experience: Power, politics and community. Urban Research Program publication series, Griffith University(12). Searle, G., & Bounds, M. (1999). State powers, state land and competition for global entertainment: the case of Sydney. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 23(1), 165-172. Searle, G., & Byrne, J. (2002). Selective memories, sanitised futures: constructing visions of future place in Sydney. Urban Policy and Research, 20(1), 7-25. Selltiz, C., Wrightsman, L. S., & Cook, S. W. (1976). Research methods in social relations (3d ed.). Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York. Sime, J. D. (1986). Creating places or designing spaces. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 6(1), 49-63. SMH. (2001). Taskforce thinks design costs too much The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) 13.11.01, Cited in News archive july to december 2001, Butterpaper: australian and new zealand architecture and design resources, retrieved July15, 2008, from http://www.butterpaper.com/cms/ SMH. (2002). The Greening Of Sydney: The NSW Government Architect Wants To

References | 299 Take Garden Apartments To Another Level. The Sydney Morning Herald, Interview with Chris Johnson, Accessed from Comment on Current Issues, NSW Government Architect, NSW Department of Commerce, retrieved June 18, 2006, from http://www.govarch.dpws.nsw.gov.au/comment.htm SMH. (2002a). Groundscraper: A grand project at Zetland focusing on building larger more homely apartments. The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) Feb 20-27, 2002, Cited in Domain., retrieved June 18, 2008, from http://www.butterpaper.com/cms/ SMH. (2002b). Love thy neighbour, With land a dwindling resource, suburbia's on the way out. So, writes Elizabeth Farrelly, get used to it. The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) 13.11.01, By Elizabeth Farrelly, Cited in National News archive November 30, 2002., retrieved June 18, 2008, from http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/11/29/1038386312284.html SMH. (2003a). Green Heart. The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) 03.05.2003, retrieved June 18, 2008, http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/02/1051382079619.html SMH. (2003b). How apartment living grew up. The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) 29.05.03.- Cited in comment by Bruce Judd, Director Master of Urban Development and Design Program, Faculty of the Built Environment, UNSW., retrieved June 18, 2008, from www.smh.com.au. SMH. (2003c). Rise of the loggia : Suddenly they are everywhere - but what exactly is this new feature on flash flats? The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) April 04, 2003, Cited in Domain., retrieved June 18, 2008, from http://www.butterpaper.com/cms/ SMH. (2003d). There goes the neighbourhood. The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) 29.05.03.- Cited in News and Features, Vertical Villages , by Bonnie Malkin and Anthony Dennis, retrieved June 20, 2008, from www.smh.com.au. SMH. (2008). Battle for beauty in a city going flat out. The Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) 19.01.08.- Cited in News and Features, by Wendy Frew Urban Affairs Editor, from retrieved June 18, 2010, www.smh.com.au. Smith, D. P., & Butler, T. (2007). Conceptualising the sociospatial diversity of gentrification: `to boldly go' into contemporary gentrified spaces, the `final frontier'? Environment and Planning A, 39(1), 2-9. Smith, N. (1996). The new urban frontier : gentrification and the revanchist city. Routledge: London ; New York. Smith, P. F. (2001). Architecture in a climate of change : a guide to sustainable design. Architectural Press: Oxford. Soebarto, V. I. (1999). A 'new' approach to passive design for residential buildings in a tropical climate. Paper presented at the Paper presented at the conference on Sustaining the Future: Energy-Ecology-Architecture, Passive Low Energy Architecture, PLEA 1999. Sommer, R. (1983). Social design : creating buildings with people in mind. Prentice- Hall: Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Sommer, R., & Sommer, B. B. (2002). A practical guide to behavioral research : tools and techniques (5th ed.). Oxford University Press: New York. South Sydney City Council – Affordable Housing Development Control Plan (DCP), (2002). Spearritt, P. (1978). Sydney since the twenties. Hale and Iremonger: Sydney. Stanisic Associates Architects. (2006). Projects. retrieved June 18, 2008, from

References | 300 http://www.stanisic.com.au/html/projects.php Stevens, J. (1996). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (3rd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, N.J. Stokols, D. (1977). Perspectives on environment and behavior : theory, research, and applications. Plenum Press: New York. Sullivan, W. C., Kuo, F. E., & Depooter, S. F. (2004). The Fruit of Urban Nature: Vital Neighborhood Spaces. Environment and Behavior, 36(5), 678-700. Szokolay, S. V. (2004). Introduction to architectural science : the basis of sustainable design. Architectural Press: Oxford. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2001). Using multivariate statistics (4th ed.). Allyn and Bacon: Boston, Mass. Talen, E. (1999). Sense of Community and Neighbourhood Form: An Assessment of the Social Doctrine of New Urbanism. Urban Studies, 36(8), 1361-1379. Talen, E. (2006). Design for Diversity: Evaluating the Context of Socially Mixed Neighbourhoods. Journal of Urban Design, 11 (1), 1-32. Talen, E. (2008). Design for diversity : exploring socially mixed neighborhoods (1st ed.). Elsevier/Architectural Press: Amsterdam ; Boston. Taube, G. (1972). The Social Structural Sources Of Residential Satisfaction- Dissatisfactionin Public Housing. Unpublished 7220811, Brandeis University, United States -- Massachusetts. Taylor, A. F., Kuo, F. E., & Sullivan, W. C. (2002). Views Of Nature And Self-Discipline: Evidence From Inner City Children. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22(1- 2), 49-63. Taylor, R. B., Gottfredson, S. D., & Brower, S. (1984). Block Crime and Fear: Defensible Space, Local Social Ties, and Territorial Functioning. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 21(4), 303-331. The Garreau Group. (2008). Edge City: Life on the New Frontier. Retrieved June 10, 2010, from http://www.garreau.com/main.cfm?action=chapters&id=2 Thomas, R. (2003). Sustainable urban design : an environmental approach. Spon Press: London ; New York. Thomas, R. (2006). Environmental design : an introduction for architects and engineers (3rd ed.). Taylor & Francis: London ; New York. Thorne, R. (1983). Medium density housing in Sydney - 2 surveys : attitudes of users & non-users. Dept. of Architecture, University of Sydney for the I.B. Fell Research Centre Committee: Sydney. Tiesdell, S. (2002). The New Urbanism and English Residential Design Guidance: A Review. Journal of Urban Design, 7(3), 353 - 376. Tonkin Zulaikha Greer Architects. (2006). Arc Apartments, Victoria Park 2008, from http://www.tzg.com.au/projects/arc-apartments Toronto Star. (2010). Le Corbusier’s Berlin apartment building was home to an idea. Toronto Star, Published On Fri Jun 04 2010, Cited in Urban Issues, Architecture, By Christopher Hume, retrieved June 10, 2010, from http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/819524--hume-le-corbusier-s-berlin- apartment-building-was-home-to-an-idea Tourism New South Wales. (2010). History of New South Wales. Retrieved June 10, 2010, from http://www.visitnsw.com/History_of_New_South_Wales_p3086.aspx

References | 301 Troy, P. N. (1971). Environmental quality in four Sydney suburban areas : an analysis of the results of a survey of 735 households conducted in 1968. Urban Research Unit, Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University: Canberra. Troy, P. N. (1995). Australian cities : issues, strategies and policies for urban Australia in the 1990s. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge ; Melbourne. Troy, P. N. (1996a). The perils of urban consolidation : a discussion of Australian housing and urban development policies. Federation Press: Sydney, NSW. Troy, P. N. (1996b). Urban consolidation and the family. In Jenks M., E. Burton & K. Williams (Eds.), The Compact city : a sustainable urban form? (1st ed., pp. 155– 165). E & FN Spon: London ; Melbourne. Troy, P. N., ANU, & URP. (1991). The benefits of owner occupation. Urban Research Program (URP), Research School of Social Sciences, Australian National University (ANU): Canberra. Troy, P. N., Randolph, B., & Holloway, D. (2005). Water use and the built environment : patterns of water consumption in Sydney. City Futures Research Centre, University of New South Wales: Sydney. Turner Associates. (2006). Urban Housing. Retrieved March 18, 2006, from http://www.turnerassociates.com.au/ Turrent, D. (2007). Sustainable architecture. RIBA Publishing: London. Ulrich, R. S. (1984). View Through a Window May Influence Recovery from Surgery. Science, 224, April 27, 420-421. Van Harrison, R. (1978). Person-Environment fit and job stress. In Cooper C. L. & R. Payne (Eds.), Stress at work (pp. xii, 293 p.). Wiley: Chichester ; New York. Vanclay, F. M., Higgins, M., & Blackshaw, A. (2008). Making sense of place : exploring concepts and expressions of place through different senses and lenses. National Museum of Australia Press: Canberra. Veenhoven, R. (1996). Happy life-expectancy. Social Indicators Research, 39(1), 1-58. Veenhoven, R. (2000). The Four Qualities of Life. Journal of Happiness Studies, 1(1), 1-39. Vining, J., & Ebreo, A. (1990). What Makes a Recycler? A Comparison of Recyclers and Nonrecyclers Environment and Behavior, 22(1), 55-73. Vitruvius, P., Rowland, I. D., Dewar, M., & Howe, T. N. (1999). Vitruvius : ten books on architecture (New ed.). Cambridge University Press: New York. Weber, B. D. R. R. (2007). Valuing New Development in Distressed Urban Neighborhoods: Does Design Matter?s. Journal of the American Planning Association, 73(1), 100 - 111. Weirick, J. (2004). Watering Sydney-the NSW Government Architect and Hassell create water responsive parks, streets and public spaces for Victoria Park precinct. Architecture Australia, 2004(January/February 2004). Wekerle, G. (2000). From Eyes on the Street to Safe Cities [Speaking of Places]. Places Journal, 13(1), 44-49. Wells, N. M. (2000). At Home with Nature: Effects of "Greenness" on Children's Cognitive Functioning. Environment and Behavior, 32(6), 775-795. Williams, D. E., & Knovel (Firm). (2007). Sustainable design : ecology, architecture, and planning. Wiley: Hoboken.

References | 302 Williams, F. (1968). Reasoning with statistics; simplified examples in communications research. Holt, Rinehart and Winston: New York. Williams, F. (1992). Reasoning with statistics : how to read quantitative research (4th ed.). Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers: Fort Worth. Williams, K., Burton, E., & Jenks, M. (2000). Achieving sustainable urban form. E & FN Spon: London. Wittmann, S. (1997). Architects' Perceptions Regarding Barriers to Sustaianble Architecture. Unpublished Thesis, UNSW, Sydney. Wokingham Borough Council. (2008). Level 2: Form, Perimeter Blocks. Residential Design . Retrieved June 10, 2010, from http://wokinghamdirect.com/EasySiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=6192&type= full&servicetype=Attachment Wong, T. H. (2006). Water Sensitive Urban Design - the Journey Thus Far. Australian Journal of Water Resources, 10(3), 213-222. Wood, L., Giles-Corti, B., & Bulsara, M. (2005). The pet connection: Pets as a conduit for social capital? Social Science & Medicine, 61(6), 1159-1173. Yancey, W. L. (1971). Architecture, Interaction, and Social Control: The Case of a Large-Scale Public Housing Project. Environment and Behavior, 3(1), 3-21. Yin, R. K. (2002). Case study research : design and methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, Calif. Young, S. (1976). Social and psychological effects of living in high-rise buildings. Ian Buchan Fell Research Project on Housing, Faculty of Architecture, University of Sydney: Sydney. Young, S., & MSJ Keys Young Planners. (1976). Social and psychological needs related to residential density and housing form : a report. National Capital Development Commission: Canberra. Youngentob, K., & Hostetler, M. (2005). Is a New Urban Development Model Building Greener Communities? Environment and Behavior, 37(6), 731-759. Zeisel, J. (1981). Inquiry by design : tools for environment-behavior research. Brooks/Cole Pub. Co.: Monterey, Calif. Zeisel, J. (2005). Inquiry by design : environment/behavior/neuroscience in architecture, interiors, landscape, and planning (Rev. ed.). W.W. Norton & Company: New York. Zeisel, J., & Griffin, M. (1975). Charlesview Housing : a diagnostic evaluation. Architecture Research Office, Graduate School of Design, Harvard University: [Cambridge, Mass.]. Zukin, S. (1982). Loft living : culture and capital in urban change. Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore.

References | 303 Appendices Appendix 1 : List of published conference papers relating to this research, 2005-2009. Conference paper attached: Reassessing ‘people and residential environment’: socio-spatial aspects of built forms Conference paper attached: Where is the sustainable buzz? : design and liveability of higher density urban housing in inner Sydney

Appendix 2 : Study area Map of Sydney showing CBD & study area Layouts of selected complexes

Appendix 3 : Survey related documents HREA (Human research ethics advisory) approval Cover letter from Landcom Project information statement Consent letter Survey questionnaire Interview questions

Appendix 4 : Statistical Analyses (SPSS) Factor analysis Regression analysis

Appendix 1 : List of published conference papers relating to this research, 2005-2009. Conference paper attached: Reassessing ‘people and residential environment’: socio-spatial aspects of built forms Conference paper attached: Where is the sustainable buzz? : design and liveability of higher density urban housing in inner Sydney

Appendix | 1 PUBLISHED CONFERENCE PAPERS RELATING

TO THIS RESEARCH, 2005-2009

This research has generated five conference papers, listed below, which in turn have been used to develop and focus the substantive research through peer review, feedback, questions and discussion at the respective conferences:

2005: “Socio-spatial aspects of built forms: an interface of ‘people and residential environment’”, in Roberta Julian, Reannan Rottier and Rob White (eds), Community , Place , Change - The Australian Sociological Association (TASA) 2005, Sandy Bay : 2005.

2005: “Reassessing ‘people and residential environment’: socio-spatial aspects of built forms”, in Fabricating Sustainability, 39th Annual Conference of the Architectural Science Association, Wellington: 2005.

2005: ‘Diversity in Housing: Reassessing the medium-density house forms of Sydney’, in Housing and Globalisation, APNHR (the Asia-Pacific Network for Housing Research) Conference, Kobe: 2005.

2007: ‘Users’ – Architects’ viewpoint: A basis for reinvestigation of urban multifamily housing forms (SYDNEY)’, in 18 Commonwealth Association of Architects [CAA ] Conference 2006. [Published by Commonwealth Association of Architects & Institute of Architects Bangladesh (IAB), in Society Architects and Emerging Issues, Dhaka, April 2007]

2009: “Where is the sustainable buzz? : design and liveability of higher density urban housing in inner Sydney”, in Stephen Loo, Gregory Nolan, Sabrina Sequeira, Florence Soriano (eds), Performative Ecologies in the Built Environment: Sustainability Research Across Disciplines: 43rd Annual Conference of the Australian and New Zealand Architectural Science Association, Launceston: 2009.

Where is the sustainable buzz? : design and liveability of higher density urban housing in inner Sydney

Mamun Rashid1 and Dilshad Rahat Ara2

1The University New South Wales, Australia 2UAE University, UAE

ABSTRACT: Sustainable design is now a growing trend within various fields. However the most common response to sustainable design continues to be 'eco-friendly' and 'economic' designs while social factors incorporating users' design satisfaction and connectivity with place have been currently downplayed. Although measuring users satisfaction has been one of the popular areas of inquiry for housing environment researches, in architecture little attention has been paid so far to successful design factors that are sustained by the users. No matter how energy and water efficient a building might be, it becomes a waste of resources and potential detriment to the community if no one wants to occupy it. With this presupposition the study investigates, what is sustainable design taking into consideration a designed setting where architects’ and users' approaches and needs are constantly negotiated. This issue is very important for medium to medium-high density residential forms as these are gradually increasing in numbers in inner Sydney, where space/ land is at premium. Results from an investigation into a master planned medium-high density brown-field development at an inner area of Zetland are presented in this paper. In this highlighted context, the designs are not apparently 'green' but to some extent sustainable parameters were considered when these were designed. Residents' views of dwelling and neighbourhood in form of household surveys are taken as primal consideration when assessing design issues. Factor Analysis was used to represent variables relating to the residents' assessments of residential and neighbourhood features. Secondly, the emerged factors along with objective features and person characteristics were used in a multiple regression analysis to identify subset of independent variables that would be most useful in predicting the dependent variable 'overall satisfaction' with living environment. The results show that architects’ design intentions and approaches, in line with socio-psychological design issues, are not always in conflict with the users, on the contrary users - aspiring for a particular urban lifestyle, are happy to pursue design cues to fine- tune in a 'particular setting'.

Conference theme: Architectural Keywords: Architecture, sustainable design, higher density housing, users' assessment.

INTRODUCTION: WHERE IS THE BUZZ?

Given the current political climate both in Australia and across the pacific sustainable design is resurfacing as a popular topic in different fields. Despite the growing awareness and interest, few words in the design and building industry have been so inadequately used as the ‘sustainable design’ and ‘green architecture’. Many misconceptions and shifting definitions exist that have created barriers to its adoption.

Broadly, sustainable design involves the strategic use of design to meet current and future human needs without compromising the environment. Currently ‘sustainability movement’ – a new prevalent term is gaining significance. Many now see it as a philosophy not a stylistic endeavour. It is conceived as an approach to design and not an aesthetic exercise (Lind, Hartmann, and Wakenhut 1985; McLennan 2004). In the design field, many architects, engineers, planners, developers (as clients in high density development) have come to think more strategically about the environmental implications of building, especially in the residential sector. Moving beyond the basic inclusion of a few green materials or features, they are increasingly conceiving of residences as coherent, holistic systems, with extended life cycles that must be considered throughout the design process (Stang and Hawthorne 2005). By now some of the stakeholders in building industry have come to agree that by adding few solar collectors, photovoltaics, biological recycling systems, and building automation systems and double-skin facades – in one single building will not instantaneously create an ecological architecture. The demand for more innovative solutions to meet progressively complex consumer requirements is increasingly at the forefront of design practice and research. Coinciding with this is the urgency for adequate provision for more socially sustainable services alongside environmental and economical ones.

However despite these new developments the most common response to sustainable design has been 'eco- friendly' and 'economic' designs while social factors incorporating users' design satisfaction and in-built opportunity for sustainable behaviour at home, and connectivity with place have been downplayed. No matter how energy and water efficient a building might be, it becomes a waste of resources and potential detriment to

43rd Annual Conference of the Architectural Science Association, ANZAScA 2009, University of Tasmania the community if users are unaware (or uncaring) of the sustainable potential and/or act energy ‘unconsciously’ or dissatisfied with designs. Almost two decades ago in an in-depth evaluation or assessment of energy efficient houses in Australian cities indicated that ‘prescriptive design solution and standards do not necessarily lead to the consequences expected’ (Ballinger, Samuels, and ERDC 1991:139). Findings from the study reinforce the notion that the household as well as the house should be foci of attention in promoting energy efficiency. Accordingly noted:

Energy efficiency seems more likely to be consequence of a thermally comfortable and amenable house inhabited by energy-literate and ecologically responsible individuals, than a driving force in its own right. (Ballinger, Samuels, and ERDC 1991:6)

However, given the current trend towards higher density environments in inner areas the solutions of these settings have not been tested. There is lack of current study on Sydney inner city medium &higher density housing which evaluates housing from users’ perspective including both subjective and objective features of housing design and its setting. Moreover there is lack of studies on inner city master planned higher density brownfield developments (M. McGuirk and Dowling 2007). Within this premise we investigate higher density housing in inner Sydney taking users’ satisfaction and sustainable design issues as the major points of investigation.

Source: (Authors 2006) Figure 1: Left: Variation in architectural design and forms, view of midrise forms on left side. Middle: Permeable design taking advantage of internal court and greenery. Right: View from a low-rise building toward the park and high-rise form in the distant. Central Park with ESD consideration (below ground).

1. SUSTAINABLE DESIGN AND ‘GOOD DESIGN’: TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN

As practicing architects and academics we personally believe that sustainable design is an integral part of good design. No building, space or place can be considered well designed if it does not contribute to environmental, social and economic sustainability. Conversely, no building, space or place can be considered sustainable if it is not well designed. However, many people see design quality and sustainable design as two separate issues: one a question of aesthetics, the other of technical solutions to the problems of reducing energy consumption. Interestingly, orientation of built-form to suit natural conditions which is one the fundamental tenets of residential design is now seen as basis to sustainable design and these are sometimes defined as passive design factors (Knowles 1981; Szokolay 2004). Architect Aalto Aalto strongly argued that the natural energy of light and air must be brought directly into buildings, ‘The biological conditions for human life are, among others, air, light and sun...’. He corroborates, that well designed high-rise buildings have a ‘harmonious integration with nature and the community around’ them, with ‘flawless orientation with respect to sun and view, and many other purely qualitative improvements’ (Menin and Samuel 2003, p. 156-157). This is further validated in an empirical study ‘Floor mass, a north orientation and a shallow plan seem to indicate positive links to thermal comfort and lifestyle satisfactions, in Sydney and Adelaide’ (Ballinger, Samuels, and ERDC 1991, p:139).

As observed in the fieldwork, these are some of the issues that have been dealt with in the designs of Victoria Park, a master planned residential development. Deviation to the cardinal directions in the master plan orients the buildings in an angular position. This resulted in two sides exposed to north and being peripheral building inner courtyard sides also have northern side exposure. Taking Advantages of Australian condition especially in Sydney allows to bring-in natural light, maximize natural air flow and thereby connecting the interior with exterior. These afford energy savings as well as physiological comfort and psychological needs of users. It is not just design quality of the building but the outdoor setting with which users’ link visually from indoor or through their behaviour. As a part of environmental sustainability approach to brownfield redevelopment, Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) techniques were integrated. Bio-retention swale or the Stormwater feature in central park on top at public view level, was designed and landscaped. Interestingly, the effect of the outdoor setting on users’ overall satisfaction of residential environment remains unstudied.

We see sustainable design and good design are mutually reinforcing. Good design of a building or a group of building can positively enhance the quality of an area where architecture, landscape and planning are indivisible. Good design is not just defined by how a building, space or place looks, but how it functions, how it meets the social, economic and environmental needs of the people it serves, and how it can be managed and adapted as those needs change over time.

43rd Annual Conference of the Architectural Science Association, ANZAScA 2009, University of Tasmania 2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Currently there is an urgency in pursuing design issues in line with user-social issues although the development in this area is marginal when it comes to generic interpretation of sustainable housing design issues. Measuring sustainable design parameters especially one that looks into users and design satisfaction is fraught with difficulty but one that is crucial. Regrettably measuring users satisfaction has been one of the popular areas of inquiry for housing environment researches, in architecture however little attention has been paid so far to successful design factors that are sustained by the users. The word liveability has multivalent meanings and has come to reflect various user subjectivities and values. If a place is inhabited it must be somewhat liveable. However some generalities can be made about the term that assists in operationalizing it to meet the daily life needs of residents in place. We observe up to now that the concepts of liveability, quality of place and sustainability overlap. As reviewed (Kamp, Leidelmeijer, Marsmana, and Hollander 2003) they all refer to aspects of the person-environment relationship where ‘environment’ is broadly defined (physical, built, social, economic and cultural). While liveability and quality of place are related to the environment, from the perspective of a person, quality of life is primarily related to the person. The environmental perspective is only way to look at quality. The object of sustainability is the future (the person- environment fit in the future), while liveability and quality of life are focused on the ‘here and now’. Sustainability thus may be interpreted as long term liveability. Consequently, Newman, Shafer and several authors without hesitation call for an integration of the concepts of liveability and sustainability (cited in Kamp, Leidelmeijer, Marsmana, and Hollander 2003)

Source: (Authors 2007) Figure 2: From left: Outdoor spaces as places for social interaction. Activities in central park: Tai-chi session, dogs & people. From right: Activities indicate presence of higher number of families with children in Victoria Park than any other typical inner city higher density development.

Liveability, at its roots, is about living. Many authors use the city, sometimes the region as the subject of liveability measurement. If liveability is about living and daily life ( jobs, access to daily services, housing, social activities etc.), the argument here is, the subject of measurement should be at scale where people actually do most of their living at dwelling and neighbourhood level where they spent substantial part of daily life (figure 2). Among different prevailing approaches of liveability research this study relies on preference and satisfactions of users in measuring individuals’ perceptions about their home environment. This type of research is rich and important in understanding local contexts, issues, desires and preferences, but tends to be less robust due to subjectivity (Larice 2005). Most are willing to recognise their deficiencies, but call for them to be combined and triangulated with other objective and empirical methods. This double pronged approach of objective and subjective research provides the model for place- based approach that follows. However, other methods used for triangulation are not presented in this paper. There are many studies about residents’ satisfaction or perception as measuring the quality of dwelling environment. Most of them are form based and concentrate on city scale. Little attention has been paid to design issues in an inner city setting.

Table 1: Matrix of explanatory Variables – [Dependent Variable Overall Residential Satisfaction (O-Sat)]

Person/Household Objective Environmental Features Perceptions, Assessment and Behaviour : Characterises Social , Economic & Environmental Features

HH Ob Env P Soc-Eco-Con Age Dwelling unit floor: higher floor or lower floor Neighbourliness Income Dwelling complex: high-rise, mid-rise, low-rise Conservation: Recycle Tenure Size of dwelling: number of rooms Economic: Investment

P Env Neighbourhood and Dwelling: Factor1: Security, Management & Facilities Factor 2: Neighbourhood Features Factor 3: Dwelling Design & Features Comfort

43rd Annual Conference of the Architectural Science Association, ANZAScA 2009, University of Tasmania The study of residential satisfaction had been developing since 1960s in order to evaluate the quality of housing. Since then, researchers have increasingly examined the relationship between the resident’s satisfaction and the physical and social aspects of the residential environments. Weidemann and Anderson extended the model proposed by Marans and Spreckelmeyer for understanding residents’ responses especially satisfaction to include behavioural intentions, behaviour and social aspects of the residential environment as well (cited in Amérigo & Aragonés, 1997; Galster, 1987). They illuminate the importance of considering how assessments of both the physical and social components of the residential environment influence residents’ satisfaction.

In summary there is a consensus that residential satisfaction is related to three sets of factors: 1) objective characteristics of environment, 2) objective characteristics of residents, and 3) their subjective beliefs, perception and aspirations (Galster, 1987). Within these (outlined in Table 1) the research is aimed at obtaining predictors of overall residential satisfaction. There are numerous studies where residents’ satisfaction is considered as dependent variable or as residential quality indicator. But these concentrate on low income housing or public housing areas with main focus on policies related issues. Another approach measuring resident satisfaction in the literature has been interpreting resident satisfaction as a predictor of several behaviours.

3. METHODS

The data was collected by a questionnaire survey. Study respondents were all residents at eight low-rise to high-rise complexes in Victoria Park, Zetland five kilometres from Sydney CBD. After meeting all ethical considerations the data was collected. The eight page questionnaire had several parts. It was designed to be both structured and open- ended. The information sought from interviewees was based on categories: occupancy pattern, motivations, choice preferences of the area and dwelling, satisfaction with spaces and activities ranging from neighbourhood level to residential level, energy literacy and consciousness, environmental fit, the socio-economic criteria. However, only analyses of part of satisfaction questions are reported here. The questions were formed in groups. The 5 dependent variables (Appendix-Table 2) were grouped under ‘On the whole, how satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following aspects of Victoria Park?’. The independent variables were grouped under following questions: ‘How satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following aspects of the Victoria park?’, ‘How satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following features of your dwelling?’ and ‘How satisfied/dissatisfied are you with these characteristics concerning your dwelling?’ (Appendix-Table 3).

3.1 STUDY SITE & PARTICIPANTS

The study area has had a long and varied history dating back to the 19th century. Originally it was known as the Waterloo swamp and later became the home of the Victoria Park pony club racecourse. It was a Naval Supply Centre until the late 90s when Landcom took over the site. It can be considered a classic brownfield development example even before the sustainability arguments began to proliferate. It was re-developed as a master-planned ‘new town’ medium-high density community but one that is integrated into its surrounding urban fabric and, and its surrounding established communities. It was intended to have mixed housing types, and perhaps some socio-economic diversity in terms of tenure and household type. Landcom’s two primary aims for this project were: to establish new benchmarks in urban design and development best practice through good planning and design and to achieve a reasonable return consistent with the level of risk involved. Landcom in a competitive process transferred the lots to developers, where they in turn engaged reputed architects for each lot. A substantial part of this 25 hectare site is devoted to the public domain, featuring four large and functional, well-landscaped, green community spaces.

Source: (Landcom 2005) Figure 3: Left: 3D simulations of formal arrangement. Right layout: low-rises on left, high-rises on right.

The height of form varies from low-rise to high-rises with all of the complexes individually arranged around a internal courtyard (see figure 1 & 3). The rationale for selecting this area was that user’ responses on dwelling design features and outdoor spaces from different form and height of buildings within a common neighbourhood can be elicited and tested. All designs had to conform design form guidelines (E.g. all dwellings have a balcony) but again individual design ideas were not inhibited. Most balconies either overlooked outdoor spaces or indoor courtyards.

Socio-demographic profile of sample. With a response rate of 18% the respondents were almost equally distributed in low-rise (46%) and higher-rise complexes (54%). Care was taken to meet the minimum size requirements for factoral

43rd Annual Conference of the Architectural Science Association, ANZAScA 2009, University of Tasmania and regression analyses before proceeding on further analyses (Field 2005, p. 640; Pallant 2005, p.174; Tabachnick and Fidell 2001). Vast majority of respondents (66%) were residing in 2 bedroom apartment, while 21% were from 3 bedroom larger apartments and the rest were from 1 bedroom or studio apartment. 70 % of respondents were from lower floors (0 – 4, floor), 22% were from middle floors (5–8, floors) and the rest from higher floors (9-18 floors). The median household income of entire sample was in the range of $80,000 - $100,000 per annum. This was similar to the Census 2006 median household income of $89,492 for Zetland suburb, which is much higher than Australian median household income of $53,404 (ABS 2006). The dominant occupational category of the sample was Professional and Managerial (74%) combined. 40% of the respondents were under 30 years of age. Median age of respondents was 34 years, compared with 31 years in Zetland Suburb and 37 years in Australia (ABS 2006). Slightly more than half of the respondents were female (54%). Since there was almost 50/50 split, gender bias was not an issue. In this survey vast majority of the respondent’s were from Australia (62%). In terms of cultural grouping 79% of the respondents were from Australia, New Zealand, North America and European countries, whereas only 16 % were from Asian countries.

4. RESULTS

Analyses were performed using SPSS version 15 for factor analysis, regression & evaluation of assumptions. The term factor analysis is used here to refer to principal component analysis (PCA).Based on the model of residential satisfaction described in section 2 (Table 1) multiple regression (hierarchical) was done to identify the predictor variables of overall residential satisfaction which in turn contributes to liveability of the dwelling environment. To draw conclusions about a population based on a regression analysis done on a sample, several assumptions (Outliers, Normality, Linearity & Multicollinearity) were investigated for accepted value (Field 2005; Pallant 2005).

Prior to performing regression analysis data reduction measures were taken. Factor Analysis was used to reduce the data to more focused and, and therefore, more manageable proportions. The underlying assumption is that since every population is multivariate, “... groups need to be studied with as many variables as possible, with all variables simultaneously represented, preferably in a multivariate typology” (cited in Taube 1972, p.476). To have as many relevant variables as possible represented in the regression, factoral analysis was done. Select variables were entered individually in the regression because of their relative importance and their non association in terms of the effects they were measuring.

Finally to estimate the influence of predictor variables on overall residential satisfaction (O-Sat) with the dwelling three regression equations were estimated. In each equation a base set of personal characteristics (age, income and tenure, HH) and objective variables of dwelling environment (floor level, complex form and number of bedrooms, Ob Env) were included. In each subsequent model the two variable groups listed under Perceptions, Assessment and Behaviour in Table 1 were added one at a time to observe both the relative contributions of the set of variables to the predictions of overall dwelling satisfaction, and the effect of the addition of each set on the importance of living on a different floor and dwelling complex. The results of entering these hierarchically in a standard regression analysis are presented in Table 4 (Appendix). This shows the results of adding each of the two groups of measures (P Soc-Eco- Con and P Env) to the base set of predictors. In the Durbin–Watson statistic a value near to 2 (1.98) indicates there appears to be no autocorrelation in the residuals from the regression analysis.

4.1 DISCUSSION

Most simply stated, these empirical findings suggest that perceptual and attitudinal data elicited from people about the residential environment, particularly the dwelling and neighbourhood features are most helpful in accounting for their satisfaction with their housing. It should be noted that none of the independent variables singlehandedly show a strong relationship with the dependent variable. The closeness of beta values demonstrates that the significant variables as a whole exert influence on overall satisfaction. Given the complexity of residential satisfaction this is comprehensible. From the outset this study argued that overall residential satisfaction is likely to be a function of satisfaction with environmental, social and economic aspects. This outcome underpins the theoretical framework elaborated in a previous section.

This finding contributes to an understanding of the importance of good design of a dwelling, which helps moderate the potentially negative effects of high-density living. The importance of design features such as layout and the attention given to the design of different areas is validated. Since outdoor neighbourhood features stand out prominently, it can be hypothesised that if the relationship between the inside and outside increases the physical and psychological connectivity between the two and it can increase the satisfaction of high-density living.

What is more salient to the specific purpose of this study is the relative indifference of living on a different floor level or in a different form of building type to overall satisfaction with housing. As clearly demonstrated the dwelling level and complex typology were not having any significant affect on residential satisfaction. Once we take other variables of perception and assessment into consideration (Step 3), neither the fact that people live in a high-rise complex nor the size of dwelling have apparent bearing on the satisfaction they derive from it. The representative sample (upon which the analysis is based) does not include many people who live in very tall buildings. Thus the possibility that these residents experience great dissatisfaction with their housing, specifically because they are high, has not really been tested. Victoria park is a special case scenario, designed with landscaping and territorial enclosure in mind, etc. These results thus cannot be generalized to other high or low rise buildings which are not part of a comprehensively designed complex. On the other hand, for the respondents who have been studied, these results imply that living in a high-rise building, per se, has few, if any, properties which are uniquely associated with housing satisfaction or

43rd Annual Conference of the Architectural Science Association, ANZAScA 2009, University of Tasmania dissatisfaction. In other words, it is essentially perceptions of and attitudes towards features of the housing environment, rather than building height, which make a difference.

CONCLUSION & FUTURE DIRECTIONS

It has been projected in the next 30 years 70% of the future housing growth would be accommodated in existing areas (Department of Planning 2005) and as this research anticipates the form/typology in inner areas would be higher density housing in Sydney. It becomes very important at this juncture that we study the existing forms of brownfield developments to make future decisions on sustainable housing forms & designs. In addition, the aspirations, lifestyle, preferences of this middle class (mid-high income) should be object of further studies. In line with studies conducted in United Kingdom & North American cities this research also reveals a growing interest in housing areas near city. In a study of specific class grouping ‘near to- but not in- the city’ in Dockland, London it is suggested that what they are seeking is often associated with some conceptions of suburban life in addition to the appreciation for higher density design (Butler 2007). This investigation has shown that Sydney residents have a clear order of preference for obtaining contemporary urban lifestyle-values through good design of housing. Likeness towards outdoor spaces is also highlighted in these works. Previous scholarship suggests that landscaped outdoor spaces can facilitate vital neighbourhood spaces, then clearly more studies are needed which can take inference from current findings and extend it into deeper social parameters and community development issues.

Lastly this provides systematic evidence that with the middle class design and aesthetics (linked to urban values) are two critical factors among other preferences in housing. This reinforces our hypothesis that design does matter. Far too many poor inner city housing solutions consider sustainability in technological terms while overlooking critical design and user issues. Clearly any future designs should be based on local conditions of site, community preferences (as users communities have better understanding of what really works in design) (CABE 2009). Housing design should also create scope for architects to make creative conjectures. We need creative designs - not repetitions that add to the banality of suburbia or mediocrity of medium density forms that characterizes the housing built-ups of Sydney in the 60s-70s as well as those in the beginning of this century (Delaney 2002).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I (Author 1) wish to thank Dr. Robert Samuels for introducing me to the discipline of environment psychology and to help reconcile the egocentric view of an architect. I want to thank Dr. Dilshad Ara for her support during fieldwork in Sydney and data entry phases.

APPENDIX

Appendix-Table 2: Results of Factor Analysis (PCA) for Dependent Variable

Factor (DV) Cronbach’s Alpha Items Item loading Factor: 0.83 Lifestyle-image /activities .822 Neighbourhood living environ .817 Overall Residential Satisfaction Appearance of the area/bldg .786 Location of Neighbourhood .749 Dwelling .677 Note: Responses were recorded on a 5-point scale with 5 indicating the highest satisfaction.

Appendix-Table 3: Results of Factor Analysis (PCA) for Independent Variables

Factors (IV) Cronbach’s Alpha Items Item loading Factor1: 0.79 Security around/approaching/inside .739 Security (movement at night) .699 Security, Management & Facilities Building Management (efficient, helpful) .633 Provision of community spaces .600 Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) .585 Underground parking area .523 Noise from neighbouring dwellings .424 Factor2: 0.78 Appearance of your st./landscape .818 Satisfaction greenery/park/trees .694 Neighbourhood Features Condition of your street .679 Feel crowded/too many people .550 Privacy .431 Factor3: 0.75 Look of bldg/aesthetics .485 Layout & design (apt) .738 Dwelling Design & Features Entry corridor to dwelling .673 Place furniture .640 Entrance to bldg street level .530 Satisfaction Internal court .466 Note: Responses were recorded on a 5-point scale with 5 indicating the highest satisfaction.

43rd Annual Conference of the Architectural Science Association, ANZAScA 2009, University of Tasmania 1. Survey instruments and scale construction Factor Analysis. In the decision concerning the number of factors to retain 2 techniques were utilized. The methods of factor extraction were eigenvalues greater than 1.0 and examination of the scree plot. An item-loading of at least 0.4 was established as the criterion by which variable loadings were selected to define the factor. Nunnaly (1967, p. 360) suggests that 0.3 is permissible by convention for interpretive identification. A more cautious approach was deemed advisable in the exploratory context of this study. These final factors were then subjected to Cronbach’s internal consistency estimate of reliability. Only factors with alphas of .70 or greater were retained. Finally, new variables were then created for each factor by averaging each participant’s scores on the items comprising the factor.

1.1 Preparation of Dependent & Independent variables Dependent variable (DV) selected for analysis-Overall Residential Satisfaction. Residents were asked how satisfied they were with different elements and characteristics of where they lived and about the problems with their subdivision and larger community. The 5 survey items were generated as the combined output of a review of literature, heuristic experience, content analysis of developers’ advertisements and a reconnaissance observation of the area as well as informal interviews of residents and architects of the planned community. The goal was to identify major variables on issues associated with liveability that are dependent variables relating to dwelling design, aesthetics and neighbourhood features. The 5 DV items of the Overall Residential Satisfaction were subjected to principal component analysis (PCA). The questions were used to measure overall satisfaction to living environment, which includes aspects of dwelling, neighbourhood, lifestyle, location & aesthetics.

Independent Variables (IV) selected for analysis. The original variables were selected not only on the basis of intuitive judgement but also in reference to prior, related research in which most of these measures had been utilised. The selected items were subjective responses of satisfaction with physical environmental features grouped together. Subjective variables relating to neighbourliness, investment, recycling & comfort were not included, but were instead retained as individual variables. Variables on which a high number of respondents indicated ‘Not Applicable’ were not included. Finally 24 variables were subjected to factor analyses. Factor analysis of the 24 items related to neighbourhood and dwelling satisfactions yielded four factors which explained 48% of the total variance. However, Factor 4 (not reported here) did not meet the Cronbach’s alpha cut-off value of .70. Since it did not have good internal consistency, this factor was not used in the regression analysis. The results of the factor analysis are given in Table3, in which only saturations greater than 0.4 of each item in its corresponding component can be seen.

1.2 Analysis of regression

Appendix-Table 4: Significant predictors of overall residential satisfaction: Based on hierarchical regression analysis

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Person/Household + Perceptions and + Perceptions and HH & Ob Env + P Soc-Eco-Con + P Env

Age -.15 -.07 -.19** Income .07 .05 .02 Tenure .22* .10 .13* Floor level .00 .00 .01 Complex form .00 -.01 .00 Number of Bedrooms .12 .03 .01

Neighbourliness .40*** .20** Recycling .08 -.02 Investment .33*** .13*

Factor1: -.01 Factor2: .36*** Factor3: .20** Comfort- winter .14* R2 .07 .43 .62 F Change 1.7 31.53*** 16.87*** NOTE: Statistic reported is the standardized coefficient, . *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Step1: In the first equation predicting overall dwelling satisfaction using only the base set of variables (HH & Ob Env), only 7% (R2 = .07) of the total variations in dwelling satisfaction was explained. The predictive power R2 indicates that the personal characteristics & information about objective features were insufficient in explaining overall residential satisfaction. Of the six variables entered, tenure appears as the only statistically significant ( = .22, p < .05) variable among the important variables. Though not significant, age (=.15) was the second most important variable, while the number of bedrooms (=.12) was the third. The salient aspect of this model was that data on objective features (Ob Env) of dwelling level, type of complex and size of the apartment were not showing any relationship at all to the overall dwelling satisfaction. Step2: Once perceptions and assessment of social, economic & conservation variables (P Soc-Eco-Con) were added, the percentage variance of the model increased markedly to 43% (R2 = .43). The F-value of the model was found to be statistically significant at the .001 level. Table 2 shows that of the nine variables entered only two variables appear as significant. In terms of relative importance among variables, the most important predictor was neighbourliness ( = .40, p < .001) followed by investment ( = .33, p < .001). The model indicates that perceptions of people living around the area & perception of the apartment as good value for money were significantly predictive of overall residential satisfaction. Step3: In the final model an appreciable increase of predictive power R2 occurred when the respondents’ perceptions and assessments of their own residences and neighbourhood (P. Env) were also taken into account, such as satisfaction with dwelling

43rd Annual Conference of the Architectural Science Association, ANZAScA 2009, University of Tasmania layout, internal court or the greenery. At this stage the predictive efficacy of the model was found to be high with a percentage variance explained of 62% (R2 = .62). This was also a significant contribution as indicated by the F change (16.87, p < .001). Table 2 demonstrates that of the thirteen variables entered seven make a statistically significant contribution. This provides strong evidence that in this model a relationship exists between the dependent variable (O-Sat), overall residential satisfaction, and the independent variables. In terms of relative importance among variables, neighbourhood features was the most important predictor, as indicated by a standardised coefficient of .36 (Factor 2, p < .001). That is, the greater the satisfaction is with the neighbourhood features the greater the overall satisfaction. Aspects of dwelling design (Factor 3, = .20, p < .01) and neighbourliness ( = .20, p < .01) were the second strongest predictors. The more satisfied residents are with the dwelling layout, look of the building and people living around them, the more satisfied they are with their overall residential experience. Age ( = .19, p < .01), a personal characteristic, was also related to overall residential satisfaction. The negative direction suggests that respondents in their later age tend to have lower satisfaction compared to their younger counterparts. Comfortable conditions in winter in the living-dining space (comfort, = .14, p < .05) was the next most important predictor, followed by the perception of the apartment as good value for money (investment, = .13, p < .05) and by ownership of the apartment (tenure, = .13, p < .05). This means greater satisfaction with winter comfort conditions and perception of higher value of investment returns can induce more satisfaction with the dwelling. On the other hand overall satisfaction tends to decrease if the apartment is rented. Consistently in all models (Step1: Floor level, = .00; Complex form, = .00, Step2: Floor level, = .00; Complex form, = .01, Step3: Floor level, = .01; Complex form, = .00) the level of dwelling or complex type and size of complex did not add appreciably to the understanding of overall satisfaction.

REFERENCES

ABS, Australian Bureau of Statistics (2006), "QuickStats : Zetland (NSW State Suburb)" Census 2006, Retrieved 2008 (http://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/D3310114.nsf/home/Census+data). Amérigo, M., & Aragonés, J. I. (1997). A Theoretical and Methodological Approach to the Study of Residential Satisfaction. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 17(1), 47-57. Ballinger, John A., Robert Samuels, and ERDC. (1991). A National evaluation of energy efficient houses : attitudes and experiences, thermal and environmental comfort, and energy consumption : final report, December 1991. [Energy Research and Development Corporation (Australia)] Butler, Tim. (2007). "Re-urbanizing London Docklands:Gentrification, Suburbanization or New Urbanism?" International Journal of Urban and Regional Research v. 31.4 759-81. CABE. (2009), "Good design: the fundamentals" Publications, Retrieved 2009 (http://www.cabe.org.uk/publications/good-design). Delaney, Brigid (2002), "Putting an end to the 'ugly flat' syndrome" Publications, Retrieved 2008 (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/07/16/1026802694366.html). Department of Planning, NSW Government. (2005), "City of Cities: A Plan for Sydney's Future" METROPOLITAN STRATEGY, Retrieved 2008 (http://www.metrostrategy.nsw.gov.au). Field, Andy P. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS. London: SAGE Publications. Galster, G. (1987). Identifying the Correlates of Dwelling Satisfaction: An Empirical Critique. Environment and Behavior, 19(5), 539-568. Kamp, Irene van , Kees Leidelmeijer, Gooitske Marsmana, and Augustinus de Hollander. 2003. "Urban environmental quality and human well-being Towards a conceptual framework and demarcation of concepts; a literature study." Landscape and Urban Planning v. 65:5–18. Knowles, Ralph L. (1981). Sun rhythm form. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Lind, Georg, Hans A. Hartmann, and Roland Wakenhut. 1985. Moral development and the social environment : studies in the philosophy and psychology of moral judgment and education. Chicago, Ill. New Brunswick, USA: Precedent Pub. Larice, M. A. (2005). Great neighborhoods: The livability and morphology of high density neighborhoods in urban North America. Unpublished Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, California. M. McGuirk, Pauline and Robyn Dowling. 2007. "Understanding Master-Planned Estates in Australian Cities: A Framework for Research." Urban Policy and Research v. 25: 21–38. McLennan, Jason F. (2004). The philosophy of sustainable design : the future of architecture. Kansas City, Mo.: Ecotone. Menin, Sarah and Flora Samuel. (2003). Nature and space : Aalto and Le Corbusier. London ; New York: Routledge. Nunnally, Jum C. (1967). Psychometric theory. New York,: McGraw-Hill. Pallant, Julie F. (2005). SPSS survival manual : a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS. Crows Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin. Stang, Alanna and Christopher Hawthorne. (2005). The green house : new directions in sustainable architecture. New York: Princeton Architectural Press ; National Building Museum. Szokolay, Steven K. (2004). Introduction to architectural science : the basis of sustainable design. Oxford: Architectural. Tabachnick, Barbara G. and Linda S. Fidell. (2001). Using multivariate statistics. Boston, Mass.: Allyn and Bacon. Taube, Gerald. (1972). "The Social Structural Sources of Residential Satisfaction-Dissatisfaction in Public Housing." 7220811 Thesis, Brandeis University, United States -- Massachusetts.

43rd Annual Conference of the Architectural Science Association, ANZAScA 2009, University of Tasmania Reassessing ‘people and residential environment’: socio-spatial aspects of built forms

Mamun ur Rashid

Faculty of the Built Environment, UNSW, Sydney, Australia.

ABSTRACT: Sustainability of a city is invariably linked to its shape, size, density and uses. Yet regarding urban house-form, a lack of in-depth analysis, or perhaps serious interest, in the way these buildings interact with the user - their purported aim - seems puzzling given the widespread focus on ‘social dimensions’ of sustainability. More commonly, the relationship between people and the environment is viewed as one directional, the latter impacting more on the former. Arguing this, the research takes a particular conceptual approach in establishing lateral linkages and relations between people and built form on an interactive basis. The paper targets a broad definition of housing and sustainability and proposes to take in users’ perspective by including their psycho-social needs and interactions with the built environment. Consequently it is argued that, if any advances in urban sustainability are to be made then a connection between house form and users’ perception and behavioural aspects needs to be re-established. Based on ongoing research on the low-rise to high- rise house forms of Sydney inner city surroundings, the article elaborates on the theoretical framework of this human-environment phenomena and its evaluation.

Conference theme: Human and natural environments Key words: House-form, users’ behaviour, residential environment, sustainability.

INTRODUCTION The inner-city residential fabric of Sydney, with its mix of dwelling types of separate houses, row and terrace houses, low-rise and high-rise apartments portrays a transitional phase of growth. Consequently the city presents a unique case for sustainable dwelling evaluation. However at the moment there is a tendency to build beyond the walk-up range, universally, within all types of urban settlement patterns, without assessing its viability in the total context. The on-going competition for land in the inner areas has favoured the development of dwellings in high-rise blocks. Economic aspects seem to be the sole driving force without meeting the social challenge. This can be seen as a threat to the visions of sustainability. Hence, at this critical point in time the study from a different perspective emphasizes reassessing the existing built form, low-rise to high-rise and the changes that are taking place, as the newly-emerging residential areas with their multicultural social formations will play a part in the issues of broader sustainable environment.

1. SUSTAINABILITY OF THE URBAN FORM In the 1980s in Australia and Europe planning ideals of urban consolidation based on a compact city model were swiftly introduced into policy. This model was seen as a sustainable solution for urban form in most countries of the developed world. It was seen to offer a sustainable use of land – since it restricted growth beyond the urban fringe - enabling reduced travel demand. Economic benefits, in terms of concentrations of business and savings in infrastructure, were associated with compactness. Consequently a major strand of the sustainability discourse focused on whether the urban form of cities can be made more sustainable. In particular, much attention has been paid to the question of whether the arrangement of a city’s physical elements, and the intensity of its use, affect its capacity to function in a sustainable way (Lawrence 2000). Broadly it is now accepted that a relationship exists between the shape, size, density and uses of a city and its sustainability. However, at the moment there is a lack of agreement about the exact nature of this relationship (Williams et al. 2000). Even now today’s city form and structure turn out to be undetermined as today’s urban society and some argued that individual needs are more important than collective values (Frey 1999). Furthermore, there were other considerable issues mainly associated with environmental quality and acceptability which had not been foreseen by the advocates of the model. Other efforts point out the

1 relative merits of urban forms, and stress broadening the portfolio of options for future growth. Hence, the present understanding is that instead of searching for one definitive sustainable urban form, the emphasis should be on how to determine which forms are suitable in any given locality. Similarly, concentrating solely on urban scale solutions only offers a partial solution to the understanding. Thus different scales, from the house, through to the block, the neighbourhood, the district, city and region all need to be considered (Jenks et al. 1996). Side by side others (Blowers 1993) advocated a ‘MultipliCity’ approach to sustainability which they reasoned could only be achieved by considering development at the scale of the ‘Social City region’. Emphasis was put on finding solutions appropriate for different scale and locations. Elkin et al. (1991:12) also note that, ‘... sustainable urban development must aim to produce a city that is “user friendly” and resourceful, in terms not only of its form and energy-efficiency, but also its function, as a place for living’. Eventually it was felt that there is the need to broaden the range of issues which are encompassed by the sustainable urban form debate. Ultimately the issues are summed up by Williams (2000:3): Until now the weight of research has been on the implications for travel and fuel consumption, but the effects of urban forms on ecology, wildlife, natural resources, social conditions, behaviour and economic well-being are equally important to sustainability ... We observe two directions emerging from sustainability of urban form discourses - the shift from urban scale to individual form and filtering of social aspects to individual behaviours. It should be noted that long before the sustainability debates on urban forms surfaced, Louis Wirth in his seminal work (1938) called for a sociological definition of the city. Acknowledging the different views of disciplines associated he puts forward: …while in no sense intended to supersede these, the formulation of a sociological approach to the city may incidentally serve to call attention to the interrelations between them by emphasizing the peculiar characteristics of the city as particular form of human association (cited in Gutman 1972:55). Arguing in the similar tone, Sale (1980) stresses that large scale systems have created or perpetuated the current crises and effort should be made to approach or view it in smaller, more controllable, more efficient, people sized units, rooted in local circumstances and guided by local citizens. Sale (1980:37) points out: “Man the measure” – has that not been the standard, or at least the goal, for the greatest number of human societies since they first began gathering collectively some 15000 years ago? The inclusion of social issues at the outset might have helped to arrive at a more integrated approach to the identification and achievement of a more sustainable society. The planning and design of urban form is just one of the constraining or enabling aspects involved in urban sustainability. However, for each individual the meaning of the prevailing forms and spatial patterns is largely the outcome of the extents to which people’s actual life styles are in line with sustainability. Environmental dimensions

Social dimensions

Economic dimensions

Figure 1: View of dimensions of sustainability

It is perhaps useful at this point to clarify how the term ‘sustainability’ is viewed, which consequently influences the meaning of sustainable form of dwelling throughout the paper. Sustainable development is conceptualised through a bio-economy model which reasons that the ‘three dimensions’ of sustainable development are not qualitatively equal, but occupy different positions in a hierarchy (Lehtonen 2004:200). In this model, the three separate dimensions are replaced by three concentric circles, the economic sphere constituting the innermost circle and the environment circumscribing the social dimension. This reflects the idea that economic activities should be in the service of all human beings while at the same time safeguarding the biophysical systems necessary for human existence. The social would thus be in the command of the economic, but at the same time submitted to the ultimate environmental constraints. Besides, Schumacher (1999:28) reasons that profitability alone is not an adequate measure of whether something is “economic” or not. A new look at economic dimensions is needed that takes into account not only profitability of a given activity, but also its affect upon people and the environment, including the resource base. This model is taken as the point of departure for the paper.

2. A GLIMPSE AT MULTI-UNIT DWELLINGS OF THE INNER AREAS OF SYDNEY It is essential to have a look at the socio-physical setting, before we go into the theoretical arguments of human-environment phenomenon and its relationship to the sustainability of multiunit dwellings. It follows, in order to understand the present and the future one need to know the past, both regarding

2 people and environments. We have to know the aspects of these form and people that changed over time and those that do not change, as well as some that change slowly over time (Rapoport 1972; Rapoport 2002). The earliest indication of multi family low-rise form in Sydney can be found in 1908 in the writings of J.D. Fitzgerald. He observed ‘the rich everywhere swinging back into the flat’ and forecast that Sydney ‘would in time follow the fashion of old world cities with the workman in a modern tenement flat in order to be near his work’ (cited in Roe 1980). The cost and scarcity of labour forced many of the wealthy to relinquish their mansions and seek the communal domestic service available in luxury flats. On the other hand a large proportion of population, able only to rent rather than own, were more often faced with the prospect of a flat or tenement - a non self contained apartment. The Stevens Buildings, built in 1900 for the owner John Michaels Stevens, in Sydney’s Millers point, containing eleven tenanted flats is Australia’s oldest surviving purpose-built block of walk-up flats (Burns 2004). The 1,700 flats and tenements in Sydney in 1911 confirm Fitzgerald’s observation of an emerging trend toward flats. It is apparent this novel house form had appeal for people belonging to bi-polar ends of economic status and varying lifestyles. This emerging popularity in the early decades continued through the 1920s and to 1930s, with the principal areas of flat building being the ocean and harbour-side suburbs. In 1926 nearly a quarter of all flats were built in King’s Cross and a number of these were high rise (eight stories) rather than medium rise (three stories). King’s Cross remained one of the important areas of flat building and the concentration of multi-storied apartments in such a confined area produced a distinctive skyline. The revival of flat building in the mid thirties was taken by contemporary observers as a sign of a return to better economic times. However, common attitudes to ‘flats’ were not always favourable. They were condemned as “inventions of the devil, sources of immortality, forces for reducing the birth rate, and encouragement to excessive familiarity” (cited in Roe 1980:70).

2 3 4

Source :( Author 2005) Figure 2: Multi-unit apartment forms rising among the low-rise in areas near the CBD. Figure 3: Old forms changing attitude. Figure 4: Contemporary modern designs of similar forms.

The flat boom of the 1960s coincided with strong economic growth and physical growth. During the second half of the 1960s, more than half the new dwelling constructed in inner areas and suburbs were flats or home units. Eventually in 1971 Sydney became the first city to have more flats than houses completed. Spearritt (1978:109) notes that Sydney, “… more than any other Australian city, is no longer the preserve of the detached house”. There were, of course, many who were unsympathetically critical of the type of flats being built ‘rows of larger boxes made of ticky tacky and slums of the future’ (cited in Roe 1980:59). However, what should be noted side by side that there was always the intense pull to live in the suburbs exhibiting strong lifestyle preference for the archetypal separate house. In the 1980s coinciding with the economic downturn was the introduction of a policy of urban consolidation actively promoted by the state governments wanting to bring under control the infrastructure costs associated of spreading cities. This was promoted through the intensification of housing in the existing urban areas. During the 1990s this led to the change in the form and culture of Sydney. No longer is there the singular and continual push to suburbia and an part of the community began returning to the inner suburbs. Inner-city living has become popular. Between 1986 and 1996 all of these inner-city areas had growing populations, with much of the increase being housed in high-rise apartments (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2002). People are attracted to the inner area for its access to public transport, skilled and professional jobs in the CBD, and the wide range of entertainment, educational and cultural facilities that are concentrated in the CBD and adjacent area. However this is just one of the explanations as elaborated in the later sections.

3 3. EMERGING CULTURE OF APARTMENT LIVING All throughout the last century temporal aspects of values and aspirations of the people is now very much obvious. A variety of these values, aspirations and events will remain dominant themes for decades, as indeed they have for the past century (Salt 2001). Some are temporal and will be replaced by others yet to emerge. It is observed that the demise of the word ‘flat’ and its replacement with ‘apartment’ - the term most widely used today, goes some way towards revealing the peoples attitude towards and the evolution of this form of residential building (Burns 2004). From the prosaic buildings low-rises of the 1960s we have architect designed mid to high-rises apartments. People today are more design-conscious than before, and many who choose to live in an apartment want a building that reflects a smart, stylish and sophisticated image. Experienced developers have realised that good design sells and are harnessing the creative talents of architects towards this end. This, in turn, has helped to raise the profile of these low-and high-rise dwellings. An inner-city culture emerged in addition to the forms and lifestyle. This is further substantiated by Salt (2001:26): The shifting and shuffling of people around Australia is largely driven by the values and aspirations of the people, and also by the economic and administrative circumstances that are imposed both from within and beyond Australia. As a nation, we singularly and relentlessly pursued outer suburbia for 50 years to the exclusion of what was considered to be the cramped and congested inner suburbs. More recently, a new generation, X ers, challenged old thinking and enthusiastically embraced the inner city and the CBD.

3.1. Changing attitudes or lifestyle preferences The questions that arise now are: what attracts people to these areas and to live in these diverse house forms? How do people evaluate and choose the built setting? Is it solely a type of housing option, or choice of an ideal lifestyle that relates people to this form, or just to be near the city to take advantage of the location and pursue an idealised lifestyle of inner-city apartment living? Or they are pure aficionados of inner-city culture. What can be argued is that there would be a kind of ‘congruence’ between people and the dwelling they want to live in. The place of behaviour and other social considerations in the environmental context is explained with the use of the concept ‘congruence’ (Michelson 1977). Instead of assuming that spatial attributes determine attitude and the subsequent behaviour within built environment, space is seen as a medium, rather than a variable. Space and settings are conceived as largely permissive, allowing people to do within it what they wish. Where the desired activity could be accommodated by the given design, a form of congruence was supposed to be present. This appears in two forms (Michelson 1976; Michelson 1977): Firstly, mental congruence exists, if an individual thinks that a particular environment will successfully accommodate his or her personal characteristics and style of life. This notion of congruence is then illustrated with respect to “content” areas: lifestyle, stage in lifecycle, pathology etc. In addition Michelson (1977) suggests that the notion of four hurdles or tests- physical opportunity, psychological factors, cultural factors, and social factors, should be applied when assessing the ability of a setting to make the desired behaviour possible. Secondly, experiential congruence would exist whenever the ‘people side’ and the ‘environment side’ were compatible, once people had actual, realistic contact with the setting of dwelling in question. This is concerned with how well the environment actually accommodates the characteristics and behaviour of people. The investigation then will focus upon people living or working in specific environments; daily experience would point out the constraining or enabling power of the environment. Most of our attempts to explain human-environment relationship revolve only on the latter aspects. Both types of congruence are essential to understanding the fruitfulness or lack in the built environments. Within the mental congruence, lifestyle can be understood as a choice process with a suggestive potential link with housing and its setting. Tuan’s (1974:173) observation on the dual action of people and their environment is very much relevant to the present setting: The lifestyle of a people is the sum of their economic, social, and ultramundane activities. These generate spatial patterns; they require architectural forms and material settings which upon completion, in turn influence the patterning of activities. This explains to some extent the choice and subsequent behaviour of people in relation toward this form of dwelling, the nature of the systems of settings and its environmental quality profile. The congruence then may be understood as: commonly overlooked aspect of lifestyle which is rarely verbalised but consciously acted out, based on economic, social and other common activities. On the other hand is the notion of ideal human beings leading ‘ideal lives’ in ideal settings (cited in Low and Chambers 1989). The ideal, one aspect of the total life, is often verbalised and occasionally substantiated through the design of the dwellings. In making choices by users this is used to make evaluation of a dwelling in terms of some perceived qualities. Developers through their advertisement of ideal lifestyle very much take advantage of this latter form. True to publicity of the advertising brochures, apartment living can give many people access to amenities they might not have been able to afford or accommodate in a detached house as well as a prestigious address, which also adds up to an enviable lifestyle. The generalisation of people’s ideal life attaches label to the type of people who prefer to live in the inner area multi-storied dwellings. ‘Empty nesters’, ‘time poor professionals couples’, ‘childless couples’, ‘single peoples’ etc. are now labelled to people describing their social formation and design is generated accordingly to fit their lifestyle preferences.

4 5 6

Source: (Author 2005) Figure 5: Developers promoting Ecological ideals in the advertisements. Figure 6: New ideal lifestyle of apartment living displayed in the advertisement, with emphasis on the physical features. This informs us that the present deterministic view in the evaluation of a built environment is not adequate. There may be a common social character but the evaluations and preferences of people are changeable. It would then be questionable to assume or to give a specific social character to the dwellers and their preferred form of dwelling. However what is emphasized that these varied multi-unit dwelling forms of the inner area are in some kind of ‘congruence’ with peoples’ wants and needs. As elaborated in the earlier section the phenomenon exhibited throughout the last century and the one we are currently witnessing in these settings exhibits a degree of success of the forms regarding peoples need. Any evaluation of these urban forms should consider the outlined important aspects so that future directions can be made accordingly. To an extent Sydney inner areas with its varied house forms continue to be successful in meeting the varied demand of people. This is because: Successful cities are those that satisfy people’s bio social and psychological wants and needs, and are supportive of their culture (lifestyles, values, images and ideals, activity systems, social arrangements, etc.). Such cities are also more “sustainable” in the sense that they are likely to last longer, do not become obsolete as quickly, needing to be rebuilt (Rapoport 2002:148).

4. THE RELATIONSHIP OF PEOPLE, THEIR PSYCHO-SOCIAL NEEDS AND INTERACTIONS WITH THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT The previous section shows the dual relationship of people with dwelling and its setting. However, many architects and planners would argue that the physical environment directly affects human behaviour. The behaviourist architect wants to design buildings which in a way compels people to live in certain ways and expects them to adapt to the design (Broadbent 1973). In response, social scientists tend to deny that the environment has significant causal influence, asserting that culture and social structure are the crucial variables. A psychological perspective treats the individual’s attitudes, need, feelings, cognitions, and abilities as separated from groups, physical settings, organisations, and communities. This view most often has been the study of the “contextless” individual (Zube et al. 1987). However, the strength of environmental determinism similar to the practitioners’ perspective is that it indeed focuses attention on the environment; the behaviour must always be seen within an environmental context. Thus, one comes across the view that environments must be designed for people to be placed in, to meet their needs and to satisfy their purposes. Implicit in this traditional notion is the idea that human control over the environment is to be limited, that environments are custom-made to humans in somewhat of a static, nonmodifiable form. Increased importance has to been given to the design of flexible, changing environments which humans can control, shape and modify. Concepts such as privacy, territory, and personal space all refer to an active, coping use of the environment by people, not merely reactive responses to environmental stimuli (Proshansky et al. 1976). Practitioners and researchers often act as if their designs and knowledge were fixed and unchanging through time. The dynamic, changing quality of human-environment relations needs to be considered. As exemplified in the context of Sydney with multiunit dwellings what was seen as a negative now is an accepted form of dwelling to the users. It may well be that multiple dwellings do not provide the physical opportunity for active and noisy recreational pursuits, but one cannot conclude that we have a situation of experiential incongruence when there is evidence of a change in behaviour; the occupants of such dwellings may prefer not to be involved with such pursuits. Moreover, evidence from the census shows that in 2001 half of all high-rise residents of Australia are born overseas, which is obviously very different form the social formation of the beginning of the last century. 20% of overseas born high-rise residents aged 18 years and over were full-time students (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2004). We now have to add another new label to what we have already attributed to the people living on the apartments.

5 We have to be aware that territories shift, functions alter, group composition changes through time. Social systems adapt, cope and strive, and both research and practice need to incorporate this idea. The basic conception to be argued here is: The physical environment is relevant to behaviour in so far as this environment affects the social system and culture of the people involved or as it is taken up into their social system. This paper attempts to develop a frame of reference for asking this question and to formulate a compromise that combines aspects of both positions regarding the evaluation of dwelling as sustainable form.

4.1. Sustainability and the mechanistic view The “human machine systems” approach with the one maxim, “fit the machine to human” goes for the design of forms solely built around physical, sensory, motor and intellectual capabilities of people. This approach has been translated into lighting, colour, heating analyses of environments. People are viewed primarily as performing, task oriented organisms. Emphasis has been placed on capabilities for sensing, processing, and interpreting inputs, and on skills in evaluating and selecting alternatives. “Motivational and emotional states and interpersonal processes are either of secondary interest. Such processes are not usually considered in and of themselves, but are cast in the context of efficient performance output” (cited in Proshansky et al. 1976:32). This approach is extensively concerned with technological aspects, environmental design, or the shaping of physical environment. Consequently the built form is seen as energy efficient, green building. While training for maximum performance is often undertaken, emphasis has been placed on the design of physical environments, with users as one major constraint on that environment. Thus, with limited degrees of operating freedom humans are merely another system component and environments are designed in a static sense. This leaves users with relatively few options to alter environments or to function in them in a flexible fashion (Proshansky et al. 1976). Robinson (2004) made observation on the notion of the ‘technological fix’ approach to ‘sustainable development’ as opposed to the value oriented approach of ‘sustainability’. He notes that there is no emphasis on spiritual values, or individual responsibilities in the Brundtland report, rather the focus is on the collective institutional responses, efficiency gains, and social responsibility. He further argues that any scientific understanding is, to some degree at least socially constructed. He states considering the two views, “...in the end, sustainability is ultimately an issue of human behaviour, and negotiation over preferred future ...” (Robinson 2004:379). In drawing our attention to technology however, Heidegger (1977) claimed that technology enframed all of modern life, suggesting that technology had become an essential component of our environment. Technology is cultural form through which everything in the modern world becomes available for control, he argues. We can not therefore ignore mechanistic models of the modern era (Heidegger 1977). However it must be understood that these technical fixes are necessary but not sufficient by themselves. This is further validated in the evaluation of energy efficient houses which suggests “that prescriptive design solution and standards do not necessarily lead to the consequences expected” (Ballinger et al. 1991:139). Findings from the study reinforce the notion that the household as well as the house should be foci of attention in promoting energy efficiency. Accordingly noted: Overall, indications are that prescriptive energy efficient guidelines for energy efficient housing are likely to be inappropriate. Energy efficiency seems more likely to be consequence of a thermally comfortable and amenable house inhabited by energy-literate and ecologically responsible individuals, than a driving force in its own right. (Ballinger et al. 1991:6)

5. THE DWELLING FORM – ITS EVALUATION With combined social systems-environmental view of humans as the basis of approach, the following section attempts to take into consideration the users’ and architects’ perspective in a single platform from which the evaluation of the multi-unit forms can take place. In the contemporary complex urban environment the users of multi-family dwelling form are seen as merely consumers. The eventual users are no longer present in the design process. The difficulty arises how to bring users into the picture where they are no longer represented directly. A simplified way of doing that is to see a dwelling as a manifestation of users’ needs. We can then bring in the designers or architects vis a vis the users into the equation. User needs are generalised by an architect even though users have increased in number and become diverse in terms of needs and values. This makes the architect a ‘proxy user’ or a surrogate user of that environment. User needs are largely concentrated on the physical attributes of housing that people want or need for the housing to be optimal. It is seen as user requirements in terms of physical space required, environmental conditions; relationship with other activities; effects of structure of the building (Broadbent 1973). User needs are then filtered to the architect via various ways. Developers in their profit making venture recognise the users as consumers. The consumers’ viewpoint is accepted to make the product more attractive. Thus developers as a client channels users’ needs to the architect. There are other influences – economic technical, legislative – all of which limit and modify the role of the designer. The extent to which designers actually shape form can be questioned considering the constraints placed upon his action. The effects of government regulations, codes, political expediency etc. act even before a design takes place. The architect eventually turns out to be a process manager, balancing needs of many actors as well as fulfilling his own professional needs (Davis 1977). It is based on this view that the notion that well-packaged knowledge coupled with a logic of design can lead to radically better artefacts. How well-packaged and structured the knowledge is becomes the

6 decisive issue in the experiential congruence for the users. Experiential congruence too, is not without its problems. It is not enough for the investigator to simply describe behaviour and describe the environment, practitioners are concerned about what ought to be, in addition to descriptions of what is (Szokolay et al. 1981). What the architect is unable to observe and foresee that between the physical environment and empirically observable human behaviour, there exists a social system and a set of cultural norms which define and evaluates portions of the physical environment relevant to the lives of people involved and structure the way people will use or react to this environment in their daily lives (Gans 1972). However what must be acknowledged that architects in absence of users are also inserting their own values into the process of transforming user needs. A dwelling form and its setting would only be a potential environment; the users will determine to what extent it becomes an effective environment (Gans 1972). The argument from the previous section concludes there is a mutual and dual impact of relationship between humans and their environment. Continuing on that evaluation of multiple dwelling as a sustainable form involves taking into consideration the user and the architect’s viewpoint in a single platform. This would involve: Users’ viewpoint - users’ social system, cultural system as well as physiological needs. Designers’ point of view – the performance of the built form and setting as well as other commonly accepted sustainable indicators (in terms of human needs and as physical entity- energy efficiency, environmental performance through observation etc.). As explained in the earlier section the study assumed that there would be some ‘congruence’ between people and the kind of environment in which they choose to live. On the other hand the built form can be

Figure 7: ‘User – (Architect)’ and Built Form Interface seen as a physical manifestation of the conjectures of an architect as a ‘proxy user’. This approach as shown in the diagram accepts these inadequacies of the two types of users. The objective is not to implicate designers or users. When taken together in an integrative approach this would provide a holistic model framework through which the evaluation of the dwelling types can take place.

CONCLUSION: The evolving concept of sustainability of urban form in relation to the social aspects is reviewed at the outset. The potential for these social aspects to contribute to sustainable urban form was then discussed. In particular, the practical difficulty of incorporating social aspects of urban house form in a sustainable paradigm is acknowledged. It urges us to view socio-spatial-urban aspects in terms of more controllable, smaller people sized units. Urban residential form of Sydney’s inner area was then reviewed through a temporal analysis for a critical understanding of trends that relate people to a physical setting. It is clear that in the inner-city areas there is great variability as well as regularities among individuals and groups in terms of lifestyle values and eventual environmental preferences. In the end the paper hinges on a discussion introducing an architect as a proxy user in an interactive socio-spatial setting. The basic point and one which is critical for the future of our environment, is that in order to design for the future one must first understand the socio-spatial aspects. The study of the interaction of people and environment should lead to the acquisition of some of this understanding. Any action without the proper understanding and adequate knowledge of human or social processes would be fruitless for sustainability. As argued sustainability of forms should not be a single concept. It must be an integrative concept. Hopefully this paper has shown the intricacy of the relations and at the same time proposes an integrated way in which they can be approached and studied. Environmental, economic and social issues are so much interwoven that any form of evaluation that ignores the social aspects would not only be a meaningless endeavour – it is precarious.

REFERENCES: Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2002. Australian social trends 1999; Housing- Housing stock: Inner-city residential development. ABS Web Site. Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2004. Australian social trends: Housing: High-rise living. ABS Web Site. Ballinger, John A., Robert Samuels, Susan Coldicutt, Terry Williamson, Neville D’Cruz and Energy Research and Development Corporation (Australia). (1991). A National evaluation of energy efficient

7 houses : attitudes and experiences, thermal and environmental comfort, and energy consumption : final report, December 1991. Australia: Energy and Research Development Association. Blowers, Andrew. (1993). Planning for a sustainable environment : a report. London: Earthscan. Broadbent, Geoffrey. (1973). Design in architecture; architecture and the human sciences. London, New York,: John Wiley & Sons. Burns, Jenna Reed. (2004). Apartment living : Australian style. South Yarra, Vic.: Hardie Grant Books. Davis, Sam. (1977). The Form of housing. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Elkin, Timothy, Duncan McLaren, Mayer Hillman and Friends of the Earth. (1991). Reviving the city: towards sustainable urban development. London: Friends of the Earth. Frey, Hildebrand. (1999). Designing the city: towards a more sustainable urban form. London ; New York: E & FN Spon. Gans, Herbert J. (1972). People and plans: essays on urban problems and solutions. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Gutman, Robert. (1972). People and buildings. New York: Basic Books. Heidegger, Martin. (1977). The question concerning technology and other essays. New York: Harper & Row. Jenks, Mike, Elizabeth Burton and Katie Williams. (1996). The Compact city : a sustainable urban form? London ; Melbourne: E & FN Spon. Lawrence, Roderick J. (2000). Sustaining human settlement : a challenge for the new millennium. North Shields [England]: Urban International Press. Lehtonen, Markku. (2004). "The environmental-social interface of sustainable development: capabilities, social capital, institutions." Ecological Economics 49:199-214. Low, Setha M. and Erve Chambers. (1989). Housing, culture, and design : a comparative perspective. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Michelson, William. (1976). Man and his urban environment: a sociological approach, with revisions. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. —. (1977). Environmental choice, human behavior, and residential satisfaction. New York: Oxford University Press. Proshansky, Harold M., William H. Ittelson and Leanne G. Rivlin. (1976). Environmental psychology : people and their physical settings. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Rapoport, Amos. (1972). Australia as human setting. Sydney: Angus and Robertson, Education. —. (2002). "The role of neighborhoods in the success of cities." 69:145. Robinson, John. (2004). "Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development." Ecological Economics 48:369-384. Roe, Jill. (1980). Twentieth century Sydney : studies in urban and social history. Sydney: Hale & Iremonger in association with the Sydney History Group. Sale, Kirkpatrick. (1980). Human scale. London: Secker & Warburg. Salt, Bernard. (2001). The big shift : welcome to the third Australian culture : the Bernard Salt report. South Yarra, Vic.: Hardie Grant Books. Schumacher, E. F. (1999). Small is beautiful : a study of economics as if people mattered. Point Roberts, Wash.: Hartley & Marks Publishers. Spearritt, Peter. (1978). Sydney since the twenties. Sydney: Hale and Iremonger. Szokolay, S. V., Australian and New Zealand Architectural Science Association. Conference ,, Australian and New Zealand Architectural Science Association. and People and the Man-made Environment Group (Australia). (1981). Understanding the built environment : proceedings of the annual conference of the Australian and New Zealand Architectural Science Association in conjunction with the People and the Man-made Environment Group,. Canberra, A.C.T: ANZAScA. Tuan, Yi-fu. (1974). Topophilia: a study of environmental perception, attitudes, and values. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,: Prentice-Hall. Williams, Katie, Elizabeth Burton and M. Jenks. (2000). Achieving sustainable urban form. London: E & FN Spon. Zube, Ervin H., Gary T. Moore and Environmental Design Research Association. (1987). Advances in environment, behavior, and design. New York: Plenum Press.

8

Appendix 2 : Study area Map of Sydney showing CBD & study area Layouts of selected complexes

Appendix | 2

SYDNEY CBD

Study area

Map of Sydney showing CBD & Study area. Source: Google Map 20011

P P

P

P P

1 .0 4

P P P

2 .0 4

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P

P

P

P

P

P

P

P P P P

P P

P P P

P P L

L

L

L

L

L Level 3

B

B4

P

K B1 B3 L L L L L L L L B2 B L B2 MB B MB L B2 L L MB L B3 L R P P N3.09 R W3.07 R R R D R D W3.06 R N3.06 D D D D D D R D S Ldy D S R R R B2 L ST ST ST ST ST ST B R R ST LN D W3.13 W3.12 W3.11 W3.10 W3.09 W3 .08 ST ST LN LN MB B D B N3.08 S LN D LDY D E LN ST K BEN K B E K B B LDY K K K K K LDY EN LDY PPK P P P P K E E S E R W3.14 E E N3.07 P P PS P LN

STAIR 7 E E E W3.05 Ð LN ST LDY E R MB B2B2 R FIRE STAIR void ST K STAIR 6 over LIFT D L 1

P 1 E N3.05 E LDY P B2 K W3.15 P ST L D K K D D R L LN ST P R P E B W3.04 K D L

L ST MB W3.03 E E E N3.04 ST LDY L D D K MB EN P N3.03 K E P

P ST B L D K R L K D L R ST P S3.01A P E LN W3.02 K B2 MB D L E ST B EN ST W3.01 E E LN N3.02 ST

D L E D L K N3.01 S3.01B E L P

B2 ST FIRE STAIR L D R LDY K D K 2 P P

FIRE STAIR VOID STAIR 5 STAIR 4 3 E E S P ST LIFT 4 LIFT 3 RR B2 B3 B2 LDy Ð Ð K B P R S Ldy Ž LN E LIFT ST E K L P P E P D E E E P B 2 MB B R E3.10 R EN LDY K K LDY BEN B K K LDY B EN B3 LN E LN ST P LN P E B E LN LDY R EN B EN D B ST B D D K D LDY K EN R ST EN E3.02 A ST LN LN ST ST LN E3.02 B LDY R R RR R R MB D S D LN R

R B D R LDY R R E3.08 E3.07 R K D ST R E3.09 R R E3.06 E3.05 E3.03 D. R R R E3.04 MB E3.01

MB L L L B2 D MB P L B2 B L MB L L B2 L L D B2 B2 L MB R MB K P L

B

P

Appendix 3 : Survey related documents HREA (Human research ethics advisory) approval Cover letter from Landcom Project information statement Consent letter Survey questionnaire Interview questions

Appendix | 3

FACULTY OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

HUMAN RESEARCH ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL

24 January 2006

Application No: 065001 Project Title: Evaluation of Livability and Sustainability of Multi-storied Dwelling Form in and Inner Area of Sydeny

Attention: MD Mamum Rashid Student No: 3116425

Dear Mamum

Thank you for your application requesting approval to conduct research involving humans. The Panel has evaluated your application and upon their recommendation, has attached the decision below.

Please be aware that approval is for a period of twelve months from the date of this letter, unless otherwise stated below.

Decision

Approved with Your application is approved; however, there are certain things conditions you must do, before you may conduct your research. Please see below for details, and your responses will assist us in completing your file.

Items that must be completed before 1 A letter of support is needed prior to conducting each interview. Please research can forward all letters to HREAP to complete your file. commence:

Advisory 1 Please be aware that the HREA Panel cannot approve interviews or comments: surveys of participants under the age of 18. Please see your Supervisor for further direction.

2 It is unclear on your application about how you intend to store your research data. This must be considered and please be aware that you must keep your research data for a period of 5 years should you intend to publish your research.

3 Should you or your participants be making photographic, video or audio recordings that include people, please be aware that: • Recordings in public places do not generally require the permission of the people who are in those public places; however, this will depend upon the sensitivity of the subject matter and the situation • If you will be specifically identifying any person in photos or videos which you intend to publish, you will require their signed consent • Photographs or videos of identifiable people on private property should not be made without their consent, even when taken from public property

4 You do not need a Consent Form for participants completing a

Questionnaire; however, Consent Forms are needed whenever participating in a Focus Group or In-depth Interview, or whenever an interview is recorded.

Any approval to conduct research given to the applicant Researcher is done so on the condition that the applicant Researcher is at the date of approval: (a) a Student undertaking an approved course of study in the FBE; or (b) a member of Academic Staff in the FBE. If, at any time subsequent to the date of approval and prior to completion of the research project the applicant Researcher ceases to be either of (a) and (b) above, then any prior approval given to the applicant Researcher to conduct will be deemed to be revoked forthwith. The applicant Researcher must inform the FBE HREA Panel immediately upon any change, or possible change, to the applicant’s status that may affect any prior approval given by the Panel to the applicant Researcher to conduct research.

Evaluation Authority: Approving Authority:

Graham Fletcher (Convener) Jim Plume FBE HREA Panel Head of School Faculty of the Built Environment

Copy to: Dr Robert Samuels, Supervisor

SYDNEY 2052 AUSTRALIA 2 Email: [email protected] Victoria Park is being surveyed as a case study area to investigate social aspects of sustainability - concentrating on user satisfactions, attitudes, experiences, choices & preferences.

I am writing to you to request your cooperation in furthering the research which investigates the liveability and sustainability of multi-storied forms in Sydney.

This Survey is being undertaken (May-August 2006) as part of Doctoral research being conducted by the Faculty of the Built Environment, at the University of New South Wales (UNSW).

Youur comments and responses will assist architects, planners & developers to work out residents’ needs and incorporate those in their future designs.

Your participation will remain anonymous.

Landcom supports this work, and would sincerely appreciate your participation.

Robert Kennedy Development Director, Victoria Park LANDCOM Tel: 02-98418735

22 May, 2006 FBE HREAP FORM 3 page 1 PROJECT INFORMATION STATEMENT

Date: 22 May 2006 Project Title: Evaluation of liveability and sustainability of multi-storied dwelling form in an inner area of Sydney Approval No.: 065001 FACULTY OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Participant selection and purpose of study You are invited to participate in a study of liveability and sustainability of multi-storied residential buildings. As a resident of this apartment complex you have been selected as a possible participant in this study.

Description of study If you decide to participate, we will need you to fill out an anonymous questionnaire. It should take about 20 minutes to complete and please return the completed questionnaire in the enclosed reply-paid envelope. The questionnaire comprises of simple questions asking about your living experience and evaluations of this residential complex and some common demographical details. It is concerned with “user’s” (resident, owner/occupier) values, satisfactions, preferences, and activities associated with the running of your home. This study is extremely important in understanding the existing residential forms of Sydney from users’ (resident) perspective so that the sustainable future development can be planned with better designs benefiting residents of this city. The project has been approved by the human research ethics committee of the university. Your participation is completely voluntary. We cannot and do not guarantee or promise that you will receive any benefits from this study.

Confidentiality and disclosure of information The survey, and the reply paid envelope for return of the survey, are anonymous and contain no means of identifying the person who has completed the questionnaire. There is no way that you can be linked to your response, so your confidentiality is ensured. Moreover, any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission, or except as required by law. We also plan to publish the results. In any publication, information will be provided in such a way that you cannot be identified.

Your consent Your decision whether or not to participate will not prejudice your future relations with The University of New South Wales or other participating organisations. If you decide to participate, you are free to withdraw your consent and to discontinue participation at any time without prejudice by completing the statement below and returning this entire form to Mamun Rashid, postgraduate research, Faculty of the Built Environment, University of new South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me (Mamun Rashid, phone 93854848). If you have any additional questions later, my supervisors (Senior Lecturer Robert Samuels, & Associate Professor Bruce Judd, phone 93855274, [email protected] ) will be happy to answer them.

We look forward to your participation in this novel and important study. Thank you. Yours sincerely,

Mamun Rashid Robert Samuels Doctoral Candidate, Senior Lecturer Faculty of the Built Environment, UNSW Faculty of the Built Environment, UNSW [email protected] [email protected] Telephone: 9385 4848, 04 13195978, Fax: 9385 6374 Telephone: 93855258

REVOCATION OF CONSENT. Project Title: Evaluation of liveability and sustainability of multi-storied dwelling form in an inner area of Sydney (Please send this entire form to the above address.) I hereby wish to withdraw my consent to participate in this research project. I understand that such withdrawal will not jeopardise my relationship with The University of New South Wales, other participating organisations or other professionals.

…………………………… ……………………………………………..….… …………………..………… Signature Please PRINT name Date

Complaints may be directed to the Ethics Secretariat, The University of New South Wales, SYDNEY 2052 AUSTRALIA (phone 9385 4234, fax 9385 6648, email : [email protected]). FBE HREAP FORM 3 page 1 PROJECT INFORMATION STATEMENT

Date: 19 January 2006 Project Title: Evaluation of liveability and sustainability of multi-storied dwelling form in an inner area of Sydney FACULTY OF THE Approval No.: 065001 BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Participant selection and purpose of study You are invited to participate in a study of liveability and sustainability of multi-storied residential buildings. As an architect involved in the design of the particular apartment complex you have been selected as a possible participant in this study.

Description of study If you decide to participate, we will request you to join for an interview based on the attached questions. It should take about 35 minutes. The interview comprises of simple questions asking about your experience as a designer and evaluations of this residential complex and some common demographical details. It is concerned with architects’ values, preferences, understanding of users’ needs and other sustainable aspects associated with the design of these dwellings. This study is extremely significant in understanding the existing residential forms of Sydney so that future development can be sustainable with better designs benefiting residents of this city. The project has been approved by the human research ethics committee of the university. Your participation is completely voluntary. We cannot and do not guarantee or promise that you will receive any benefits from this study.

Confidentiality and disclosure of information Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission, or except as required by law. If you give us your permission, we plan to publish the results. If you give us your permission we will make audio recording of the interview.

Your consent Your decision whether or not to participate will not prejudice your future relations with The University of New South Wales or other participating organisations. If you decide to participate, you are free to withdraw your consent and to discontinue participation at any time without prejudice by completing the statement below and returning this entire form to Mamun Rashid, postgraduate research, Faculty of the Built Environment, University of new South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me (Mamun Rashid, phone 93854848, [email protected]). If you have any additional questions later, my supervisors (Senior Lecturer Robert Samuels, phone 93855258, [email protected], & Associate Professor Bruce Judd, phone 93855274, [email protected] ) will be happy to answer them.

We look forward to your participation in this novel and important study. Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Mamun Rashid

REVOCATION OF CONSENT. Project Title: Evaluation of liveability and sustainability of multi-storied dwelling form in an inner area of Sydney (Please send this entire form to the above address.) I hereby wish to withdraw my consent to participate in this research project. I understand that such withdrawal will not jeopardise my relationship with The University of New South Wales, other participating organisations or other professionals.

…………………………… ……………………………………………..….… …………………..………… Signature Please PRINT name Date

Complaints may be directed to the Ethics Secretariat, The University of New South Wales, SYDNEY 2052 AUSTRALIA (phone 9385 4234, fax 9385 6648, email : [email protected]). Survey of Victoria Park Architects Evaluation of liveability and sustainability principles of multi-storied dwelling forms in an inner area of Sydney

FACULTY OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT Doctoral Research - Architecture

Kevin Driver Senior Associate Turner + Associates Architects

Dear Kevin,

I am undertaking doctoral research in the Faculty of the Built Environment at the University of New South Wales focused on multi-storied residential forms from the viewpoint of socio-spatial sustainability and liveability. The evaluation of these residential forms will investigate both user perceptions and experiences, and architect’s design intentions and interpretations of the brief.

I have selected the residential buildings in Victoria Park as case studies since this development is considered a model of a successful transformation of a neglected inner city precinct; and also the range of multi-storied buildings allows for an evaluation of a central theme in my work: the affect of height in residential buildings.

To this end I am requesting you & some other members of the design team involved in the project, to answer a questionnaire. This is to permit me to learn more about the design concepts explored when you & your firm were involved in the development of the projects (Form, Nova, Eco, Esp, Aria) at Victoria Park in Zetland. In particular I am interested in the extent to which both environmental/ecological and human factors were taken into consideration in the design process.

If you are able to meet with me I would be pleased to provide a copy of the proposed questions for your consideration prior to that time; or if you are unable to meet me I could forward the emailed questionnaire, which could be completed when you have the time (hopefully within a month to allow the research to progress as planned) and returned electronically.

Moreover, at the conclusion of the research, I would be happy to share my findings with you if you should consider this useful (analyses of both user and designer responses).

I look forward to your response.

Thank you

Sincerely yours

Mamun Rashid Doctoral Candidate, FBE, UNSW

Mamun Ras id Doctoral Candidate, FBE, UNSW, [email protected], P one: 9385 4848, MO 0413 195978, Fa : 9385 6374 1 Supervisors Robert Samuels, phone 9315 7376 0422 683411, [email protected] Bruce Judd, phone 9385 5274, [email protected] FBE HREAP FORM

PROJECT CONSENT FORM FACULTY OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Project Title: Evaluation of liveability and sustainability of multi-storied dwelling form in an inner area of Sydney

You are making a decision whether or not to participate in a research project.

This PROJECT CONSENT FORM enables you to indicate your preparedness to participate in the project. By signing this form, your signature indicates that you have decided to participate.

You will be given a PROJECT INFORMATION STATEMENT that explains the project in detail, and that statement includes a revocation clause for you to use if you decide to withdraw your consent at some later stage. The PROJECT INFORMATION STATEMENT is your record of participation in the project.

This PROJECT CONSENT FORM will be retained by the researcher as evidence of your agreement to participate in this project.

Please complete the information in this box.

Please indicate which of the following options you agree to by ticking one of the following options:

" I consent to being quoted and identified

" I do not want to be quoted or identified but am prepared to participate anonymously

…………………………………………………… Signature of Research Participant

…………………………………………………… Please PRINT name

…………………………………………………… Date

Name of researcher: Mamun Rashid FACULTY OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT Doctoral Research - Architecture

Sydney - Future Housing Questionnaire to residents: Evaluation of liveability and sustainability of multi-storied dwelling form 2006

Please return the completed questionnaire in the enclosed pre-paid envelope  By 30 June,2006 This questionnaire should take about 25 minutes to complete. Your answers will remain strictly confidential & anonymous. Thank you for your participation.

Survey Instructions

1. This anonymous questionnaire is to be filled in by household heads or their partner.

2. Please read the PROJECT INFORMATION STATEMENT thoroughly before completing the survey. This questionnaire should take about 25 minutes to complete.

Your answers will remain strictly confidential & anonymous.

3. For some questions you are asked to tick the appropriate box , or write down your response.

4. For other questions you are asked to consider your answer on a scale (1 to 5). The lower number represents lower level of satisfaction. For example: Higher number denotes higher satisfaction. You would circle the number that represents your feelings.

Similarly, higher number denotes higher level of importance. You would circle the number that represents your feelings.

SAMPLE QUESTION: On the whole, how satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following aspects?

Completely Mixed Highly Not

Dissatisfied Dissatisfied feelings Satisfied Satisfied Applicable

1. Meets general lifestyle needs 1 2 3 4 5 0 2. Living environment 1 2 3 4 5 0

 Thank you for your participation  If you have any queries, please feel free to ask us: Mamun Rashid, FBE, UNSW, NSW 2052,  9385 4848, [email protected] Robert Samuels Senior Lecturer, FBE, UNSW,  9385 5258, [email protected]  i

Please tick the appropriate box  or write down your response.

Today’s date: ______, 2006

Occupancy pattern & choice

1. Please state whether you are? 1. Renting OR 2. Owner 2. If renting, would you like to own a similar dwelling?

1. Yes, 2. No 3. Not sure

3. How long have you been living in this dwelling (apartment)? ______

4. On average can you estimate how long you might want to live here?

 1."Leave immediately 2."1-3 years 3."3-7 years 4."Rest of life

5. Number of bedrooms in this dwelling? ______or "Studio apartment

6. Please indicate the floor level you live on (e.g. 3rd floor) : ______

7. How do you go up (travel) to your floor?

1." Always Lift 2."Always Stairs 3."Both 4."Mostly Stairs & Sometimes Lift

Please tick the appropriate box  or write down your response.

8. Which type of area (locality) did you live in before you moved here?

1."Rural area 2."Regional town 3."Outer suburb 4." Suburb near central city 5." Central city

9. Which type of dwelling did you live in before coming here?

1.!High-Rise apartment (1-20 floor) 2.!Mid-Rise apt (1-8 ) 3.!Low-Rise apt ( 1-4)

4.!Townhouse 5.!Separate House 6.!Terrace 7.!Other, please state_____

10. If you move again would you choose to live in one of the following types of dwelling (apartment)?

1."High-rise (1-20 floors) 2." Medium-rise (1-8 ) 3." Low-rise (1-4) 4."Other, Please state______a. When you were last looking for a place to live, what was it that made you choose this area / locality?

Please mention the most important reasons.

b. What was it that made you choose to rent or buy this dwelling, specifically this apartment on this floor? (e.g. size, design, layout, quality, views, garden etc.)

ii

Victoria Park- neighbourhood & your dwelling

On the whole, how satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following aspects of the Victoria Park?

Completely Highly Not Mixed Dissatisfied Dissatisfied feelings Satisfied Satisfied Applicable 1. Neighbourhood living environment (Victoria park) 1 2 3 4 5 0

2. Dwelling (apartment) you live in 1 2 3 4 5 0

3. Location of your neighbourhood (Victoria park) 1 2 3 4 5 0

4. Go with/match with your lifestyle (image & activities) 1 2 3 4 5 0

5. Appearance/look of the area & buildings 1 2 3 4 5 0

How satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following aspects of the Victoria Park?

Completely Mixed Highly Not feelings Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Satisfied Applicable

6. Neighbours / people (friendliness) living around 1 2 3 4 5 0

7. Children play facilities within the Victoria park area 1 2 3 4 5 0

8. Safe for children & parents to walk /use(parks & pathways) 1 2 3 4 5 0

9. Appearance of your street/ landscape (trees, pavement, 1 2 3 4 5 0 street furniture)

10. Condition /maintenance of your street (neighbourhood st.) 1 2 3 4 5 0

11. Shops/ café & other facilities within Victoria park 1 2 3 4 5 0

12. Recreational facilities (gym, games) 1 2 3 4 5 0

13. Safety of movement during night 1 2 3 4 5 0

14. Street parking provision 1 2 3 4 5 0

15. Internal courtyard adjacent to your dwelling (design, 1 2 3 4 5 0 facilities, green space)

16. Greenery (park & trees ) in the area 1 2 3 4 5 0

How essential are the following outdoor green areas to you and other members?

Not at all Very Not Mixed Important Unimportant feelings Important Important Applicable

17. Parks / green spaces (Joynton-central park / Tote / Nuffield) 1 2 3 4 5 0

18. Internal courtyard /green space adjacent to your dwelling 1 2 3 4 5 0 (plants, sittings & other facilities)

How often do you use or do the following activities? Not Once a Almost Never Sometimes week Everyday Regularly Applicable 1. Use parks / green spaces ( Joynton Park /Tote/ Nuffield) 1 2 3 4 5 0

2. Internal courtyard/ green space (walk, sit, use facilities) 1 2 3 4 5 0

iii

Dwelling (apartment) - overall c. If you look at your dwelling (apartment & building) from outside what do you find most attractive or unattractive? Please be open & frank.

Like - Dislike i. ii.

d. If you are not satisfied with something what would you change or add inside your dwelling, assuming you could change something? (e.g. kitchen worktop, wall colour, lights, door, curtains etc.)

1. What type of view would you prefer from your window? You may select more than one box.

1." Activity on park/street 2." Greenery, 3." City view, 4."Ocean view 5."Like to see far 6."Any surroundings

2. Please indicate the view from your living room (or balcony ) :

1."Surrounding buildings, 2." Greenery, 3."City view, 6."Other, please state______

How satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following features of your dwelling (apartment)

Completely Highly Not Mixed Dissatisfied Dissatisfied feelings Satisfied Satisfied Applicable 3. Overall look of the whole building (aesthetics / 1 2 3 4 5 0 exterior design)

4. Layout & design (apartment plan, room 1 2 3 4 5 0 arrangements, entry)

5. Entry corridor / passage to your dwelling (apartment) 1 2 3 4 5 0

6. Window sizes - overall 1 2 3 4 5 0

7. Window/glass panel- you can open or control 1 2 3 4 5 0

8. Able to place furniture according to your liking 1 2 3 4 5 0

9. Storage areas /spaces (cabinets/ built-in cupboards ) 1 2 3 4 5 0

10. Privacy 1 2 3 4 5 0

Living space & dining

1. Please indicate the direction the living room main window/glass door faces.

1. "North 2. "South 3."East 4."West 5. "Same as balcony

How satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following features of the Living-dining space?

Completely Highly Not Mixed Dissatisfied Dissatisfied feelings Satisfied Satisfied Applicable 11. Size of Living- dining space (for furniture placing) 1 2 3 4 5 0

12. Comfortable conditions last Summer 1 2 3 4 5 0

13. Comfortable conditions in Winter 1 2 3 4 5 0

14. Sufficient natural daylight ( living-dining space) 1 2 3 4 5 0

15. View from living room window 1 2 3 4 5 0 iv

Kitchen area - worktop

How satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following Completely Highly Not features? Mixed Dissatisfied Dissatisfied feelings Satisfied Satisfied Applicable 16. Overall design of kitchen (cooking, preparation, 1 2 3 4 5 0 storage) 17. Performance of exhaust over stove (ventilation) 1 2 3 4 5 0

Bedrooms How satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following features of the bedroom (s)?

Completely Highly Not Mixed Dissatisfied Dissatisfied feelings Satisfied Satisfied Applicable 18. Size of bedroom (s) , for furniture placing 1 2 3 4 5 0

19. Sufficient natural daylight in the bed room(s) 1 2 3 4 5 0

20. Comfortable conditions- last Summer 1 2 3 4 5 0

21. Comfortable conditions- in Winter 1 2 3 4 5 0

22. Built-in closets (design, size, quality) 1 2 3 4 5 0

Balcony (terrace, patio, veranda) i. Please indicate the direction the main balcony faces.

1."North 2. "South 3."East 4."West 5."Same as Living room ii. Your main balcony faces towards:

1."Internal courtyard 2."Road 3."Both, road & internal court iii. Please indicate (select more than one) the activities you prefer doing on the balcony.

1."Enjoy the view / fresh air 3."Outdoor sitting 4."BBQ 5."Grow plants 6." Drying clothes

7."Temporary storage (bike, boxes) 8."Other, please state. ______

How often do you do the following on the balcony? Not Hardly Almost ever Sometimes Mixed everyday Everyday Applicable 23. Come out on the balcony ( use ) 1 2 3 4 5 0

24. Use movable shading device / louvres to control 1 2 3 4 5 0 sunlight

How satisfied/dissatisfied are you with the following features of the balcony?

Completely Highly Not Mixed Dissatisfied Dissatisfied feelings Satisfied Satisfied Applicable

25. Adequate space for the activities you indicated 1 2 3 4 5 0

26. Sufficient protection from sun / rain 1 2 3 4 5 0

27. Safety (any type of activity) 1 2 3 4 5 0

28. Privacy 1 2 3 4 5 0

v

How satisfied are you with these characteristics concerning your dwelling?

Completely Highly Not Mixed Dissatisfied Dissatisfied feelings Satisfied Satisfied Applicable

29. Entrance to the building from street level 1 2 3 4 5 0

30. Stair lobby at entry level 1 2 3 4 5 0

31. Lift lobby at entry level 1 2 3 4 5 0

32. Underground parking area 1 2 3 4 5 0

33. Feel crowded (too many people around) 1 2 3 4 5 0

34. Noise from neighbouring dwellings 1 2 3 4 5 0

35. Provision of community spaces 1 2 3 4 5 0

36. Security – around/approaching/inside the dwelling 1 2 3 4 5 0

37. Garbage disposal 1 2 3 4 5 0

38. Building Management (efficient, helpful) 1 2 3 4 5 0

39. Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) 1 2 3 4 5 0

40. Accessibility for elderly & disabled people 1 2 3 4 5 0

41. Keep pets ( to your liking) 1 2 3 4 5 0

42. Good value for money/ good investment 1 2 3 4 5 0

43. Affordability (reasonable rent or price paid) 1 2 3 4 5 0

44. Strata costs 1 2 3 4 5 0

Energy, water & recycling - attitude & behaviours How important are the following features for you & other family members?

Not at all very Not Mixed Important Unimportant feelings Important Important Applicable 1. To save energy 1 2 3 4 5 0

2. To save water 1 2 3 4 5 0

3. To have star rated household appliances 1 2 3 4 5 0 (eg notice Star Rating label on fridge/ washer/dryer)

4. Performance of water appliances (taps /shower heads) 1 2 3 4 5 0

5. To reuse water 1 2 3 4 5 0

6. Recycle - separate waste material, e.g., paper, glass. 1 2 3 4 5 0

i. Would you say that your attitude towards saving energy and water has changed since living here? 1."Yes or 2."No

Please explain how / why?

ii. What do you do to keep the temperature inside your dwelling at a comfortable level?

(eg use Fan/Heater/Air- Conditioner/Cooler, put on warm clothes, open / close windows & curtains etc.)

Winter Summer

Firstly 1. 1.

Secondly 2. 2.

Thirdly 3. 3.

vi

How satisfied are you with the following Completely Highly Not Mixed measures you took in your dwelling? Dissatisfied Dissatisfied feelings Satisfied Satisfied Applicable

7. Water saving measures you took 1 2 3 4 5 0

8. Energy saving measures 1 2 3 4 5 0

9. Recycle /separate waste material, e.g., paper, glass 1 2 3 4 5 0

Demographics

1. Please indicate your age : ______

2. Please indicate whether you are: 1. Male 2. Female

3. Please indicate the number of members in your household ______

4. From the following which describes your life 5. What is your major occupation

1. Living alone 1. Student 2. Living in shared house 2. Professional 3. Couple - no kids 3. Clerical 4. Family – kid/s under 12yrs 4. Service/sales, technical 5. Family – kid/s above 13yrs 5. Homemaker 6. Mature Couple – no kids at home 6. Unemployed 7. Mature single – no kids at home 7. Retired

8. Other, please state______8. Other, please state______

6. Please mention your birth place (or country)? ______

7. What is the combined gross annual income (approximate) of you and your partner?

1. " 2. " 3. " 4. " 5. " 6. "

$30,000 -40,000 $40,001 -60,000 $60,001 -80,000 $80,001 -100,000 $100,001 -150,000 $150,001 -above e. In your opinion, what are the 3 best and 3 worst things about your dwelling (apartment)?

Please also consider other household members’ views & be open & frank

BEST WORST i. i. ii. ii. iii. iii. f. Finally is there anything else you would like to mention about your experience of living here? (liveability or pleasantness of dwelling & the area) Survey of Victoria Park Architects

Evaluation of liveability and sustainability principles of multi-storied dwelling forms in an inner area of Sydney

Please read the Project Consent Form thoroughly before completing the survey. All responses are for research purposes only and remain anonymous and confidential. No person or company can be identified unless allowed by you. I apologise for the long questionnaire however all FACULTY OF THE questions are critical for the research & I appreciate your invaluable response. BUILT ENVIRONMENT You may only fill in forms in the grey highlighted regions OR you may attach hand written pages

Questionnaire

Firstly let me ask about your role for this particular project (Victoria Park). Can you please elaborate briefly here? [Form / Design] a. Please elaborate your ideas of the most important elements of a ‘good design’ for a multi-storied residential building complex? b. What design variations or similarities (if any) would you consider in high-rise, medium rise and low-rise forms?

[Sustainable Design] a. How would you define sustainable design? What parameters do you consider most important? b. What social aspects (human factors) would you consider, in general, when designing a multi-storied residential project?

[Form, Design & User Needs] a. Do you think there are differences in lifestyle preferences of families living in low-rise, medium-rise or high-rise? b. How do you ascertain user needs/requirements assuming you have a rough idea of the users? c. Regarding internal courtyards & builtform relationships, what criteria do you set in your design? How might these vary between low-rise, mid-rise & high-rise? d. What criteria do you consider for corridors in your design? e. Balconies are the only private outdoor spaces in the Victoria Park apartments. How do you see the role of balconies in these settings? f. ‘View’ is a highly sought-after feature & often marketed as a major attraction in the brochures. What considerations did you take to offer views from the apartments? g. It is inevitable that some apartments will be oriented towards west and/or south. In terms of thermal comfort of users what considerations/adjustments in design do you think are necessary? h. Do you have any experience of living in an apartment? Do you think apartment living would have any affect on your design intentions/considerations?

[Developer- (other than economic aspects)] a. What parameters (or constraints) did the developers set for this particular project? Please elaborate. b. Did Landcom (& the developer) set any guidelines for sustainable parameters? If yes, to what extent do you consider you met those through the design? And which were the most essential criteria in your opinion? c. Do the developers (as a client) provide any information regarding user needs?

Since designing the Victoria Park project; do you think your conceptual approach to a similar project would be different now? OR, what, if anything, would have been done differently if you were to design the project now?

Finally, if there is there anything you would like to add, which could assist in this research investigation, please elaborate or attach.

Thank you for taking part in this interview and your invaluable comments If you have any queries, please feel free to ask me, Mamun Rashid (phone 9385 4848, fax, 9385 6374, [email protected]) Page 1

Appendix 4 : Statistical Analyses (SPSS) Factor analysis Regression analysis

Appendix | 4 Factor Analysis . Correlation Matrixa .

Notes . Satisf Satisf Nhood Satisf Location of living environ Dwelling/Apt Nhood Output Created 28-APR-2008 00:30:27 Correlation Satisf Nhood living Comments environ 1.000 .481 .546 Input Data D:\mamun research-phd\SPSS- all Satisf Dwelling/Apt .481 1.000 .359 bldg data\march 2008\Copy Satisf Location of Nhood .546 .359 1.000 erase\reg\1.sav Satisf Lifestyle-image Filter /activities .523 .435 .604 Weight Satis apperance of the Split File area/bldg .588 .415 .427 N of Rows in 164 Sig. (1-tailed) Satisf Nhood living Working Data File environ .000 .000 Missing Value Definition of Missing MISSING=EXCLUDE: User-defined Satisf Dwelling/Apt .000 .000 Handling missing values are treated as Satisf Location of Nhood .000 .000 missing. Satisf Lifestyle-image Cases Used PAIRWISE: Correlation coefficients /activities .000 .000 .000 for each pair of variables are based Satis apperance of the on all the cases with valid data for .000 .000 .000 that pair. The factor analysis is area/bldg based on these correlations. Syntax FACTOR /VARIABLES VPW1nhod VPW2dwel VPW3loc VPW4lifestyl VPW5look /MISSING PAIRWISE /ANALYSIS VPW1nhod VPW2dwel VPW3loc VPW4lifestyl VPW5look /PRINT UNIVARIATE INITIAL CORRELATION SIG DET KMO EXTRACTION ROTATION /FORMAT SORT BLANK(.40) /PLOT EIGEN /CRITERIA MINEIGEN(1) ITERATE(25) /EXTRACTION PC /CRITERIA ITERATE(25) /ROTATION VARIMAX /METHOD=CORRELATION . Resources Elapsed Time 0:00:01.06 Maximum Memory Required 4100 (4.004K) bytes

[DataSet2] D:\mamun research-phd\SPSS- all bldg data\march 2008\Copy erase\reg\1.sav .

Descriptive Statistics .

Mean Std. Deviation Analysis N Missing N Satisf Nhood living environ 4.25 .794 164 0 Satisf Dwelling/Apt 4.24 .758 164 0 Satisf Location of Nhood 4.32 .775 164 0 Satisf Lifestyle-image /activities 4.11 .775 164 0 Satis apperance of the area/bldg 4.13 .837 164 0

.

Page 1 Page 2 Correlation Matrixa . .

Satisf Satis Lifestyle-imag apperance of Scree Plot e /activities the area/bldg Correlation Satisf Nhood living environ .523 .588 Satisf Dwelling/Apt .435 .415 3.0 Satisf Location of Nhood .604 .427 Satisf Lifestyle-image /activities 1.000 .573 2.5 Satis apperance of the area/bldg .573 1.000 Sig. (1-tailed) Satisf Nhood living environ .000 .000 2.0 Satisf Dwelling/Apt .000 .000 Satisf Location of Nhood .000 .000 Satisf Lifestyle-image 1.5 /activities .000 Satis apperance of the area/bldg .000 Eigenvalue a. Determinant = .162 1.0

KMO and Bartlett's Test . 0.5

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .807 0.0 Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 291.919 Sphericity df 10 1 2 3 4 5 Sig. .000 Component Number

Communalities . Component Matrixa .

Initial Extraction Compone Satisf Nhood living nt environ 1.000 .670 1 Satisf Dwelling/Apt Satisf Lifestyle-image 1.000 .459 .819 Satisf Location of Nhood 1.000 .581 /activities Satisf Nhood living Satisf Lifestyle-image .818 /activities 1.000 .671 environ Satis apperance of the Satis apperance of the .782 area/bldg 1.000 .612 area/bldg Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Satisf Location of Nhood .762 Satisf Dwelling/Apt .677 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained . a. 1 components extracted.

Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Rotated Component Matrixa . 1 2.993 59.851 59.851 2.993 59.851 59.851 2 .674 13.471 73.323 a. Only one component was extracted. The solution cannot be rotated. 3 .562 11.242 84.565 4 .462 9.232 93.797 5 .310 6.203 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Page 3 Page 4 Factor Analysis . Descriptive Statistics .

Notes . Mean Std. Deviation Analysis N Missing N apperance of your st. /landscape 4.27 .768 164 0 Output Created 28-MAR-2008 21:01:28 condition of your street 4.32 .751 164 0 Comments shops/facilities 2.90 1.046 164 0 Input Data D:\mamun research-phd\SPSS- all safety(movement at night) bldg data\march 2008\Copy 3.82 .865 164 0 erase\chnaging NAP to missing. satisf +addsav.sav Street parking provision 2.99 1.226 156 8 Filter Satisfaction Internal court 3.71 1.030 163 1 Satisfaction Weight 4.30 .761 164 0 Split File greenery/park/trees Overall look of N of Rows in 3.95 .750 164 0 Working Data File 164 bldg/aesthetics Missing Value Definition of Missing MISSING=EXCLUDE: User-defined Layout & design (apt) 4.19 .764 164 0 Handling missing values are treated as Entry corridor to dwelling 3.73 1.020 160 4 missing. Window sizes 4.27 .778 164 0 Cases Used PAIRWISE: Correlation coefficients Window -open/control 4.02 .874 162 2 for each pair of variables are based Place furniture 3.99 .787 164 0 on all the cases with valid data for Storage space/cabinets 3.52 1.054 164 0 that pair. The factor analysis is based on these correlations. Privacy (dwelling) 3.97 .847 164 0 Entrance to bldg street Syntax FACTOR 3.66 .939 163 1 /VARIABLES Vp9appear Vp10cond level Vp11shop Vp13safeN Vp14parkng Underground parking 3.77 .894 159 5 Vp15court area Vp16green D21look D22design Noise from neighbouring D23entry D24win D25winopen dwellings 3.64 1.093 163 1 D26furn D27storage Provision of community D28privacy O50entry O53ugpark spaces 3.96 .938 160 4 O55Noise O56com O57security O58garbage Security O59manage O60safety O54crowd around/approaching/insid 3.54 1.132 164 0 /MISSING PAIRWISE /ANALYSIS e Vp9appear Garbage disposal 3.52 1.164 164 0 Vp10cond Vp11shop Vp13safeN Building Management Vp14parkng Vp15court Vp16green (efficient, helpful) 3.60 1.051 161 3 D21look Safety (Way-out in case D22design D23entry D24win of fire ) 3.98 .698 163 1 D25winopen D26furn D27storage Feel crowded/too many D28privacy people 3.88 .861 153 11 O50entry O53ugpark O55Noise O56com O57security O58garbage O59manage O60safety O54crowd . /PRINT UNIVARIATE INITIAL CORRELATION SIG DET KMO EXTRACTION ROTATION /FORMAT SORT BLANK(.4) /PLOT EIGEN /CRITERIA FACTORS(4) ITERATE(25) /EXTRACTION PC /CRITERIA ITERATE(25) /ROTATION VARIMAX /METHOD=CORRELATION . Resources Elapsed Time 0:00:00.83 Maximum Memory Required 68472 (66.867K) bytes

[DataSet3] D:\mamun research-phd\SPSS- all bldg data\march 2008\Copy erase\chnaging NAP. to missing.sav

.

Page 1 Page 2 Correlation Matrixa . Correlation Matrixa .

apperance of safety(move apperance of safety(move your st. condition of shops/facil ment at your st. condition of shops/facil ment at /landscape your street ities night) satisf /landscape your street ities night) satisf Correlation apperance of your st. Sig. (1-tailed) apperance of your st. /landscape 1.000 .689 .292 .367 /landscape .000 .000 .000 condition of your street .689 1.000 .165 .353 condition of your street .000 .017 .000 shops/facilities .292 .165 1.000 .157 shops/facilities .000 .017 .022 safety(movement at night) safety(movement at night) satisf .367 .353 .157 1.000 satisf .000 .000 .022 Street parking provision .274 .400 .180 .143 Street parking provision .000 .000 .012 .038 Satisfaction Internal court .350 .362 .230 .245 Satisfaction Internal court .000 .000 .002 .001 Satisfaction Satisfaction greenery/park/trees .576 .421 .245 .230 greenery/park/trees .000 .000 .001 .002 Overall look of Overall look of bldg/aesthetics .481 .388 .189 .157 bldg/aesthetics .000 .000 .008 .022 Layout & design (apt) .321 .342 .123 .125 Layout & design (apt) .000 .000 .058 .055 Entry corridor to dwelling .256 .290 .244 .078 Entry corridor to dwelling .001 .000 .001 .165 Window sizes .235 .204 -.110 .182 Window sizes .001 .004 .080 .010 Window -open/control .362 .331 .036 .307 Window -open/control .000 .000 .326 .000 Place furniture .246 .211 .096 .197 Place furniture .001 .003 .110 .006 Storage space/cabinets .183 .291 .135 .209 Storage space/cabinets .009 .000 .042 .004 Privacy (dwelling) .343 .373 .191 .244 Privacy (dwelling) .000 .000 .007 .001 Entrance to bldg street Entrance to bldg street level .203 .290 .196 .205 level .005 .000 .006 .004 Underground parking Underground parking area .293 .378 .041 .432 area .000 .000 .306 .000 Noise from neighbouring Noise from neighbouring dwellings .262 .335 .041 .200 dwellings .000 .000 .300 .005 Provision of community Provision of community spaces .378 .473 .188 .351 spaces .000 .000 .009 .000 Security Security around/approaching/insid .206 .327 .102 .506 around/approaching/insid .004 .000 .097 .000 e e Garbage disposal .303 .256 .218 .012 Garbage disposal .000 .000 .003 .438 Building Management Building Management (efficient, helpful) .223 .289 .069 .370 (efficient, helpful) .002 .000 .191 .000 Safety (Way-out in case Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) .423 .415 .099 .445 of fire ) .000 .000 .105 .000 Feel crowded/too many Feel crowded/too many people .376 .469 .013 .158 people .000 .000 .438 .025

Page 3 Page 4 Correlation Matrixa . Correlation Matrixa .

Satisfaction Satisfaction Street parking Satisfaction greenery/par Overall look of Street parking Satisfaction greenery/par Overall look of provision Internal court k/trees bldg/aesthetics provision Internal court k/trees bldg/aesthetics Correlation apperance of your st. Sig. (1-tailed) apperance of your st. /landscape .274 .350 .576 .481 /landscape .000 .000 .000 .000 condition of your street .400 .362 .421 .388 condition of your street .000 .000 .000 .000 shops/facilities .180 .230 .245 .189 shops/facilities .012 .002 .001 .008 safety(movement at night) safety(movement at night) satisf .143 .245 .230 .157 satisf .038 .001 .002 .022 Street parking provision 1.000 .374 .227 .279 Street parking provision .000 .002 .000 Satisfaction Internal court .374 1.000 .365 .372 Satisfaction Internal court .000 .000 .000 Satisfaction Satisfaction greenery/park/trees .227 .365 1.000 .359 greenery/park/trees .002 .000 .000 Overall look of Overall look of bldg/aesthetics .279 .372 .359 1.000 bldg/aesthetics .000 .000 .000 Layout & design (apt) .159 .399 .282 .370 Layout & design (apt) .024 .000 .000 .000 Entry corridor to dwelling .256 .313 .253 .397 Entry corridor to dwelling .001 .000 .001 .000 Window sizes .075 .077 .203 .223 Window sizes .175 .165 .005 .002 Window -open/control .020 .150 .253 .202 Window -open/control .402 .028 .001 .005 Place furniture .185 .324 .187 .270 Place furniture .010 .000 .008 .000 Storage space/cabinets .297 .305 .295 .125 Storage space/cabinets .000 .000 .000 .055 Privacy (dwelling) .188 .250 .262 .297 Privacy (dwelling) .009 .001 .000 .000 Entrance to bldg street Entrance to bldg street level .173 .220 .255 .334 level .016 .002 .001 .000 Underground parking Underground parking area .335 .326 .167 .278 area .000 .000 .018 .000 Noise from neighbouring Noise from neighbouring dwellings .195 .286 .270 .129 dwellings .007 .000 .000 .051 Provision of community Provision of community spaces .226 .347 .290 .249 spaces .003 .000 .000 .001 Security Security around/approaching/insid .272 .322 .231 .219 around/approaching/insid .000 .000 .001 .002 e e Garbage disposal .192 .302 .302 .191 Garbage disposal .008 .000 .000 .007 Building Management Building Management (efficient, helpful) .182 .355 .293 .226 (efficient, helpful) .012 .000 .000 .002 Safety (Way-out in case Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) .134 .260 .301 .257 of fire ) .048 .000 .000 .000 Feel crowded/too many Feel crowded/too many people .185 .205 .389 .273 people .013 .006 .000 .000

Page 5 Page 6 Correlation Matrixa . Correlation Matrixa .

Layout & Entry corridor Window Layout & Entry corridor Window design (apt) to dwelling Window sizes -open/control design (apt) to dwelling Window sizes -open/control Correlation apperance of your st. Sig. (1-tailed) apperance of your st. /landscape .321 .256 .235 .362 /landscape .000 .001 .001 .000 condition of your street .342 .290 .204 .331 condition of your street .000 .000 .004 .000 shops/facilities .123 .244 -.110 .036 shops/facilities .058 .001 .080 .326 safety(movement at night) safety(movement at night) satisf .125 .078 .182 .307 satisf .055 .165 .010 .000 Street parking provision .159 .256 .075 .020 Street parking provision .024 .001 .175 .402 Satisfaction Internal court .399 .313 .077 .150 Satisfaction Internal court .000 .000 .165 .028 Satisfaction Satisfaction greenery/park/trees .282 .253 .203 .253 greenery/park/trees .000 .001 .005 .001 Overall look of Overall look of bldg/aesthetics .370 .397 .223 .202 bldg/aesthetics .000 .000 .002 .005 Layout & design (apt) 1.000 .397 .150 .375 Layout & design (apt) .000 .028 .000 Entry corridor to dwelling .397 1.000 .146 .212 Entry corridor to dwelling .000 .032 .004 Window sizes .150 .146 1.000 .504 Window sizes .028 .032 .000 Window -open/control .375 .212 .504 1.000 Window -open/control .000 .004 .000 Place furniture .512 .252 .123 .343 Place furniture .000 .001 .058 .000 Storage space/cabinets .320 .180 .050 .227 Storage space/cabinets .000 .011 .263 .002 Privacy (dwelling) .275 .302 .134 .178 Privacy (dwelling) .000 .000 .044 .012 Entrance to bldg street Entrance to bldg street level .263 .516 .102 .241 level .000 .000 .097 .001 Underground parking Underground parking area .293 .244 .248 .250 area .000 .001 .001 .001 Noise from neighbouring Noise from neighbouring dwellings .242 .227 .114 .228 dwellings .001 .002 .074 .002 Provision of community Provision of community spaces .221 .255 .202 .226 spaces .003 .001 .005 .002 Security Security around/approaching/insid .257 .293 .171 .249 around/approaching/insid .000 .000 .014 .001 e e Garbage disposal .179 .224 .072 .107 Garbage disposal .011 .002 .179 .088 Building Management Building Management (efficient, helpful) .197 .155 .201 .246 (efficient, helpful) .006 .026 .005 .001 Safety (Way-out in case Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) .237 .140 .111 .248 of fire ) .001 .039 .078 .001 Feel crowded/too many Feel crowded/too many people .168 .261 .230 .232 people .019 .001 .002 .002

Page 7 Page 8 Correlation Matrixa . Correlation Matrixa .

Storage Entrance to Storage Entrance to Place space/cabi Privacy bldg street Place space/cabi Privacy bldg street furniture nets (dwelling) level furniture nets (dwelling) level Correlation apperance of your st. Sig. (1-tailed) apperance of your st. /landscape .246 .183 .343 .203 /landscape .001 .009 .000 .005 condition of your street .211 .291 .373 .290 condition of your street .003 .000 .000 .000 shops/facilities .096 .135 .191 .196 shops/facilities .110 .042 .007 .006 safety(movement at night) safety(movement at night) satisf .197 .209 .244 .205 satisf .006 .004 .001 .004 Street parking provision .185 .297 .188 .173 Street parking provision .010 .000 .009 .016 Satisfaction Internal court .324 .305 .250 .220 Satisfaction Internal court .000 .000 .001 .002 Satisfaction Satisfaction greenery/park/trees .187 .295 .262 .255 greenery/park/trees .008 .000 .000 .001 Overall look of Overall look of bldg/aesthetics .270 .125 .297 .334 bldg/aesthetics .000 .055 .000 .000 Layout & design (apt) .512 .320 .275 .263 Layout & design (apt) .000 .000 .000 .000 Entry corridor to dwelling .252 .180 .302 .516 Entry corridor to dwelling .001 .011 .000 .000 Window sizes .123 .050 .134 .102 Window sizes .058 .263 .044 .097 Window -open/control .343 .227 .178 .241 Window -open/control .000 .002 .012 .001 Place furniture 1.000 .352 .202 .187 Place furniture .000 .005 .008 Storage space/cabinets .352 1.000 .210 .149 Storage space/cabinets .000 .003 .029 Privacy (dwelling) .202 .210 1.000 .230 Privacy (dwelling) .005 .003 .002 Entrance to bldg street Entrance to bldg street level .187 .149 .230 1.000 level .008 .029 .002 Underground parking Underground parking area .198 .106 .146 .357 area .006 .092 .034 .000 Noise from neighbouring Noise from neighbouring dwellings .237 .154 .261 .162 dwellings .001 .025 .000 .020 Provision of community Provision of community spaces .231 .295 .231 .227 spaces .002 .000 .002 .002 Security Security around/approaching/insid .279 .298 .299 .432 around/approaching/insid .000 .000 .000 .000 e e Garbage disposal .238 .295 .234 .144 Garbage disposal .001 .000 .001 .033 Building Management Building Management (efficient, helpful) .242 .303 .182 .156 (efficient, helpful) .001 .000 .010 .024 Safety (Way-out in case Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) .235 .190 .250 .311 of fire ) .001 .008 .001 .000 Feel crowded/too many Feel crowded/too many people .151 .221 .302 .271 people .031 .003 .000 .000

Page 9 Page 10 Correlation Matrixa . Correlation Matrixa .

Noise from Provision of Security Noise from Provision of Security Underground neighbouring community around/approa Underground neighbouring community around/approa parking area dwellings spaces ching/inside parking area dwellings spaces ching/inside Correlation apperance of your st. Sig. (1-tailed) apperance of your st. /landscape .293 .262 .378 .206 /landscape .000 .000 .000 .004 condition of your street .378 .335 .473 .327 condition of your street .000 .000 .000 .000 shops/facilities .041 .041 .188 .102 shops/facilities .306 .300 .009 .097 safety(movement at night) safety(movement at night) satisf .432 .200 .351 .506 satisf .000 .005 .000 .000 Street parking provision .335 .195 .226 .272 Street parking provision .000 .007 .003 .000 Satisfaction Internal court .326 .286 .347 .322 Satisfaction Internal court .000 .000 .000 .000 Satisfaction Satisfaction greenery/park/trees .167 .270 .290 .231 greenery/park/trees .018 .000 .000 .001 Overall look of Overall look of bldg/aesthetics .278 .129 .249 .219 bldg/aesthetics .000 .051 .001 .002 Layout & design (apt) .293 .242 .221 .257 Layout & design (apt) .000 .001 .003 .000 Entry corridor to dwelling .244 .227 .255 .293 Entry corridor to dwelling .001 .002 .001 .000 Window sizes .248 .114 .202 .171 Window sizes .001 .074 .005 .014 Window -open/control .250 .228 .226 .249 Window -open/control .001 .002 .002 .001 Place furniture .198 .237 .231 .279 Place furniture .006 .001 .002 .000 Storage space/cabinets .106 .154 .295 .298 Storage space/cabinets .092 .025 .000 .000 Privacy (dwelling) .146 .261 .231 .299 Privacy (dwelling) .034 .000 .002 .000 Entrance to bldg street Entrance to bldg street level .357 .162 .227 .432 level .000 .020 .002 .000 Underground parking Underground parking area 1.000 .168 .311 .424 area .017 .000 .000 Noise from neighbouring Noise from neighbouring dwellings .168 1.000 .364 .325 dwellings .017 .000 .000 Provision of community Provision of community spaces .311 .364 1.000 .506 spaces .000 .000 .000 Security Security around/approaching/insid .424 .325 .506 1.000 around/approaching/insid .000 .000 .000 e e Garbage disposal .052 .280 .268 .288 Garbage disposal .259 .000 .000 .000 Building Management Building Management (efficient, helpful) .272 .282 .324 .410 (efficient, helpful) .000 .000 .000 .000 Safety (Way-out in case Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) .338 .261 .427 .340 of fire ) .000 .000 .000 .000 Feel crowded/too many Feel crowded/too many people .254 .466 .380 .322 people .001 .000 .000 .000

Page 11 Page 12 Correlation Matrixa . Correlation Matrixa .

Building Building Management Safety Feel Management Safety Feel Garbage (efficient, (Way-out in crowded/too Garbage (efficient, (Way-out in crowded/too disposal helpful) case of fire ) many people disposal helpful) case of fire ) many people Correlation apperance of your st. Sig. (1-tailed) apperance of your st. /landscape .303 .223 .423 .376 /landscape .000 .002 .000 .000 condition of your street .256 .289 .415 .469 condition of your street .000 .000 .000 .000 shops/facilities .218 .069 .099 .013 shops/facilities .003 .191 .105 .438 safety(movement at night) safety(movement at night) satisf .012 .370 .445 .158 satisf .438 .000 .000 .025 Street parking provision .192 .182 .134 .185 Street parking provision .008 .012 .048 .013 Satisfaction Internal court .302 .355 .260 .205 Satisfaction Internal court .000 .000 .000 .006 Satisfaction Satisfaction greenery/park/trees .302 .293 .301 .389 greenery/park/trees .000 .000 .000 .000 Overall look of Overall look of bldg/aesthetics .191 .226 .257 .273 bldg/aesthetics .007 .002 .000 .000 Layout & design (apt) .179 .197 .237 .168 Layout & design (apt) .011 .006 .001 .019 Entry corridor to dwelling .224 .155 .140 .261 Entry corridor to dwelling .002 .026 .039 .001 Window sizes .072 .201 .111 .230 Window sizes .179 .005 .078 .002 Window -open/control .107 .246 .248 .232 Window -open/control .088 .001 .001 .002 Place furniture .238 .242 .235 .151 Place furniture .001 .001 .001 .031 Storage space/cabinets .295 .303 .190 .221 Storage space/cabinets .000 .000 .008 .003 Privacy (dwelling) .234 .182 .250 .302 Privacy (dwelling) .001 .010 .001 .000 Entrance to bldg street Entrance to bldg street level .144 .156 .311 .271 level .033 .024 .000 .000 Underground parking Underground parking area .052 .272 .338 .254 area .259 .000 .000 .001 Noise from neighbouring Noise from neighbouring dwellings .280 .282 .261 .466 dwellings .000 .000 .000 .000 Provision of community Provision of community spaces .268 .324 .427 .380 spaces .000 .000 .000 .000 Security Security around/approaching/insid .288 .410 .340 .322 around/approaching/insid .000 .000 .000 .000 e e Garbage disposal 1.000 .276 .239 .207 Garbage disposal .000 .001 .005 Building Management Building Management (efficient, helpful) .276 1.000 .395 .353 (efficient, helpful) .000 .000 .000 Safety (Way-out in case Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) .239 .395 1.000 .375 of fire ) .001 .000 .000 Feel crowded/too many Feel crowded/too many people .207 .353 .375 1.000 people .005 .000 .000 a. Determinant = .000

KMO and Bartlett's Test .

Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .841

Bartlett's Test of Approx. Chi-Square 1193.569 Sphericity df 276 Sig. .000

.

Page 13 Page 14 Communalities . Total Variance Explained .

Initial Extraction Initial Eigenvalues apperance of your st. Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1.000 .738 /landscape 1 7.077 29.486 29.486 condition of your street 1.000 .631 2 1.655 6.896 36.382 shops/facilities 1.000 .360 3 1.444 6.017 42.399 safety(movement at night) 4 1.357 5.655 48.054 satisf 1.000 .532 5 1.317 5.489 53.543 Street parking provision 1.000 .321 6 1.152 4.799 58.342 Satisfaction Internal court 1.000 .478 7 1.032 4.298 62.641 Satisfaction 8 .891 3.714 66.355 greenery/park/trees 1.000 .539 9 .836 3.484 69.839 Overall look of bldg/aesthetics 1.000 .499 10 .769 3.205 73.044 Layout & design (apt) 1.000 .597 11 .759 3.164 76.208 Entry corridor to dwelling 1.000 .522 12 .698 2.910 79.118 Window sizes 1.000 .573 13 .627 2.613 81.730 Window -open/control 1.000 .617 14 .583 2.430 84.160 Place furniture 1.000 .464 15 .545 2.271 86.431 Storage space/cabinets 1.000 .345 16 .482 2.010 88.441 Privacy (dwelling) 1.000 .295 17 .476 1.982 90.423 Entrance to bldg street 18 .431 1.797 92.220 level 1.000 .360 19 .411 1.712 93.932 Underground parking 20 .398 1.659 95.591 1.000 .442 area 21 .330 1.376 96.967 Noise from neighbouring 22 1.000 .310 .315 1.314 98.281 dwellings 23 .213 .886 99.167 Provision of community 24 .200 .833 100.000 spaces 1.000 .500 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Security around/approaching/insid 1.000 .657 e Garbage disposal 1.000 .359 Total Variance Explained Building Management 1.000 .446 (efficient, helpful) Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings Safety (Way-out in case Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1.000 .474 of fire ) 1 7.077 29.486 29.486 3.496 14.567 14.567 Feel crowded/too many 1.000 .473 2 1.655 6.896 36.382 3.417 14.236 28.803 people 3 1.444 6.017 42.399 3.079 12.829 41.631 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. 4 1.357 5.655 48.054 1.541 6.422 48.054 5 . 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

Page 15 Page 16 . Component Matrixa .

Component Scree Plot 1 2 3 4 condition of your street .725 apperance of your st. /landscape .687 -.510 8 Security around/approaching/insid .632 .418 e Provision of community spaces .631 6 Satisfaction Internal court .604 Satisfaction greenery/park/trees .601 Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) .591 4 Feel crowded/too many people .576 Overall look of Eigenvalue bldg/aesthetics .568 Layout & design (apt) .559 .441 Building Management 2 (efficient, helpful) .545 Underground parking area .542 Entry corridor to dwelling .526 safety(movement at night) 0 satisf .524 -.449 Entrance to bldg street 987654321 1110 12 13 14 1615 191817 20 21 22 23 24 level .511 Component Number Privacy (dwelling) .508 Noise from neighbouring dwellings .506 . Place furniture .495 Storage space/cabinets .470 Street parking provision .455 Garbage disposal .444 shops/facilities .490 Window -open/control .497 .500 Window sizes -.429 .465 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a. 4 components extracted.

.

Page 17 Page 18 Rotated Component Matrixa .

Component 1 2 3 4 Security around/approaching/inside .739 safety(movement at night) satisf .699 Building Management (efficient, helpful) .633 Provision of community spaces .600 Safety (Way-out in case of fire ) .585 Underground parking area .523 Noise from neighbouring dwellings .424 apperance of your st./landscape .818 Satisfaction greenery/park/trees .694 condition of your street .679 Feel crowded/too many people .550 Overall look of bldg/aesthetics .509 .485 Privacy (dwelling) .431 Layout & design (apt) .738 Entry corridor to dwelling .673 Place furniture .640 Entrance to bldg street level .530 Satisfaction Internal court .466 Storage space/cabinets Window sizes .677 Window -open/control .602 shops/facilities -.438 Garbage disposal Street parking provision Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization. a. Rotation converged in 9 iterations.

Component Transformation Matrix .

Component 1 2 3 4 1 .596 .598 .535 .019 2 -.554 .197 .420 -.691 3 -.443 -.097 .578 .679 4 .377 -.771 .450 -.248 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.

Page 19 Regression . Descriptive Statistics .

Notes . Mean Std. Deviation N DV 4.2098 .60905 164 Output Created 01-JUN-2008 13:11:25 rentown .5488 .49914 164 Comments ht .3049 .46177 164 Input Data D:\mamun research-phd\SPSS- all form 1.8780 .88464 164 bldg data\output may 2008\final for Number of Bedrooms 2.08 .586 164 regression.sav Total family income 4.05 1.602 163 Active Dataset DataSet1 Age of Respondent 37.46 12.670 162 Filter Good value for 3.57 .871 157 Weight money/good investment Nbours freindliness Split File 3.66 .889 164 N of Rows in Satisf 164 Satisfied recycling Working Data File 4.09 .796 160 Missing Value Definition of Missing User-defined missing values are measures Handling treated as missing. IVfac1 3.7642 .63843 164 Cases Used Correlation coefficients for each pair IVfac2 4.1530 .58269 164 of variables are based on all the IVfac3 3.8739 .59174 164 cases with valid data for that pair. Liv comfortable cond Regression statistics are based on winter 3.62 .965 162 these correlations. Syntax REGRESSION /DESCRIPTIVES MEAN STDDEV . CORR SIG N /MISSING PAIRWISE /STATISTICS COEFF OUTS R ANOVA COLLIN TOL CHANGE ZPP /CRITERIA=PIN(.05) POUT(.10) /NOORIGIN /DEPENDENT DV /METHOD=ENTER rentown ht form O5beds D7income D1age /METHOD=ENTER O63invest Vp6peop E9satisrecyc /METHOD=ENTER IVfac1 IVfac2 IVfac3 L31winter /SCATTERPLOT=(*ZRESID ,*ZPRED ) /RESIDUALS DURBIN HIST(ZRESID) NORM(ZRESID) /CASEWISE PLOT(ZRESID) OUTLIERS(3) /SAVE MAHAL COOK . Resources Processor Time 0:00:01.55 Elapsed Time 0:00:03.40 Memory Required 10372 bytes Additional Memory Required for 816 bytes Residual Plots Variables Created MAH_7 Mahalanobis Distance or Modified COO_7 Cook's Distance

[DataSet1] D:\mamun research-phd\SPSS- all bldg data\output may 2008\final for . regression.sav

.

Page 1 Page 2 Correlations . Correlations .

Good value for Number of Total family Age of money/good DV rentown ht form Bedrooms income Respondent investment Pearson Correlation DV 1.000 .176 .020 -.034 Pearson Correlation DV .128 .075 -.032 .525 rentown .176 1.000 -.092 -.237 rentown .144 -.026 .416 .199 ht .020 -.092 1.000 .512 ht .273 -.012 -.039 .001 form -.034 -.237 .512 1.000 form .042 -.118 -.167 -.024 Number of Bedrooms .128 .144 .273 .042 Number of Bedrooms 1.000 .055 .206 .203 Total family income .075 -.026 -.012 -.118 Total family income .055 1.000 -.041 .008 Age of Respondent -.032 .416 -.039 -.167 Age of Respondent .206 -.041 1.000 -.019 Good value for Good value for money/good investment .525 .199 .001 -.024 money/good investment .203 .008 -.019 1.000 Nbours freindliness Nbours freindliness Satisf .543 .079 .061 .009 Satisf .076 .025 -.002 .360 Satisfied recycling Satisfied recycling measures .237 .052 -.021 -.020 measures -.014 .106 -.017 .285 IVfac1 .441 .103 -.154 -.212 IVfac1 .105 .106 .174 .375 IVfac2 .634 .133 .040 .002 IVfac2 .148 .076 .230 .419 IVfac3 .599 .038 -.117 -.166 IVfac3 .043 .057 .066 .457 Liv comfortable cond Liv comfortable cond winter .453 .221 .025 -.084 winter .202 .048 .059 .372 Sig. (1-tailed) DV . .012 .400 .332 Sig. (1-tailed) DV .051 .171 .342 .000 rentown .012 . .122 .001 rentown .033 .369 .000 .006 ht .400 .122 . .000 ht .000 .439 .311 .495 form .332 .001 .000 . form .295 .067 .017 .381 Number of Bedrooms .051 .033 .000 .295 Number of Bedrooms . .243 .004 .005 Total family income .171 .369 .439 .067 Total family income .243 . .304 .461 Age of Respondent .342 .000 .311 .017 Age of Respondent .004 .304 . .409 Good value for Good value for money/good investment .000 .006 .495 .381 money/good investment .005 .461 .409 . Nbours freindliness Nbours freindliness Satisf .000 .157 .219 .454 Satisf .167 .376 .488 .000 Satisfied recycling Satisfied recycling measures .001 .256 .398 .400 measures .430 .093 .417 .000 IVfac1 .000 .095 .025 .003 IVfac1 .091 .088 .013 .000 IVfac2 .000 .044 .306 .490 IVfac2 .030 .167 .002 .000 IVfac3 .000 .314 .068 .017 IVfac3 .290 .235 .203 .000 Liv comfortable cond Liv comfortable cond winter .000 .002 .374 .144 winter .005 .274 .230 .000 N DV 164 164 164 164 N DV 164 163 162 157 rentown 164 164 164 164 rentown 164 163 162 157 ht 164 164 164 164 ht 164 163 162 157 form 164 164 164 164 form 164 163 162 157 Number of Bedrooms 164 164 164 164 Number of Bedrooms 164 163 162 157 Total family income 163 163 163 163 Total family income 163 163 162 156 Age of Respondent 162 162 162 162 Age of Respondent 162 162 162 155 Good value for Good value for money/good investment 157 157 157 157 money/good investment 157 156 155 157 Nbours freindliness Nbours freindliness Satisf 164 164 164 164 Satisf 164 163 162 157 Satisfied recycling Satisfied recycling measures 160 160 160 160 measures 160 159 158 153 IVfac1 164 164 164 164 IVfac1 164 163 162 157 IVfac2 164 164 164 164 IVfac2 164 163 162 157 IVfac3 164 164 164 164 IVfac3 164 163 162 157 Liv comfortable cond Liv comfortable cond winter 162 162 162 162 winter 162 161 160 155

Page 3 Page 4 Correlations . Correlations .

Nbours Satisfied Liv freindliness recycling comfortable Satisf measures IVfac1 IVfac2 IVfac3 cond winter Pearson Correlation DV .543 .237 .441 .634 Pearson Correlation DV .599 .453 rentown .079 .052 .103 .133 rentown .038 .221 ht .061 -.021 -.154 .040 ht -.117 .025 form .009 -.020 -.212 .002 form -.166 -.084 Number of Bedrooms .076 -.014 .105 .148 Number of Bedrooms .043 .202 Total family income .025 .106 .106 .076 Total family income .057 .048 Age of Respondent -.002 -.017 .174 .230 Age of Respondent .066 .059 Good value for Good value for money/good investment .360 .285 .375 .419 money/good investment .457 .372 Nbours freindliness Nbours freindliness Satisf 1.000 .124 .319 .456 Satisf .439 .254 Satisfied recycling Satisfied recycling measures .124 1.000 .295 .307 measures .223 .087 IVfac1 .319 .295 1.000 .601 IVfac1 .533 .219 IVfac2 .456 .307 .601 1.000 IVfac2 .565 .300 IVfac3 .439 .223 .533 .565 IVfac3 1.000 .419 Liv comfortable cond Liv comfortable cond winter .254 .087 .219 .300 winter .419 1.000 Sig. (1-tailed) DV .000 .001 .000 .000 Sig. (1-tailed) DV .000 .000 rentown .157 .256 .095 .044 rentown .314 .002 ht .219 .398 .025 .306 ht .068 .374 form .454 .400 .003 .490 form .017 .144 Number of Bedrooms .167 .430 .091 .030 Number of Bedrooms .290 .005 Total family income .376 .093 .088 .167 Total family income .235 .274 Age of Respondent .488 .417 .013 .002 Age of Respondent .203 .230 Good value for Good value for money/good investment .000 .000 .000 .000 money/good investment .000 .000 Nbours freindliness Nbours freindliness Satisf . .059 .000 .000 Satisf .000 .001 Satisfied recycling Satisfied recycling measures .059 . .000 .000 measures .002 .140 IVfac1 .000 .000 . .000 IVfac1 .000 .003 IVfac2 .000 .000 .000 . IVfac2 .000 .000 IVfac3 .000 .002 .000 .000 IVfac3 . .000 Liv comfortable cond Liv comfortable cond winter .001 .140 .003 .000 winter .000 . N DV 164 160 164 164 N DV 164 162 rentown 164 160 164 164 rentown 164 162 ht 164 160 164 164 ht 164 162 form 164 160 164 164 form 164 162 Number of Bedrooms 164 160 164 164 Number of Bedrooms 164 162 Total family income 163 159 163 163 Total family income 163 161 Age of Respondent 162 158 162 162 Age of Respondent 162 160 Good value for Good value for money/good investment 157 153 157 157 money/good investment 157 155 Nbours freindliness Nbours freindliness Satisf 164 160 164 164 Satisf 164 162 Satisfied recycling Satisfied recycling measures 160 160 160 160 measures 160 158 IVfac1 164 160 164 164 IVfac1 164 162 IVfac2 164 160 164 164 IVfac2 164 162 IVfac3 164 160 164 164 IVfac3 164 162 Liv comfortable cond Liv comfortable cond winter 162 158 162 162 winter 162 162

.

Page 5 Page 6 Variables Entered/Removedb . ANOVAd .

Variables Variables Sum of Model Entered Removed Method Model Squares df Mean Square F Sig. 1 Age of 1 Regression 3.645 6 .607 1.682 .129a Responden Residual 52.739 146 .361 t, ht, Total Total 56.384 152 family b income, . Enter 2 Regression 24.746 9 2.750 12.428 .000 Number of Residual 31.638 143 .221 Bedrooms, Total 56.384 152 c rentown,a 3 Regression 34.786 13 2.676 17.221 .000 form Residual 21.598 139 .155 2 Nbours Total 56.384 152 freindliness Satisf, a. Predictors: (Constant), Age of Respondent, ht, Total family income, Number of Bedrooms, rentown, form Satisfied b. Predictors: (Constant), Age of Respondent, ht, Total family income, Number of Bedrooms, rentown, recycling form, Nbours freindliness Satisf, Satisfied recycling measures, Good value for money/good investment measures, . Enter Good value c. Predictors: (Constant), Age of Respondent, ht, Total family income, Number of Bedrooms, rentown, for form, Nbours freindliness Satisf, Satisfied recycling measures, Good value for money/good investment, money/goo Liv comfortable cond winter, IVfac1, IVfac3, IVfac2 d a d. Dependent Variable: DV investment 3 Liv comfortable . cond winter, . Enter IVfac1, IVfac3,a IVfac2 a. All requested variables entered. b. Dependent Variable: DV

Model Summaryd .

Adjusted R Std. Error of Model R R Square Square the Estimate 1 .254a .065 .026 .60102 2 .662b .439 .404 .47036 3 .785c .617 .581 .39419

Model Summaryd

Change Statistics R Square Model Change F Change df1 df2 Sig. F Change Durbin-Watson 1 .065 1.682 6 146 .129 2 .374 31.793 3 143 .000 3 .178 16.153 4 139 .000 1.979 a. Predictors: (Constant), Age of Respondent, ht, Total family income, Number of Bedrooms, rentown, form b. Predictors: (Constant), Age of Respondent, ht, Total family income, Number of Bedrooms, rentown, form, Nbours freindliness Satisf, Satisfied recycling measures, Good value for money/good investment c. Predictors: (Constant), Age of Respondent, ht, Total family income, Number of Bedrooms, rentown, form, Nbours freindliness Satisf, Satisfied recycling measures, Good value for money/good investment, Liv comfortable cond winter, IVfac1, IVfac3, IVfac2 d. Dependent Variable: DV

.

Page 7 Page 8 Coefficientsa . Coefficientsa .

Unstandardized Standardized Coefficients Coefficients Correlations Collinearity Statistics Model B Std. Error Beta t Sig. Model Zero-order Partial Part Tolerance VIF 1 (Constant) 3.966 .290 13.684 .000 1 (Constant) rentown .269 .110 .220 2.449 .015 rentown .176 .199 .196 .792 1.263 ht .007 .129 .005 .053 .958 ht .020 .004 .004 .673 1.485 form -.005 .067 -.007 -.068 .946 form -.034 -.006 -.005 .679 1.472 Number of Bedrooms .127 .090 .122 1.420 .158 Number of Bedrooms .128 .117 .114 .863 1.159 Total family income .026 .031 .067 .831 .407 Total family income .075 .069 .066 .974 1.027 Age of Respondent -.007 .004 -.147 -1.642 .103 Age of Respondent -.032 -.135 -.131 .796 1.257 2 (Constant) 2.058 .326 6.306 .000 2 (Constant) rentown .119 .088 .098 1.357 .177 rentown .176 .113 .085 .755 1.324 ht .003 .101 .002 .030 .976 ht .020 .003 .002 .669 1.495 form -.009 .052 -.013 -.176 .860 form -.034 -.015 -.011 .679 1.473 Number of Bedrooms .031 .072 .030 .431 .667 Number of Bedrooms .128 .036 .027 .821 1.219 Total family income .019 .024 .050 .786 .433 Total family income .075 .066 .049 .961 1.041 Age of Respondent -.003 .003 -.071 -.996 .321 Age of Respondent -.032 -.083 -.062 .778 1.285 Good value for Good value for money/good investment .230 .051 .329 4.528 .000 money/good investment .525 .354 .284 .742 1.348 Nbours freindliness Nbours freindliness Satisf .276 .046 .403 5.987 .000 Satisf .543 .448 .375 .865 1.156 Satisfied recycling Satisfied recycling measures .063 .050 .082 1.239 .218 measures .237 .103 .078 .901 1.110 3 (Constant) .907 .315 2.877 .005 3 (Constant) rentown .154 .076 .126 2.025 .045 rentown .176 .169 .106 .711 1.406 ht .013 .085 .010 .157 .875 ht .020 .013 .008 .657 1.522 form .004 .045 .006 .091 .928 form -.034 .008 .005 .644 1.552 Number of Bedrooms .013 .061 .013 .221 .826 Number of Bedrooms .128 .019 .012 .801 1.248 Total family income .008 .020 .020 .374 .709 Total family income .075 .032 .020 .953 1.050 Age of Respondent -.009 .003 -.185 -2.970 .004 Age of Respondent -.032 -.244 -.156 .708 1.413 Good value for Good value for money/good investment .091 .047 .130 1.951 .053 money/good investment .525 .163 .102 .620 1.613 Nbours freindliness Nbours freindliness Satisf .135 .043 .197 3.165 .002 Satisf .543 .259 .166 .709 1.410 Satisfied recycling Satisfied recycling measures -.001 .044 -.002 -.029 .977 measures .237 -.002 -.002 .839 1.192 IVfac1 -.006 .069 -.007 -.094 .926 IVfac1 .441 -.008 -.005 .529 1.890 IVfac2 .376 .082 .359 4.595 .000 IVfac2 .634 .363 .241 .450 2.220 IVfac3 .207 .077 .201 2.673 .008 IVfac3 .599 .221 .140 .487 2.055 Liv comfortable cond Liv comfortable cond winter .091 .039 .144 2.336 .021 winter .453 .194 .123 .727 1.375 a. Dependent Variable: DV

.

Page 9 Page 10 Excluded Variablesc . Excluded Variablesc .

Collinearity Statistics Partial Minimum Model Beta In t Sig. Correlation Model Tolerance VIF Tolerance 1 Good value for a 1 Good value for money/good investment .499 6.802 .000 .492 money/good investment .907 1.102 .672 Nbours freindliness a Nbours freindliness Satisf .522 7.643 .000 .536 Satisf .984 1.016 .672 Satisfied recycling a Satisfied recycling measures .221 2.804 .006 .227 measures .984 1.017 .673 IVfac1 .464a 6.202 .000 .458 IVfac1 .912 1.096 .667 IVfac2 .664a 10.604 .000 .661 IVfac2 .927 1.079 .673 IVfac3 .612a 9.555 .000 .622 IVfac3 .964 1.037 .671 Liv comfortable cond a Liv comfortable cond winter .421 5.508 .000 .416 winter .913 1.095 .673 2 IVfac1 .222b 3.055 .003 .248 2 IVfac1 .700 1.429 .662 IVfac2 .458b 6.516 .000 .480 IVfac2 .616 1.623 .616 IVfac3 .383b 5.372 .000 .411 IVfac3 .647 1.545 .647 Liv comfortable cond b Liv comfortable cond winter .241 3.589 .000 .288 winter .805 1.243 .668 a. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Age of Respondent, ht, Total family income, Number of Bedrooms, rentown, form b. Predictors in the Model: (Constant), Age of Respondent, ht, Total family income, Number of Bedrooms, rentown, form, Nbours freindliness Satisf, Satisfied recycling measures, Good value for money/good investment c. Dependent Variable: DV

.

Page 11 Page 12 Collinearity Diagnosticsa . Collinearity Diagnosticsa .

Variance Proportions

Condition Number of Total family Model Dimension Eigenvalue Index Model Dimension (Constant) rentown ht form Bedrooms income 1 1 5.581 1.000 1 1 .00 .01 .01 .00 .00 .00 2 .729 2.766 2 .00 .10 .44 .01 .00 .00 3 .366 3.906 3 .00 .59 .21 .02 .00 .04 4 .142 6.280 4 .00 .01 .17 .42 .00 .42 5 .101 7.425 5 .00 .28 .03 .24 .08 .27 6 .060 9.673 6 .00 .02 .03 .01 .61 .06 7 .022 16.102 7 .99 .00 .11 .30 .30 .20 2 1 8.397 1.000 2 1 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 2 .745 3.358 2 .00 .07 .47 .01 .00 .00 3 .393 4.622 3 .00 .60 .16 .01 .00 .02 4 .142 7.677 4 .00 .01 .15 .36 .00 .47 5 .102 9.073 5 .00 .25 .04 .32 .07 .32 6 .085 9.935 6 .00 .01 .03 .12 .00 .07 7 .056 12.265 7 .00 .01 .09 .02 .76 .00 8 .039 14.600 8 .00 .00 .02 .02 .02 .02 9 .029 17.017 9 .01 .04 .00 .01 .06 .05 10 .011 27.352 10 .98 .01 .04 .12 .09 .05 3 1 12.261 1.000 3 1 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 2 .761 4.015 2 .00 .04 .47 .01 .00 .00 3 .413 5.451 3 .00 .59 .12 .01 .00 .01 4 .143 9.269 4 .00 .01 .13 .32 .00 .49 5 .109 10.591 5 .00 .14 .11 .42 .02 .39 6 .093 11.486 6 .00 .08 .01 .01 .03 .00 7 .060 14.335 7 .00 .00 .10 .02 .67 .00 8 .046 16.357 8 .00 .02 .00 .02 .13 .01 9 .040 17.618 9 .00 .00 .02 .01 .03 .02 10 .029 20.645 10 .01 .04 .00 .01 .04 .05 11 .021 24.423 11 .01 .05 .02 .00 .00 .00 12 .011 33.020 12 .26 .01 .01 .05 .00 .01 13 .008 39.230 13 .70 .01 .01 .07 .07 .02 14 .007 41.529 14 .02 .00 .00 .06 .00 .00

Page 13 Page 14 Collinearity Diagnosticsa . Collinearity Diagnosticsa .

Variance Proportions Variance Proportions Good value for Nbours Satisfied Liv Age of money/good freindliness recycling comfortable Model Dimension Respondent investment Satisf measures IVfac1 Model Dimension IVfac2 IVfac3 cond winter 1 1 .00 1 1 2 .00 2 3 .00 3 4 .00 4 5 .30 5 6 .51 6 7 .18 7 2 1 .00 .00 .00 .00 2 1 2 .00 .00 .00 .00 2 3 .00 .00 .00 .00 3 4 .00 .00 .00 .00 4 5 .20 .00 .01 .00 5 6 .42 .11 .09 .01 6 7 .15 .00 .10 .03 7 8 .00 .05 .60 .35 8 9 .12 .83 .09 .27 9 10 .11 .00 .11 .34 10 3 1 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 3 1 .00 .00 .00 2 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 2 .00 .00 .00 3 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 3 .00 .00 .00 4 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 4 .00 .00 .00 5 .02 .01 .01 .00 .00 5 .00 .00 .02 6 .52 .04 .02 .00 .00 6 .00 .00 .04 7 .06 .00 .05 .02 .01 7 .00 .00 .05 8 .07 .03 .01 .07 .01 8 .00 .00 .69 9 .00 .02 .60 .23 .00 9 .00 .00 .03 10 .14 .82 .03 .15 .00 10 .00 .00 .03 11 .13 .04 .22 .40 .25 11 .03 .06 .04 12 .01 .00 .03 .03 .46 12 .00 .30 .09 13 .00 .04 .02 .06 .08 13 .09 .39 .01 14 .04 .00 .02 .03 .20 14 .87 .24 .00 a. Dependent Variable: DV

Casewise Diagnosticsa .

Predicted Case Number Std. Residual DV Value Residual 69 -3.692 1.60 3.0554 -1.45541 a. Dependent Variable: DV

.

Page 15 Page 16 Residuals Statisticsa . .

Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation N Predicted Value 2.3139 5.1010 4.2245 .44347 149 Normal P-P Plot of Regression Standardized Residual Std. Predicted Value -3.963 1.863 .031 .927 149 Standard Error of Predicted Value .072 .189 .116 .023 149 Adjusted Predicted Value 2.3478 5.1098 4.2239 .44650 149 Dependent Variable: DV Residual -1.45541 1.04756 .00499 .38567 149 Std. Residual -3.692 2.658 .013 .978 149 Stud. Residual -4.038 2.805 .013 1.031 149 Deleted Residual -1.74081 1.16736 .00566 .42873 149 1.0 Stud. Deleted Residual -4.282 2.878 .011 1.045 149 Mahal. Distance 4.017 33.877 12.709 5.714 149 Cook's Distance .000 .228 .009 .022 149 0.8 Centered Leverage Value .026 .223 .084 .038 149 a. Dependent Variable: DV 0.6 Charts .

. 0.4 Expected Cum Prob

Histogram 0.2

0.0 Dependent Variable: DV 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Observed Cum Prob

25

20

15

Frequency 10

5

Mean =0.01 Std. Dev. =0.978 0 N =149 -4 -2 0 2 Regression Standardized Residual

Page 17 Page 18 .

Scatterplot

Dependent Variable: DV

2

0

-2 Regression Standardized Residual -4

-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 Regression Standardized Predicted Value

Page 19