Sustainability Index for Residential Neighborhoods

Home , Edmund Snow Carpenter, History of Ybor City

Florida State University Libraries

Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School

2006 Space-Time Continuum: A Design Approach for the Built Environment Raghavendra S. Shanbhag

Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected]

THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

SUSTAINABILITY INDEX FOR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS

RUPA SHARMA

A Thesis submitted to the Department of Urban and Regional Planning in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science

Degree Awarded: Fall Semester, 2003

THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY

COLLEGE OF VISUAL ARTS, THEATRE AND DANCE

SPACE-TIME CONTINUUM: A DESIGN APPROACH FOR THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

By RAGHAVENDRA S. SHANBHAG

A Thesis submitted to the Department of Interior Design In partial fulfillment of the Requirements for the degree of Master of Science

Degree Awarded Spring Semester, 2006

The members of the committee approve the thesis of Raghavendra S. Shanbhag defended on March 24, 2006.

Ricardo Navarro Professor Directing Thesis

Lisa Waxman Committee Member

Eric Wiedegreen Committee Member

Approved:

Eric Wiedegreen, Chair, Department of Interior Design

Sally Mcrorie, Dean, College of Visual Arts, Theatre and Dance

The Office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members

For My Parents

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank all members of the Interior Design Department at Florida State University for their contribution to my educational career. I would like to extend a special thank you to my major professor Ricardo Navarro, whose commitment to my success and the design made this project possible. Ricardo Navarro and my committee members Lisa Waxman and Eric Wiedegreen have been especially generous with their time and attention to this project, and I appreciate their involvement in my graduate study and successful completion of the design problem. I would also like to extend my thanks to Tock Ohazama for his involvement in my research.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables vii

List of Figures viii

Abstract xi

1. INTRODUCTION 2 The Purpose 3 A Brief Description of the Design Problem 3 Goals of the Project 4 Research Components 4

2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE Space-Time Continuum 5 Visual Perception 6 The Process of Visual Perception 7 The Role of the “Dual” Brain 9 Primitive Conception of Space and Time 10 The Classical Approach to Space and Time 13 The Approach during the Medieval Ages 16 The Absolutist’s Views 17 The Relativist’s Approach 21 Philosophical Views of Time 25

v Role of Reference in the Physical Representation of Time 30 The Vocabulary of the Present and the Future 32 Summary 35

3. DESIGN PROGRAM Project Description The Intent and the Significance 44 Existing Conditions in the Ybor City 46 The Vision Plan 50 General Physical Conditions of the Ybor City 53 History of Ybor City The Founding of the City 54 The Development of the Cigar Capital 55 Role of the Ybor City in the Cuban Revolution 56 The Decline of the Ybor City 56 Site Analysis Site Location and Features 57 The Land Use 60 The Existing usage of the Centennial Park 62 Traffic Flow 63 The Importance of Ybor City State Museum 64 The Importance of the Cigar Worker’ Houses 67 Local Architectural Style and Materials 69 Program and the Functional Requirements 70

4. THE PROPOSAL Design Process 72 Images of the Proposed Development 82 5. FINAL DISCUSSIONS OF THE PROJECT 92 REFERENCES 94 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 96

LIST OF TABLES

3.1 The number of annual visitors to the Ybor City 48 3.2 Design program 70

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1 The dual nature of the brain 10 2.2 Ouroboros 12 2.3 Temple plan of Archaic Artemision (Euphesus, Turkey) 15 2.4 Temple of Hephaistos 16 2.5 Plan and section of Villa Rotunda 18 2.6 Villa Rotunda 19 2.7 Spatial Sequences 20 2.8 Aimes Cathedral 20 2.9 Atheneum, New Harmony, Isometric View 23 2.10 Atheneum, New Harmony 23 2.11 Atheneum, New Harmony 24 2.12 Heidegger’s relationship between Being, Time and Appropriation 25 2.13 Heidegger’s concept of Time-Space 26 2.14 Conceptual Section, Louvre, Paris 27 2.15 Louvre, Paris 27 2.16 Louvre, Paris 28 2.17 WTC Memorial, New York 29 2.18 WTC Memorial, New York 29 2.19 “The Past”, Diagram of the World Trade Center, New York 30 2.20 “The Present”, Diagram of the WTC Memorial, New York 30 2.21 Section, Chora L Works, Peter Eisenman 31 2.22 View, Chora L Works, Peter Eisenman 31 2.23 Chora L Works, Peter Eisenman 32 2.24 Follies, Park de la Villete, Paris 34 2.25 Plan, Park de la Villete, Paris 34 2.26 Follie, Park de la Villete, Paris 35 2.27 Uni-axial symmetry 37 2.28 Bi-axial Symmetry 37 2.29 Sequence 38 2.30 Clustered sequence 38 2.31 Asymmetrical organization 39 2.32 Horizon line as a reference 39

viii 2.33 Vertical plane as reference 40 2.34 Inclined wall as a transformational device in a sequence 41 2.35 Curved wall as a transformational device in a sequence 41 2.36 Series of frames as transformational device in a sequence 41 2.37 Change of form 42 2.38 Extension of spaces 42 2.39 Change in material 43 3.1 Area context map of the Ybor City 45 3.2 Centennial Park Project Location Map 46 3.3 7th Avenue, Ybor City 47 3.4 Street View during the daytime, Ybor City 47 3.5 Centro Ybor Plaza, Ybor City 49 3.6 Centro Ybor Plaza, Muvico Theater,Ybor City 50 3.7 Plan showing the proximity of the proposed project from Centro Ybor 58 3.8 Site Plan 59 3.9 Site-North Side View 59 3.10 Site- South Side View 59 3.11 Site- West Side View 60 3.12 Site- East Side View 60 3.13 Zoning Plan of the Ybor City 61 3.14 Sunday Fresh Market at the Centennial Park, Ybor City 62 3.15 Sunday Fresh Market at the Centennial Park, Ybor City 63 3.16 Streetcar station at Centro Ybor,Ybor City 64 3.17 Streetcar at Centennial Park, Ybor City 64 3.18 Ybor City State Museum façade 65 3.19 Museum’s Exhibit Area 66 3.20 Museum’s Exhibit Area 66 3.21 Ferlita Bakery’s retained earthen ovens 66 3.22 Ferlita Bakery’s retained earthen ovens 67 3.23 The Casitas 68 3.24 Ybor Museum tour at the Casitas 68 3.25 Interior Exhibit Area in the Casitas 69 4.1 Site for the proposed mixed-use development 73 4.2 Grid-iron street pattern of the Ybor City 74 4.3 Representations of grid 74 4.4 Use of cube as an element of reference along the primary axis 75 4.5 Growth of form along the primary axis 76 4.6 Metaphorical representation of the concept of Lector as an open-air theater 76 4.7 Underground passage as an element of transition of the past 77 4.8 Representation of the past through negative subterranean space 78 4.9 Transformational devices 79 4.10 Conceptual elevation and section 79 4.11 Conceptual view 80 4.12 Multiple usage of stage area in the Experimental Theater 81 4.13 Columnar grid as an element of “timelessness” 81 4.14 First floor plan 82

ix 4.15 Section A-A 82 4.16 Second floor plan 83 4.17 Section B-B 83 4.18 Basement floor plan 84 4.19 Section C-C 84 4.20 Roof Plan 84 4.21 Aerial view 84 4.22 Aerial view 85 4.23 Aerial view 85 4.24 Museum Court 86 4.25 Museum Court 87 4.26 Museum Court 87 4.27 View from 8th Avenue 88 4.28 Open-air Theater 88 4.29 Approach to the Open-air theater from the underground passage 88 4.30 Approach to the Open-air theater 89 4.31 Open-air theater 89 4.32 Open-air theater 90 4.33 View of the Open-air theater from the 9th Avenue 90 4.34 Columnar grid for the fresh market area 91 4.35 Aerial view of the retail area 91

ABSTRACT

Ever since the advent of modern theories in architecture and design, the concept of Rationalism has revolutionized the process of design in the built environment. Rationalism, being the art of logic, has elevated this profession from decoration to design. A number of designers and theorists have tried to approach and achieve this concept by embracing different means and methods. The intent was to encapsulate logic, function and aesthetics in the formulation of a design approach to develop an architectural vocabulary for the built environment. Space and time, being two important aspects, play crucial role in the perception of built environment. Theorists in conjunction with the designers through the ages have tried to understand and use the dynamics of space and time. This thesis addresses the concept of space-time dynamics in the built environment and explores its application as an approach to design. The research explores this concept from a multitude of perspectives ranging from scientific to philosophical views. The end result may not be a completely new definition of architecture and design, but is an expanded view from various perspectives bearing the potential of developing new perception. These approaches can be rationally used towards the spatial solutions to enliven the present urban realm. With these theories as a backdrop, the study explores works and approaches of several contemporary designers and their novel solutions. The thesis culminates with a design project in which these concepts are applied in a real world situation. For the purpose of this thesis, a site was chosen for a mixed-use development project at the Centennial Park in Ybor city, Tampa, Florida. This site provides an opportunity to

xi provide spatial solution for the present day program in this historically and contextually rich setup.

xii

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Design serves as a medium of expression of human feelings. This art of frozen music not only fulfills functional requirements by enclosing the events in the space, but also acts as a medium of representation of time. The monuments of ancient civilizations evoke a sense of time through the immortal representation of the events or the functions through forms and spaces. In contextual design, the designers come across challenges from sites with diverse features. Each site has its own “Genius Locii” or the spirit of place that includes its geographical features, neighbors and history. Architectural design is exclusive to the site (Baker, 1993). Baker (1993) states, “To Christian Norberg Schulz, architecture belongs to poetry and attains a poetic dimension when buildings gather the properties of the place and bring them close to the man. As such architecture is also art, responding, as Berger insists, to man’s desire to prolong the instantaneous into the permanent and to create order out of the chaos of the nature” (p.10). Since no two sites can be similar in all respects, their designs cannot be analogous. The resulting design should respond conceptually to the site addressing the factors above. In other words, it is very crucial to approach a project in a rationalistic way to make it site specific. Rationalism fosters the idea of ability to reason the elements and approaches in the design. So, this game of logic is ideally realized when we define terms from multiple perspectives and derive a final approach. Time and space, being the essential factors, affect the understanding of the design at the conceptual level. The definition of perception, space and time will aid better

1 understanding of relationships. The intent of this exercise is to explore space-time dynamics and analyze their implications in the built environment. Furthermore, the research aims to explore this relationship from diverse perspectives including scientific, historical, and philosophical points of view, and attempts to formulate a design language for the built environment. The expression of the language in the built environment could take place through the use of spaces, forms and other architectonic elements. The concepts derived from the research may be applied in real world design projects to justify the use and the approach to design.

The Purpose

The purpose of this study is to understand the concept of space-time continuum and develop awareness in exploring its role as an approach in the design of the built environment. The intent is also to explore the possibility of developing a rational architectural vocabulary that could be used as a paradigm in the real world situations.

A Brief Description of the Design Problem

The design project selected for this thesis includes the development of the Centennial Park in the historic Ybor City, Tampa, Florida. The goal of the project is the revitalization of the Centennial Park area by accommodating multi-functional programs catering to present and future demands. Importance is also placed in enhancing the identity of this space by maintaining the historical and contextual sense as per the visions and goals of the Tampa government. The project encompasses diverse program requirements including the expansion of an existing museum, rentable gallery spaces,

2 multi-functional experimental theatre, open-air entertainment areas and space for the famous Sunday flea market. The intent of the project is to create a sound solution for this urban setting using the concepts derived from the research.

Goals of the Project

The goal of the Centennial Park project is to design a multi-use space in Ybor City encouraging daytime activity supporting the vision of the Tampa government. This includes enriching pedestrian activity for greater inflow of tourists. The new requirements are to be used as an addendum to the already existing Ybor City Museum adjacent to the park. The primary aim is to cater to the present demands of leisure and entertainment while complimenting the existing urban fabric.

Research Components

The following review of literature outlines the space-time dynamics through the ages ranging from primitive to the contemporary era. The research focuses on the definitions and notions of these components along with their implications on the design of the built environment. Furthermore, the research also explores the understanding of space-time dynamics from a multitude of perspectives including biological and philosophical views that lead to new definitions. Finally, the research explores the understanding and application of the space-time concepts by contemporary designers focusing on their approaches and novel solutions.

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Space-Time Continuum

“……… the architectural sensation we experience stems from hundreds of different perceptions. It is the “promenade”, the movements we make that act as a motor for architectural events” (Le Corbusier as cited in, Pauly, 1993, p.29). Space and time are two key components used to perceive an architectural design. Understanding these components is crucial since they posses the potential to manipulate the experience in a built environment. Many architects, theorists and philosophers have tried to define space and time. These definitions have evolved over time to the present contemporary world. These definitions and the developments are explained in the following chapters. Herman Minkowski, a German mathematician and teacher of the great scientist Einstein, recognized the relationship between space and time naming it the “space – time continuum”. The new phrase coined for this revolutionary concept of the fourth dimension by fusing together the two words, i.e space and time. His aim was to emphasize a unity that existed between the two concepts when combined together. Minkowski in his speech said “Gentlemen! The views of space and time, which lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of

4 the two will preserve an independent reality” (as cited in Shlain, 1991, p.132). Understanding this concept requires an in depth research from the extent of knowing the functioning of the brain to the definitions of perception, space and time from multiple points of views.

Visual Perception

The definition of the term “visual perception” is crucial in the understanding the space-time continuum. Human body is a complex system in which natural processes happen both knowingly and unknowingly to us. So, it is vital to begin understanding a concept from the natural or the biological perspective exploring both the facets. Visual perception as a natural phenomenon is the way in which we recognize and distinguish visual information. This experience according to William C. Lam (1977) depends on the two factors namely the voluntary and involuntary activity needs.

Conscious Activities or Voluntary Activity Needs

These are elements of the visual environment that provide information needed to perform conscious activities or the activity needs. For example, the letters in the book must be clear to see while reading a book. A good lighting design makes this information clearly perceptible. So, lighting is an activity need for reading book.

Involuntary Activities or Biological Information Needs

These are impulses that relate logically to human beings as biological organisms. This is information that is required by everyone, everywhere, regardless of the kind of

5 activity indulged. The biological information need is about maintaining contact with the environment and adopting behavior to the environment changes. For example location, time, orientation, neighbors, weather changes, etc can be biological information needs. Furthermore, according to Lam (1977), contrast, context and prior experience all influence the operation of the biological information needs. A bright element in a dark background, or a moving object behind a static background may be used to grab attention of a person involuntarily. Similarly, a presence or absence of an object to a context based on prior experience can also involuntarily grab attention. Depending on the kind of incoming data, context and experience, each person may react subjectively. If the incoming data is as expected, then it relates to the previous experience and the person displays a relaxed state. If the data is ambiguous, then it provokes a feeling of dissatisfaction, discomfort and the person displays an uncomfortable state. If the data is informationless like dark alleys, or high windowless walls, then it triggers a feeling of weariness due to suspected danger and the person displays a state of tension.

The Process of Visual Perception

According to William C. Lam (1977), we live in a world of a complex matrix constituted of a countless inflow of sensory impulses or data. The brain, the control hub of the human body, comprehends this raw sensory data and impulses, sorts them accordingly, and stimulates us to respond in a certain way. Visual perception is a complicated process, which even though highly sophisticated, works without the intervention of the conscious mind. The degree to which this unconscious biological mechanism of perception functions in sorting and selecting data depends on the time and experience. Lam (1977) further identifies the human eye as the receptor of visual information in form of light of different wavelengths that pass through its lens and focus on the nerve cells of the retina. The cells of the retina convert the pattern into raw sensory data

6 constituting a complex matrix of electrical charges of various strengths and send them to brain along the pathways of optic nervous system. This leads to three interesting stages of perception: 1. The attributive stage 2. The expectation stage 3. The affective stage

Attributive Stage

The attributive stage as defined by Lam (1977), is where raw sensory data in the form of the electrical impulses and patterns are sorted and classified by an interesting phenomenon called the experience filter. The experience filter is a part of unconscious memory that stores and classifies incoming data according to their characteristics and relationship with prior similar situations in the subconscious mind. This process of matching incoming data and classifying them according to the experience filter is called an attribution of meaning in perception. Visual stimuli consisting of the unclassifiable or ambiguous data would be classified as unfamiliar data, which triggers biological defense mechanisms arousing curiosity and demanding further visual attention.

Expectant stage

This stage as defined by Lam (1977) helps to establish associations with the sequence of events. This stage not only outputs the process of perception, but the subsequent selection of sensory inputs by redirecting attentions, scanning patterns and checking incoming data with the experience filter. Expectations also create extensions of the visible world. If we were to walk on a curving road, we would expect to see and visualize that the road will further curve even though it is out of our cone of vision.

Affective stage

According to Lam (1977), the affective stage is concerned with the way in which each stimulus affects our emotional or evaluative response. This stage influences the extent of response that is shown towards any element in the visual field as a result of the previous two stages. The affective stage produces positive or negative responses. When the environment behaves as expected, the associative links established by the previous experience filter is confirmed. This produces a positive emotional response in the perceiver. If the environment behaves differently, then the experience filter is modified and the whole experience is changed in the memory. The entire complex mechanism of the experience filter is constantly being updated as new stimuli are classified, suggesting new foci and finally filed into the visual memory (Lam, 1977). So, understanding the process of visual perception sheds light on the importance of the role played by the experience factor and the memory in the perception of forms and spaces in the built environment.

The Role of the “Dual” Brain

In addition to the process of visual perception, the concept of the dual characteristic, which is an interesting facet of the brain, plays vital role in the perception of space and time. As Shlain(1991) puts forward, the brain is divided into two lobes, the right and the left hemisphere. The right hemisphere of the brain facilitates emotions, comprehends images, and facilitates mental innovations (like art or poetry), and music. These aspects are better expressed through the metaphor of space. Hence the right side is better for appreciating dimensions and judging distances. These further suggest that the cognition of the right brain is vision-based and dependent on space. Furthermore, the

8 left side of the brain facilitates abstract thinking, number sense, and the execution of thoughts that are principally processed in time. It helps to develop language, logic, and strategy that need to refer to the lines of past, present and the future. So, the development of sequence happens here, which becomes crucial in the conception of time. In summary, the right side of the brain specializes in simultaneous coordination of information in space, while the left-brain assembles data sequentially perceived in time. As Shlain further says, “ this arrangement forces on dual brained humans the illusion that reality is a series of causal events that appear in the three-dimensional spatial extensions in a specific sequence on a conveyor belt of time” (Shlain, 1991, p.411).

Figure 2.1 The dual nature of the brain (Shlain, p.401)

Primitive Conception to Space and Time

Since eternity, man has evolved with an ability to think, resulting in a world of diversity through multiple perceptions. The subjective nature of perception, the geographical and cultural factors of the human habitat developed unique approaches to

9 space and time. Although historical records contain immense variety among civilizations, there have been only a few models of space and time. Primitive art radically differs from the classical and contemporary views of space and time. Primitivism does not separate the “real space” and the “proper” time of the objective world from the artist’s inner vision. Primitive artists introduced the idea of myth and magic. So, they invested their art objects with magical powers. The ideas of space and time were different to different tribes, cults and civilizations. For example, the Eskimos’ idea of space and time as described by Edmund Snow Carpenter (1960) when he stated, “They don’t regard space as static, and therefore measurable; hence they have no formal unit of spatial measurement just as they have no uniform divisions of time. The carver is indifferent to the demands of the optical eye, he lets each piece fill its own space, create its own world, without reference to background or anything external to it. The work of art can be seen or heard equally well from any direction” (p.66-67). In contrast, the idea of time was different to Aborigines and the Hopi community. They did not relate to the concepts of time. Aborigines, a native community in Australia, followed an indivisible concept of time. They did not celebrate birthdays since no one in their tribal culture believes that time can be divided or measured. The same is true in the case of the Hopi, a native Indian community in America. As Whorf(1967) explains “the Hopi language contains no reference to “time” either implicit or explicit. At the same time it is capable of accounting for and describing correctly, in a pragmatic or operational sense, all observable phenomena of the universe” (p.378). Shlain (1991) explains a fact that the Hopi tribe created sand painting by allowing the sand to trickle down their fingers without a canvas or a standard orientation as in western styles. The intent here was that the Hopi artist could view and work from different directions defeating the western rules of orienting art on a planar face. Interestingly, from the point of view of time, the painting lives only in the moment and generally cannot be preserved eternally, contrary to western styles. In summary, space and time meandered between myth and reality. Civilizations, whether Egyptian, Hindu or communities like Aborigines had no sharp line dividing the inner space of

10 imagination, the subjective reality and the objective reality. Myth and the subjective space of imagination with the events of everyday existence characterized every belief system world wide before the Greeks. Shlain (1991) further attributed the fact that time was approached as a “cyclic” entity in most of the ancient civilizations. The evidence available to corroborate this to the observers was the ideas of resurrection, repeatability, the return of seasons, the rise and fall of river Nile and the periodicity of heavens. The Eastern civilizations exhibited a strong belief in the notion of cycles or the periodic return. Circles were the symbol of unity, oneness and succession in Asia. The concept of symbolizing time began to develop during this period. Aztecs, the natives of Central America, symbolized the circle of time through “Ouroboros”- the snake who has turned around to bite its own tail as shown in figure 2.2. Western civilizations, unlike the eastern, defined time as linear and symbolized it with an “arrow”. The Egyptians and the Hebrews further supported this idea of linear non-repeatable time within a religious context. Interestingly, Indians conceptualized both cyclic and linear notions of time as a single everlasting now. They represented time as a “wheel” being a symbol of progress. Finally, it was the Greek philosophers who introduced the idea of reason formulating a rational system that sharply separated from the others which were based on myths and religious beliefs.

Figure 2.2 Ouroboros. From Blue Honey image gallery. Retrieved January 12, 2006 from http://www.bluehoney.org/Images/Ouroboros/symbol_alchemy13.jpg

The Classical Approach to Space and Time

History recounts the fact that the introduction of logic was attributed to the philosophers of the Greek civilization. They were the first to rationalize and universalize a system of communication, which further led to the development of the science of space. For the Greeks, the nature of reality was “reason” which was the antithesis to the idea of myth and religious beliefs. The introduction of alphabets as the first streamlined means of communication reinforced aspects of comprehension. This was corroborated by McLuhan (1965) who said, “Abstraction, linearity and continuity- these three ideas were also the foundation for the new conception of space, time and light that would emerge centuries later, following a wide acceptance of Greek’s new lettering system” (p.58). Euclid, a Greek mathematician, codified space into a field of knowledge called “Geometry” around 300 B.C. The Egyptians, Babylonians, Indians and the others had discovered the geometric truths in bits and pieces. But, it was Euclid who gathered all these proofs together in one universal rationale scheme that further laid the foundation for a whole new science. Euclid translated the abstract thoughts into diagrams, defined his terms and formulated his “famous five” postulates. These rules, theorems and corollaries formed a coherent system. Euclid further organized space in the form of points that could be connected by an imaginary web of straight lines. Euclid’s way of representation of space was based on mental abstraction which did not exist in nature. So the entire field of geometry was based on the system of virtual abstraction. Euclid assumed space to be totally empty which did not interact with mass or form because it was essentially nothing. It was defined as an empty container where the Greeks arranged their mortal things (Shlain, 1991). Further, Democritis corroborated this idea by defining “space as a container in which objects exist” (Taylor, 2001, p.208). Archimedis, the famous Greek philosopher with the fame of introducing concepts of buoyancy was next to support the ideas of Euclid. He declared that the shortest distance between two points is a straight line. This rule indirectly implied that Euclid’s space was uniform, consistent and continuous. This further meant that Euclid’s space

12 was linear and measurable. So, summing it up, space during this period was perceived as static, uniform, linear and measurable. The concept of “nothingness” was associated with space (Shlain, 1991). Aristotle conceptualized time in a similar way in which his counterpart Euclid developed a coherent system of geometry. He codified time as an arrow or a straight line. This concept was contradictory to the crooked, curved and the serpentine form of time from myths and religious beliefs. According to Shlain (1991), Aristotle demythologized the three daughters of necessity to the following three fates. The Lachesis guarded what had been, that is termed as the “past”. The Clotho guarded what is present, that is termed as the “present”. Finally, the Atropos oversaw what is yet to come, that is termed as the “future”. Once Aristotle had created linear time, the rules of rational thinking could develop into a powerful problem solving technique. Using the concepts of the abstract, linear and continuous time and space, he went on to develop a standardized system of rational thinking by formulating the rules of logic. Furthermore, he introduced the idea of syllogism using the simple tool “if-then”. This became a powerful tool to reveal truths without referring to myths and religious beliefs. So, logic became a primary tool to address the issues of space and time. The application of logic as an art of reasoning can still be seen in the present day in almost all fields. McLuhan (1965) supports this relationship between time and logic saying “Although logic itself is timeless, the process of logic depends heavily upon time. Logic proceeds one step after the other” (McLuhan, 1965, p.58). Sequence became the key to time. Each event followed the other to form a progressive time-space, which was non-returnable. Since the proper time was linear, it was proper to chronicle the events in a sequential order. As Arguelles (1975) corroborates the Greeks acknowledgement of the absolute uniqueness of historical events is one of history’s unique events. It could have been possible only in a civilization that adhered to linear time. The Euclidean space and the Aristotlean time became the basis of a paradigm that ruled the Greek world of art and architecture. Order and linearity were the basic concepts of their designs. John White (1987) substantiates this by highlighting that all forms were in the same plane and the movement was unidirectional.

13 Using the above principles and advantages, the Greek architects strictly formalized the uniform measurable space. The Greek artists positioned their figures in a linear orientation that depended upon the horizon. The architects later used these principles as a new aesthetic ideal to calculate the visual effects of their buildings. Greek sculptors accurately estimated the proportions of the human figure, which was used not only in sculpture but also in their buildings. Polyclitus wrote a book named Kanon (rule) that established the basis of an entire aesthetic based on measured relationships of the human body (Shlain, 1991). These principles promoted the development of classical architecture that dominated the built environment. The figures 2.3 and 2.4 support the idea of linearity and unidirectional nature of the built spaces in Greek architecture.

Figure 2.3 Temple plan of Archaic Artemision (Euphesus, Turkey). From Archeological World in Greek and Roman Period. Retrieved on March 11, 2006 from http://www.archaeology-classic.com/Map/images/plans3.jpg

Figure 2.4 Temple of Hephaistos. From Hellenic Ministry of Culture. Retrieved January 12, 2006 from http://www.culture.gr/2/21/211/21101a/00/lk01a032.jpg

The Approach During the Medieval Ages

In Europe at around 400 A.D, notable changes took place in the understanding of the space-time dynamics. This period saw chaos in both the social and intellectual part of the life of a common man. Religion took over the rationality. The laws of logic were dismissed during this time between 400A.D to 1250 A.D. The earth was considered flat with the heaven above it and hell below it. These regions were spiritual spaces that were beyond the reach of human abstraction, which could not be addressed by the postulates of Euclid’s system of geometry. Illiteracy was the norm in the monarchs and laymen defeated the idea of reason. Space during this period fragmented under the weight of the authority of the religion that was the Old and the New Testaments (Shlain, 1991). Marcea Eliade says that, “For religious man, space is not homogeneous; he experiences interruptions, breaks in it”. (as cited in Clark, 1969, p.17). The space lost its homogeneity and so could not be measured. This conceptual fragmentation of space led to the acceptance of disconnected regions. Similarly, the concept of time also drastically changed during the medieval ages. Time was no longer perceived as a straight arrow. Instead, it was broken into different zones, the profane and the divine (Shlain, 1991). “For the man of the Middle Ages, then,

15 there was not one duration only. There were durations, ranked one above another, and not only in universality of the exterior world but within himself, in his own nature, in his own human existence” (Poulet, 1956, p.7). Logic and reason could no longer be relied upon to sort out the events in their proper order. Logic was useless if the events did not have a correct sequence. According to Shlain (1991), the repercussions of these factors were seen in both art and architecture. The antirational thoughts, the dismissal of old traditions forced the artists to introduce new forms. Their beliefs of space and time were reflected in their work. Early churches contained walls with minimal aesthetic features. Since illiteracy was rampant, they had to tell their stories through simple figures. So large compositions of mosaic works started on high walls and domes of the churches. Through the use of mosaics, spaces were represented as discontinuous, but connected at a grander spiritual level.

The Absolutist’s Views

After the confusion and chaos during the medieval period, normalcy and peace returned at the end of the 15th century. During this period, a lot of issues were given order, which led to the development of systems in administration, science and literature. The famous Laws of Physics were formulated and new approaches to science made vital changes in the understanding of the space-time dynamics. As Shlain (1991) pointed out “Both art and physics are unique forms of language. Each has a specialized lexicon of symbols that is used in a distinctive syntax. Their very different and specific contexts obscure their connections to every day language as well as to each other. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy just how often the terms of one can be applied to the concepts of the other” (p.19). The conception of space and time were static. This meant that both space and time were conceived as independent in nature without any relation to any other entities in the

16 real world. Newton’s Absolute Theory further supported this where he defined “space as a real entity, which existed independently of the material objects it contained”(Taylor, 2001, p.208). Time was also perceived as an independent parameter following the definition in Newton’s Absolute Theory, which said “absolute time flows by itself, and from its own nature, flows equably without relation to anything external, and by another name is called duration” (Taylor, 2001, p.208). Corroborating the above definitions, the three-dimensional space was static and absolute. In the Renaissance, built space followed the rules of Euclidian geometry that could be viewed from one or two vantage points. Architecture was an edifice to view or an object of contemplation (Giedon, 1940). The bilateral symmetry used in the Villa Rotunda built in 1566 A.D and designed by Andrea Palladio as illustrated in figures 2.5 and 2.6 serve as ideal examples.

Figure 2.5 Plan and Section of Villa Rotunda. History of Architecture- Renaissance to 20th century. From the Department of Architecture, University of Southern California. Retrieved on January 11, 2006 from http://www.usc.edu/dept/architecture/slide/ghirardo/CD2/008-CD2.jpg

Figure 2.6 Villa Rotunda. From Architecture Week magazine. Retrieved January 12, 2006 from http://www.architectureweek.com/2004/0915/images/12514_image_1.150.jpg

During the Renaissance, architecture was controlled by the power of the ruler. The direct cause and effect can be seen in the way the monuments were built that reflected solidity, firmness, hierarchy and structure. They echoed the prevalent social structure by being the medium of their representation. Tschumi (1991) supported this by saying “In the past, architecture gave linguistic metaphors (the castle, the structure, the labyrinth) to the society. It may now provide a cultural mode” (p. 50). Spatial sequences (as illustrated in figure 2.7), displayed a formal approach to their visualization. The three parameters for a spatial sequence were space, event and movement. Since the event or the function did not change its characteristics, the spatial sequences were similar in the related types of buildings. Spatial sequence was considered as a custom or a ritual. As Tschumi (1999) states, "It implies a near frozen relationship between space and event. Nothing strange or unexpected must happen. The control must be absolute. Here the route is more important than any one space along it” (p. 163).

Figure 2.7 Spatial sequences

The formal approach towards the organization of spaces can be seen in a cathedral. The ceremonial entry through the entrance flanked by bell towers lead to nave, which finally culminates at the chapel as a focal point. The illustration in figure 2.8 depicts this concept in the Aimes cathedral.

Figure 2.8 Aimes Cathedral (Baker, p.51)

19 This notion holds well not only at the micro level but also at the macro level. An ideal example is the urban space in a Roman forum, which was built around 300 A.D in Rome, Italy. This constitutes piazzas or the open courtyards with overlooking colonnaded corridors adjoining the main buildings. These smaller courtyards combine with dominant town squares, which in turn form larger interaction spaces. The clock towers, spires of the churches and the dominant public buildings dominate the skyline leaving an indelible impression.

The Relativist’s Approach

The relativist’s approach, which emerged at the beginning of the 20th century holds a key role in the perception of space and time since it opens an altogether new chapter of views. The new laws and theories in physics brought vital changes in the field of science, thereby revolutionizing the whole world. The older theories seemed to lose their validity as the people of the new age began to look at the world with newer and transformed perspectives. The concept of space-time dynamics also got a new reformed. Space and time in modern physics are conceived as relative in nature rather than static or an absolute entity. Space according to “Leibniz’s relative view is defined as a set of relationships between the objects. This was further supported by Einstein’s theory of relativity that defined space as a medium connecting these objects” (Taylor, 2001, p.208). The essence of space conceived today is its multiple facets with unlimited possibility for relations within it. The crucial insight of Einstein’s special theory of relativity is the notion that space is interactive with the volume, shape and size of the objects residing within it. Time is also conceived from a relative perspective, which is dynamic in nature. From the Leibniz’s point of view,” time is defined as a set of relationships between the events. It is the system of relations amongst the changing objects in the world” (Taylor, 2001, p.208). Shlain (1991) added that time, according to Einstein, was subjective in nature. This means that everything in the world is not totally relative, but is observer

20 dependent. Einstein further emphasized the subjective nature of time when he said, “You have to accept the idea that subjective time with its emphasis on now has no objective meaning. The distinction between past, present and the future is only an illusion, however persistent” (Davies, 1983, p.128). This change in conception of space and time brought its repercussions on the perception of the built environment. Architecture was no longer an object of contemplation. The observer is no longer static, but projects himself through the built environment to experience the space. This concept, which was put forward by cubists broke the renaissance perspective and started to view objects relatively from different points. In addition to the viewing of the buildings from a relative perspective, it explored the visualization of the internal composition of forms by dissecting them. Geidon (1940) corroborated this by stating, “And in dissecting the objects, it sees them simultaneously from all sides- from above and below, from inside and outside. It goes around and into its objects. Thus to the three dimensions of renaissance which have held good as constituent facts throughout many centuries, there is added- a fourth dimension. The poet Guillaume Apollinaire was the first to recognize this in the 19th century” (p. 436).

Simultaneity is the key principle in this concept, which aims at presentation of objects from several points of view. Shlain (1991) further added that simultaneity contrasted with the sequence, which was the primary approach to the design. So, the opposite of sequence is simultaneity. A perfect example for this could be the Chapel at Ronchamp built in 1955 designed by Le Corbusier. Le Corbusier visualized this church against the classical notion of a church. This church building is known for its unique sculptural nature as it can be interpreted in different ways from different points of view. The built environment was no longer considered as a sequence of frozen spaces. This formal composition of spaces was first broken during the time of the Industrial Age, when people started questioning everything, which further led to innovations. This broke the autocratic monopoly of the rulers on the built environment. The city and architecture lost their formal order in representation like axial symmetry, hierarchy etc. The formal

21 sequences were manipulated in interesting ways to create elements of surprise, shock and suspense. These manipulations were done by the use of transformational devices like addition or subtraction of volumes, walls or spaces to an existing sequence or by the addition of a frame. The manipulation impacted the way of experiencing the sequence and the space. Frames were also used as transformational devices. As Tschumi (1999) points out, “A frame permits the extreme formal manipulation of the sequence, for the content of the congenial frames can be mixed, superimposed, dissolved or cutup, giving endless possibilities of narrative sequence” (p. 166). The use of angular walls and frames to affect the sequence was seen in the works of architects like Alvar Alto and Richard Mier. The conscious usage of bold walls to regulate a sequence can be seen in the Mier’s work of The Atheneum, New Harmony completed in 1979 as illustrated in the figures 2.9 - 2.11.

Figure 2.9 Atheneum, New Harmony,Isometric view (Baker, p.222)

Figure 2.10 Atheneum, New Harmony (Jencks, p.239)

Figure 2.11 Atheneum, New Harmony (Jencks, p.238)

The buildings became bolder in exhibiting their internal compositions and structural elements. The ideal example to support this is the Pompidou Center in Paris, designed by Renzo Piano in 1972, where the expression of structural elements became a novel concept. The conventional orders of spatial sequences were also influenced by contracting or expanding them in order to create an impact on the memory of the user, thus affecting the overall experience.

23 Philosophical Views of Time

The role of philosophical views in understanding time is crucial, since it questions and looks at the core meaning of the concept from different perspectives simultaneously. Martin Heidegger, in his book “Time and Being” tried to define time and its relationship with being and appropriation. The term “Being”, is defined as a form or an idea. Appropriation is defined as an “activity” or a non static process” (Heidegger, 1972, p. 11). It is also the relationship between man and his related activities. Appropriation also defines the identity of the being or an idea that in turn strives to recognize time on the basis of an event or an activity. Time is defined as “existence” and is represented in the sense of a succession of a calculable series of nows” (Heidegger, 1972, p.11). The term “now” as defined by Aristotle is the aspect of time, which is present now and is the “actual now”. Time is further represented by the past, present and the future as its three dimensions. It is the unity of past, present and future in terms of series of nows. This further analyzes present as an entity, which lacks past and future. That is to say in the present, past is defined as “no longer now” and future is defined as “not yet now”. So further, this interesting relationship between being, time and appropriation led to unearth the term “presencing” (Heidegger, 1972). This relationship can be better understood in the figure- 2.12 below.

Being (Idea) Appropriation (activity) Presencing (unconcealing) Time (existence)

Figure 2.12 Heidegger’s relationship between Being, Time and Appropriation

According to Hiedegger, “presencing means to last or to unconceal” (Heidegger, 1972, p.12). In this case, “to last” means to not being present for a mere duration, but over a time span. The term “presencing “ and hence the “sense of presence” reminds us

24 of an event or an activity over a time period. Here, the “time-space” is not duration, but is an extending time zone represented by a continuous openness that opens into the self-extending past, present and future. Figure 2.13 illustrates this relationship.

Time-space

Past present future

presencing presencing

True time

Figure 2.13 Heidegger’s concept of Time-Space

This leads us to a new aspect of time called “true time”, which Heidegger defines as “the nearness of presencing of past, present and future and this nearness unifies times threefold opening and extending. True time is four dimensional due to the nearing of nearness of three dimensions” (Heidegger, 1972, p.12). On further analysis, we can conclude that there is a sense of presence of the past in the present. This can be felt in two ways: the “presence of past” and the “absence of past”. A sense of presence through the presence of the past is experienced in a situation where the elements of the past are physically present for a viewer to understand the continuity of the time-space, hence visualizing the continuous flow of past, present and the future. The ideal example is the Pyramid Du Louvre by I.M.Pei built in 1989 at the famous Louvre in Paris. Here, the transparent pyramid addresses

25 the sense of presence of the dominant past, which is in the form of monumental buildings enclosing the Piazza. This brings in a sense of participation of past with the present. These aspects can be better understood in the illustrations figures 2.14 - 2.16.

Figure 2.14 Conceptual Section, Louvre, Paris

Figure 2.15 Louvre, Paris (Jencks, p.189)

Figure 2.16 Louvre, Paris (Jencks, p.182)

Therefore, the sense of participation between the past and the present opens a viewer into a continuous time zone. The elements of the past act as reference to the present and future, which are in turn, are represented as negative spaces below the earth. Sense of presence through the absence of the past is experienced in a situation where a strong memory supersedes the absence of physical elements. It is a situation where the memory of the past haunts the present through its absence. A perfect example for this could be the new design proposal of a memorial at the site of the World Trade Center in New York. The indelible memory of the Twin Towers still persists, which influences the design proposal for the site. It is very difficult to give a new design solution to the site through a dominant built form due to its strong past. So, the design proposal by Micheal Arad and Peter Walker in the year 2004 put forward “reflecting absence” as the concept. He proposed retaining the footprints of the past and the

27 present and future by addressing the absence of the past. The proposal aimed to retain the old foundations of the tower and create a memorial below the ground level as a negative space. So the present and future in this site is represented by the negative space below the earth that are illustrated in the figures 2.17 - 2.20 below.

Figure 2.17 WTC Memorial, NewYork. Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. Retrieved November 24, 2005 from http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/fin7_mod.html

Figure 2.18 WTC Memorial, NewYork. Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. Retrieved November 24, 2005 from http://www.wtcsitememorial.org/fin7_mod.html

Figure 2.19 “The Past”, Diagram of World Trade Center, New York

Figure 2.20 “The Present”, Diagram of WTC Memorial, New York

Role of Reference in the Physical Representation of Time

The perception of elements of past, present and future require a system of reference for the experience. The elements and the events of the past act as reference to the vocabulary of the present and the future. The absence of the contextual reference breaks the perception of continuity of time, which in turn curbs the experience of the space-time. The reference could be the style of architecture, the sequence of spaces, the massing of forms, or the organization of spaces, like hierarchy etc. It can also be the proportions like golden sections used in some architectural styles. The ideal example for the physical representation of time would be the Chora L works of Peter Eisenman

29 created in the year1997. In this work the past is represented by negative space below the earth while the future is shown as a bold positive space above the ground level. The present is represented by a thoroughfare, which passes through these positive and negative spaces representing the passage of time. The ground or the horizon is used as a reference. Figures 2.21 - 2.23 illustrate Eisenman’s work.

Figure 2.21 Section, Chora L Works, Peter Eisenman (Kipnis & Lesser, p.120)

Figure 2.22 View, Chora L Works, Peter Eisenman (Kipnis & Lesser, p.120)

Figure 2.23 Chora.L.Works, Peter Eisenman (Jencks, p.281)

The Vocabulary of the Present and the Future

According to Bernard Tschumi (1999), the present age is the Age of Deregulation. The built environment is constantly subject to redefinition and reinterpretation. The quote, “form follows function” has become obsolete. The history, memory and tradition that defined the parameters of the built environment have lost their hold. The speed of scientific inventions altered the role of architecture. “Speed expands time by contracting space. It negates the notion of physical dimension” (Tschumi, 1999, p.163). Architects and designers have started dissecting the meaning of the built environment and redefining it. The art of looking at the built form in totality is replaced by the multiplicity of meanings. The relation between the program and the built space has been redefined. Tschumi (1999) further says: “The aim here is to reconstruct architecture along different axes, to indicate that space, movement and event are inevitably part of minimum definition of architecture, and that the contemporary disjunction between

31 the use, form and social values suggests an interchangeable relation between object, movement and action. In this manner the program becomes an integral part of architecture and each element of this program becomes an element of permutation akin to solid elements” (p.186). The relation between the event and the structure is negated resulting in the radical shift in the organization of spaces without the use of the formal principles of design like sequence, hierarchy etc. Disjunction, deconstructivism and cross programming have replaced the existing type of architecture. The above design approach has unsettled the user due to the sudden shift. The abstractness and anti-contextual nature has unsettled the memory of the user, since they cannot be related to any reference system. This radical shift has breached the continuity of time-space in the real world. The lack of relation due to the abstractness has created a sense of timelessness. The perfect example for this new approach can be the Follies in Park de Villete in Paris, France designed by Bernard Tschumi in 1982. The intent here was to create a design that had multiple uses but went against the formal conception of a park. Follie was defined as “a space free from its historical connotations placed on an abstract plane as an autonomous object, which in future will be able to receive new meanings” (Tschumi, 1999, p.176). Each Follie is derived from a 10mx10mx10m cube, which is transformed into shapes of different permutations and combinations. The function and the program are not defined so that it can be used in diverse ways. These are arranged on the grid acting as points of reference. The grid here is used as an infinite element without origin. Since follies are arranged on the points of a grid, they have no formal sequence or order of approach and can be viewed from multiple points. This lack of order in the organization and lack of formal meaning to the space has created an absence of reference that in turn has created a sense of timelessness as illustrated in the figures 2.24 - 2.26.

Figure 2.24 Follies, Park de la villette, Paris (Jencks, p.287)

Figure 2.25 Plan, Park de la villette, Paris (Jencks, p.286)

Figure 2.26 Follie, Park de la villette, Paris (Jencks, p.286)

Summary

“Rational architecture becomes a selected vocabulary of the architectural elements of the past, with their oppositions, contrasts and redistributions. Not only does it refer to itself and its own history, but function- the existential justification of the work that becomes virtual than real. So the language is closed in itself, and architecture becomes truly an autonomous organism. Forms do not follow functions, but refer to other forms and functions to relate to symbols” (Tschumi, 1999, p. 37). The above statement on Rational Architecture implies that the design solution is specific to a given situation considering all the aspects discussed in the preceding chapters. This creates design solutions that are exclusive and unique to the situation and its relationships. The relation between space and time assists in analyzing the

34 elements of past, present and the future further formulating a universal vocabulary, as an approach for the design of the built environment. The definition of prime importance in the physical representation of time is “change”. The physical representation of “change” can be viewed in different ways. Some of the ways that aid in the representation of change in time-space are spatial usage, reference, transformational devices and material variations. These will be discussed at length below.

Spatial Usage

Spatial usage in the built environment is of prime importance in the representation of time. In the past, spaces were dedicated to single functions. So, the memory associated with the space was based on the solitary function for which it was designed. Spaces in the present and future are more diverse than that in the past. The advent of the concept of de-constructivism has revolutionized dynamics between space and associated function. Spaces are now designed with multiple uses, which means that a single space can be used in different ways at different periods of time. For example, a single multipurpose hall can be used for entertainment, sports, and educational activities in different periods of time. Bernard Tschumi (1999) termed the usage of multiple programs under a single roof as “Cross Programming”. This adaptable space evokes a feeling of “timelessness” due to its versatility in its usage with time.

Reference

Identification of a logical reference is vital in realizing the space-time continuum in the built environment. The elements and events of past act as reference to the vocabulary of present and the future. The absence of the contextual reference breaks the perception of the continuity of time, which in turn curbs the experience of time- space. Reference could be the form of architectural style, spatial organization and use

35 of positive and negative volumes along a plane. These aspects are further elaborated below.

Architectural Style acts as a primary reference to any given situation. The importance of the architectural style of the built environment has to be studied before responding with a design solution. The elements of design, the proportions, the forms can be adapted to represent the elements of past.

Spatial Organizations of the past were static in nature dictated by the formal rules of organization. Symmetry, balance, sequence and hierarchy were the main tools used in the spatial compositions. The spatial experience is “ritual” with similar compositions for the related spaces. This led to linear, radial, clustered and symmetrical organizations. These organizational tools can still be used to represent the past depending on the organizational fabric and context of the surroundings. The figures 2.27 - 2.30 are the examples of the spatial organizations of the past.

Figure 2.27 Uni-axial Symmetry

Figure 2.28 Bi-axial Symmetry

Figure 2.29 Sequence

Figure 2.30 Clustered Sequence

Contemporary spatial organizations have become more diverse with the incorporation of changes in sequence in order to manipulate the spatial experience. The compositions are more asymmetrical and non sequential with the use of spaces and also the transformational devices. Figure 2.31 is an example of a manipulated sequence that represents the vocabulary of the present.

Figure 2.31 Asymmetrical composition

Positive and Negative Volumes along the Reference also act as parameters to realize the continuity of the time. A reference line or plane has to be ascertained as do the volumes falling on either side of it. Negative volumes evoke a sense of past and positive volumes refer to the present. But depending on the contextual importance of the surroundings, this might vary. For example as shown in the Figure 2.32 the ground or the horizon line is the line of reference. The negative spaces refer to past and the positive spaces denote the present.

Figure 2.32 Horizon line as a reference A vertical plane may also act as reference with volumes on either side of it representing the past, present and future. Figure 2.33 illustrates the same.

Figure 2.33 Vertical plane as a reference

Transformational Devices

Transformational devices can be used as supporting tools along with spatial organizations and the reference. These are the manipulative devices to physically represent a shift in the built environment to make a statement of change. For example,

39 the devices could include blank walls interrupting a sequential organization, frames enclosing focal elements or change in ceiling heights. The examples below illustrate transformational devices in figures 2.34 - 2.36

Figure 2.34 Inclined wall as a transformational device in a sequence

Figure 2.35 Curved wall as a transformational device in a sequence

Figure 2.36 Series of frames as a transformational device in a sequence

The gradual change in form can also represent the transformation hence depicting change in time. The figure below illustrates the same.

Figure 2.37 Change of form

Extensions of spaces with varying ceiling heights also define transition hence defining physical representation of the time, which is represented in figure 2.38.

Figure 2.38 Extension of spaces

Material Variations

Material variation is a crucial aspect to realize the journey through time and space. The nature of form can remain the same to experience the origin and the materials can be varied from natural to man-made materials. The figures below conceptually show the change in materials on cuboids that relate to change in time.

Figure 2.39 Change in material

Identifying the importance of time-space helps in rationalizing the response in terms of a design solution, which brings in the participation of the past, present and future. This exercise is an attempt or a step towards idealism, a dream to achieve “Utopia” in to the real world.

CHAPTER 3: DESIGN PROGRAM

Program Description

The Intent and the Significance

The aim of the design project is the application of a design approach derived from the analysis of space and time in a real world situation. The project chosen for this is the proposed development at the Centennial park at Ybor City, Tampa, Florida. The Centennial Park project is a mixed-use development designed primarily to increase daytime activity in order to contribute to the efforts towards the revitalization of the historic Ybor City district in downtown Tampa, Florida. Ybor City possesses a distinctive status as one of only two National Historic Districts in Florida. After a half-century of neglect, followed by narrowly focused attempts at revitalization, numerous significant changes and investments still need to be made to bring the quality services necessary for a fully functional community. In 1975, the Florida State Legislature designated Ybor City a historic district. The City of Tampa made allowances to encourage business development this area. To attract tourists and visitors, Ybor City was made an “entertainment district” and the relaxation of zoning laws was permitted to allow nighttime uses such as bars and clubs to stimulate economic development. Barrio Latino Commission, an architectural review board, was assigned the task of approving any construction activity in the area. Ybor City is located less than two miles northeast of the strong and vibrant Downtown/ Channel District area in Tampa that is connected by the TECO street car

43 service. The Downtown serves as the focus for many regional attractions such as the convention center, the aquarium and the Forum in Tampa. This helps to diversify the mix of people and activities in the area, and establishes the downtown area as more than a place to do business. The Port of Tampa, located just to the south of Ybor City, is the largest port in Florida, accounting for about half of the total tonnage moving through all the ports of the state. As the region grows, port activity is expected to increase. The cruise industry has been growing, with new facilities located near the downtown area. This brings additional tourists to the region and presents an opportunity for Ybor City to attract them.

Figure 3.1 Area Context Map of Ybor City. From Ybor City Development Corporation. Retrieved March 13, 2006 from http://www.tampagov.net/dept_YCDC/images/Maps/Ybor%202%20Findings/Area_Cont ext_Map_2-2_Map1.jpg

Figure 3.2 Centennial Park Project Location Map, Ybor City

Existing Conditions in the Ybor City

Ybor City was made into an “entertainment district” in order to stimulate economic development. However, what seemed at that time to be a remedy has since become a hindrance. The public perception of Ybor City is that of a place solely for drinking, rowdiness and roaming young people. This is reinforced by the image of a “drinking mall” on the weekend nights at the closure of 7th Avenue. This reputation, as well as actual crime problems, keeps many potential visitors away. It has become clear to the City of Tampa that Ybor cannot succeed based on nighttime entertainment alone. At present, there is a very limited daytime activity, and the bars contribute to a ghost town

45 appearance until they open at night. Fortunately, interest in owning a business, working, and living in Ybor City has recently grown. This change is evident in new restaurants, the TECO streetcar line, and the revitalization of historic buildings.

Figure 3.3 7th Avenue, Ybor City

Figure 3.4 Street View during the daytime, Ybor City

With the momentum building, Ybor City has a potential to be transformed to a healthy community with a mix of uses and a spectrum of age groups. Table 3.1 corroborates the potential of Ybor City on the basis of its tourism.

46 Table 3.1 The number of annual visitors to the Ybor City. From the Ybor City Development Corporation. Retrieved August 14, 2005 from http://www.tampagov.net/dept_ycdc/general_information/visitor_data.asp

DATE EVENT # OF VISITORS February 12, 2005 Krewe of the Knights of Sant' Yago Parade and 120,000 Red Baron Pizza Family Fiesta February 25, 2005 Hillsborough County Property Appraiser's "Run 1,000 For Shelter" February 26, 2005 Fiesta Day and Flan Fest 45,000 March 12, 2005 St. Patrick's Day Parade 80,000 April 2-3, 2005 Festa Italiana 25,000 April 24, 2005 Puerto Rican Cultural Parade and Festival 20,000 May 7-8, 2005 Ybor City Arts and Crafts Fiesta 1,500 May 9, 2005 Cuban Club's Mothers Day Dinner 2,000 September 2005 Paws in the Park 1,000 Sept. 17-18, 2005 Main Street Arts and Crafts Festival 5,000 Oct. 15, 2005 TECO Line Streetcar Celebration 10,000 October 29, 2005 Guavaween and Family Fun Festival 120,000 November 2005 Race for Cure 750 November 2005 James E. Rooster and Doodle Do Parade 1,000 Nov. 19-20, 2005 Ybor City Arts and Crafts Festival 5,000 Nov. 28-29, 2005 Espiritu de Ybor Festival 30,000 December 3, 2005 Santa Fest 50,000 December 31, 2005 TECO Energy Parade and Outback Bowl Blast 50,000 Every Saturday in Ybor City Fresh Market 15,600 Centennial Park (300 patrons per Saturday)

47 Table 3.1 Continued DATE EVENT # OF VISITORS Non-Event Visitors Weekday and Fri/Sat Evenings- average 1,040,000 20,000/weekend

TOTAL ANNUAL VISITORS 1,597,850

The area has undergone extensive redevelopment over the past decade. While degrading conditions still exist, progress has been made. There has been retail and entertainment development throughout the area. The most notably is the Centro Ybor, a 240,000 square foot entertainment complex, historic quality renovation of many existing structures, a new office development and a 454-unit urban apartment complex adds to this momentum. The figures 3.5 and 3.6 illustrate the plaza areas of the Centro Ybor, which include food courts, restaurants, retail outlets and the Muvico, a high-tech entertainment and movie complex flank the main plaza area.

Figure 3.5 Centro Ybor Plaza, Ybor City

Figure 3.6 Centro Ybor Plaza, Muvico Theater, Ybor City

The Vision Plan

To plan for the future of Ybor City, The Ybor City Development Corporation Visioning committee decided upon a community visioning process called Section III. This visioning process lasted over a period of several weeks in December, 2004, with workshops, meetings and group interviews. This was to solicit as many ideas possible to mold a comprehensive vision plan. The Vision statement was finally distilled to the following: “Ybor City, a National Landmark Historic District, is a unique urban community melting beautiful historic architecture, a celebrated multi-cultural heritage, a bustling “main street”, creative business, and liveable neighborhoods into one of Tampa Bay’s most desirable places to live, work, entertain, and visit”. (Ybor City Vision Plan, 2005)

49 The Vision for Ybor City is guided by the following principles: 1. Any new development or redevelopment should be compatible with the historic urban form. This is not limited to structures but also applies to the basic street grid. 2. Land use mix should strive for maximum diversity and integration of disparate uses, with a view to creating a round-the-clock activity cycle. In particular, creative and artistic enterprises are to be targeted for growth. 3. Tightly integrated, dense, and multi-functional urban districts and their activities are to be coordinated to a larger entity. 4. Pedestrian and transit activity to be emphasized with a view of making historic core more pedestrian friendly. 5. The character of the district should continue to build on its multi-cultural heritage, emphasizing its history as the Latin Quarter of Tampa. 6. The diverse, funky mix of activities should be carefully monitored to ensure that no one element dominates at the expense of the others. A balance is to be ensured. (Ybor City Vision Plan, 2005)

General Characteristics of the Vision: Ybor City doesn’t desire a radical transformation, but is seeking to take corrective action against several issues that are hindering its progress. Most people that know Ybor City well understand that it offers a unique and historically authentic urban environment that is attractive to many. It has already made many prudent moves as a redevelopment area to enhance its future potential. Clearly the negative image has to be addressed. But, it must also be recognized that the negative image is the result of a relatively narrow set of activities confined to a relatively small portion of the overall area. The vision has to encompass all of Ybor City with the areas surrounding the historic core seen as moderating influence that should help to dilute the focus on the negative aspects. (Ybor City Vision Plan, 2005) Importance of the Centennial Park in the Vision Plan: Eight Avenue, and the streetcar, lead past Centennial Park, but not many make the journey. Despite being

50 only a block north of Seventh Avenue, Centennial Park receives only a small fraction of the pedestrian traffic that Seventh Avenue does. This end of the historic core is also not as highly developed as the area around the Centro Ybor, and does not offer as much for the visitor to do, despite the Museum and the State Park being located across the north side of the park. There are several options in the vision plan that may serve as a remedy for this issue. Centennial Park has been the subject of a design study to explore ways of reconfiguring and reprogramming to cater to a wider variety of functions. The museum and the Casitas across from the east side of the park are occupied by galleries and creative retailers that should add interest to this area (Ybor City Vision Plan, 2005). This part of the historic core is too far from the two existing parking garages, so that pedestrian activity is markedly less than one sees further west. The need for a consolidated parking structure at this end of the historic core has long been identified as a priority, but has not been viable as long as the two existing garages are not operating near capacity. This lack of parking has inhibited the redevelopment of a number of properties at this end, while a significant amount of land is tied up as surface parking. Another proposition was to redevelop the two existing surface lots across the south side of the park to mixed-use buildings compatible with the historic character and fill in two large gaps in the fabric along the Eight Avenue. The streetscape along 18th and 19th Streets is scheduled to be improved to enhance the connection between Seventh Avenue and Centennial Park, as well as to improve pedestrian movement between Seventh and Eight Avenues and complete an attractive pedestrian circuit.

General Physical Conditions of Ybor City

Ybor City retains many of its original buildings and its traditional urban street grid designed in the mid 19th century. Ybor City has the distinction of being one of the only two National Landmark Historic Districts in the entire state of Florida by the virtue of the

51 significant number of contributing historic structures. The other is St Augustine, settled by the Spanish in the mid 16th century. Many of the original brick streets have been restored with the aim of restoring the rest. The original layout is in the typical grid or block pattern. A typical block measures 350 feet by 200 feet, with a mid-block alley running parallel to the long sides. The long sides are the principal orientation of the blocks that face the Avenues running the east and west. This historic grid is still very much in evidence near the historic core with the signs of present day erosion. Interstate 4 is a major intrusion into the grid, and presently forms the northern boundary of the historic district that was uninterruptedly connected East Tampa neighborhood. The historic grid has been disrupted over the years to create super blocks, mainly by the larger institutional landowners in the Ybor City. The new diversity in the built environment in this area has until now continued to mirror its rich and fortunate past. The residential and the commercial buildings survive as the Ybor City’s multicultural history. The conditions of the buildings continue to range from restored to marginal to neglect. The streetscapes along the 7th, 8th and the 9th Avenues and the commercial side streets have been restored with wide sidewalks, historic lampposts, street trees and flowers. The residential streetscapes are less consistent in their beautification and maintenance. Therefore, the overall effect is spotty and inconsistence. Several contemporary developments have impacted the historic character of the Ybor City through their designs and patterns. Many of the larger institutional buildings do not sensitively integrate into the historic fabric, using planning and design vocabularies more suited to suburban, campus like environments. The largest influence of the modern times on the community has been the necessity to provide parking. The historic fabric of the Ybor City was created in a time when modern vehicles didn’t exist. So, the streets were lined with dense and low scale structures that covered a substantial portion of the lot area and formed continuous and consistent street frontages. Ybor City has recognized this reality and has taken steps to consolidate its parking supply in several large garages. Though it is a logical contemporary solution in a historic district, its not viable due to the cost factor and its under usage. Therefore, a significant amount of parking still remains in surface lots.

History of Ybor city

The Founding of the City

Tampa was just a small swampy and sandy village before the Spanish born Vicente Martinez Ybor arrived in 1886 establishing a center for cigar manufacturing. The two main reasons for the development of the cigar capital were the ideal climatic conditions and the development of port and railroad facilities in Tampa by Henry B.Plant. These factors made the area an ideal location for the development of the cigar industry since Cuban leaf tobacco, being the best in the world, could easily be imported and then exported in the form of cigars. According to Fernandez and Beltran (1976), Martinez Ybor was going through labor unrest in his cigar factory in Key West and was intending to establish a new setup. Based on the recommendation of his friend Gavino Guiterrez, Martinez Ybor was impressed with the location and bought the land to set up a factory. Based on previous experiences, Martinez Ybor had a hope of providing a good living and working environment so that the cigar workers would have fewer grievances against the owners. Therefore, with a clear vision of future for the city, he organized various commercial endeavors. Included in the endeavors was the acquisition of thousand acres of land near his factory on which he constructed homes to sell on installment plans giving preference to his employees. This attracted thousands of immigrant workers: Spaniards, Cubans, Italians, Germans and Jews. The immigrant population produced a unique population moving into these boarding houses also known as “Casitas” or the shot gun houses.

The Development of the Cigar Capital

From a small “factory town”, Ybor City was quickly transformed into the “Cigar Capital of the World”. Hundreds of cigar makers from different places immigrated to Tampa. According to Fernandez and Beltran (1976), the inflow of workers was so great during 1886-1887 that each time the ship arrived in Tampa usually twice a week, it would unload at least two hundred cigar makers. Along with the industrial growth, social and infrastructure developments also reached its peak. Prominent in that environment were the social clubs, whose subscription included cradle-to-grave health care, death benefits, recreational facilities, and yearly social events. The first move towards the building of the social clubs was made by Martinez Ybor himself when he donated the first building he had occupied to the cigar workers for reunions and fiestas. This was later converted into a small theater. The clubs were organized to serve specific ethnic groups, which preserved and transmitted the cultural heritage through generations. The social clubs also functioned as benevolent associations or mutual aid societies. The people of Ybor City had to go to other places like Key West for medical issues due to the scarcity in physicians. So, the social clubs covered the costs of medicines, visits and trips. In addition to the social clubs, theatres presenting opera, vaudeville, ethnic comedy and drama also developed. Illiteracy was a common problem that existed among the workers before the development of schools. In order to counter that, lectors or the readers were employed who became the most important representative of culture in the average worker’s experience. According to Harner (1975), each of the workers in the factory had to contribute 25 cents a week for the services of a “lector” or the official reader. The reader spent the whole day in loft above the heads of the cigar makers, reading from newspapers or on works of Spanish poets like Cervantes each day. The reader had to be a good actor too, for when he told the age-old story of Don Quixote, he had to wait while the ripples of laughter flowed the otherwise quite room.

54 According to Fernandez and Beltran (1976), the first streetcar line that was run by steam began to function between Tampa and Ybor City in 1886. Martinez Ybor was one of the founders of this enterprise. As the tobacco industry grew, a narrow-gauge railroad joined this city with Jacksonville and the rest of Florida. So, by that time, Ybor City was accessible by both land and sea making it accessible to all visitors.

Role of the Ybor City in the Cuban Revolution

Due to the large number of Cubans living in the Ybor City, the area was involved in the struggle for Cuban’s independence from the Spanish rule. Cuban patriots, most famously Jose Marti, came to Tampa frequently to inspire enthusiasm and generate funds for the movement. A large part of the enduring fame of Ybor City is attributed to Marti. Ybor City residents formed revolutionary clubs and encouraged cigar workers to donate a day’s salary of each week for the cause. As revolutionary fervor grew in 1895, plans to invade Cuba from the U.S shores were formed under the orders of Marti. After Marti’s death, the precipitating event that led to the culmination of war, was the destruction of the USS battleship Maine in Havana harbor in 1898. This prompted the U.S. Congress to declare war, which finally ended with the independence of Cuba.

The Decline of the Ybor City

According to Fernandez and Beltran (1976), at the end of World War I, the American government modified immigration laws. It introduced new reforms, so restrictive that they practically denied admission to the foreign worker. At that point, Cuban immigration ceased completely and the Cubans, along with the Spaniards and

55 Italians, no longer received the constant reinforcements that were important for the vitality of various groups and organizations. In spite of such mishaps, the Latin community remained united to preserve their culture. There were five Spanish language publications in Ybor City, which after several years of struggling were finally able to make the cigar factories in Tampa close their shops. Finally, the third general strike in 1920, paralyzed the tobacco industry with labor unrest, economic and political upheavals.

Site Analysis

Site Location and Features

The site is located in close vicinity to the Historic Core of Ybor City, which spans across the famous 8th and 9th Avenue. The site for the proposed mixed-use development is spread across 8th and 9th Avenues in three parts. The three parts of the site are located between 18th and 19th Streets. As shown in Figure 3.7, the site is with in walking distance from the famous Centro Ybor and the Hilton Garden Inn. The first part (marked A in Figure 3.8) is located between the Ybor City State Museum and the Casitas across the 9th Avenue. This extends to the second part (marked B in Figure 3.8) which is the Centennial Park placed between 8th and 9th Avenues. This third part of the site is the presently used parking area beyond 8th Avenue (marked B in Figure 3.8).

Figure 3.7 Plan showing the proximity of the proposed project from Centro Ybor

The first part of the proposed site (designated as A in Figure 3.8) is presently used as a park, which is flanked by the Ybor State Museum on the east, the Casitas on the west and further, extends to Centennial Park in the south. The Centennial Park (designated as B in Figure 3.8), is flanked by a residence on the east and a commercial building on the west. This further extends in the south beyond the 6th Avenue to an existing parking lot (designated as C in Figure 3.8). The areas A, B, C combine to form the site for the proposed mixed-use development. Figures 3.9 through 3.12 illustrate views in different directions from the proposed site.

Figure 3.8 Site Plan

Figure 3.9 Site-North Side View

Figure 3.10 Site-South Side View

Figure 3.11 Site-West Side View

Figure 3.12 Site-East Side View

Land Use

The land use and the other aspects of zoning are comprehensively addressed in Article V of the Second Amendment to the Ybor City Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) Plan of the year 2004. This was developed by the Ybor City Development Corporation for the City of Tampa. The Comprehensive Plan recognizes Ybor City as a Regional Attractor, which defines the area as a major tourist destination of interest to visitors from all over the world. It also designates Ybor City as one of five Urban Villages in the City, recognizing its unique and distinctive character. The Urban Village concept anticipates that Ybor City will redevelop as both a living and working environment, while remaining respectful of the area’s historical character. The Future Land Use Categories for Ybor City reflect the vision for Ybor City’s Urban Village designation, encouraging mixed-use development, urban densities, and the potential population and visitor base necessary to justify rail transit services

59 connecting Ybor City with the Central Business District. Bario Latino Commission, an architectural review board has established land use for different areas with a special series of zoning (see Figure 3.13). The main intent was to encourage development consistent with the existing historic fabric of the area, while allowing more intense commercial and mixed-use development envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. According to the plan, the Centennial Park project site (see Figure 3.13) falls under YC- 4, which is designated for a mixed-use development. According to the Article V, Centennial Park, Ybor State Museum, and Casitas, should continue to be recognized and used as a cultural and community focal points for the area. It further adds consideration for further improvements and refinements including the addition of new museum facilities.

Figure 3.13 Zoning Plan of the Ybor City. City of Tampa Urban Development Department. Retrieved August 14, 2005 from http://www.tampagov.net/dept_ycdc

60 The Existing Usage of the Site

Centennial Park is presently used as an open public space and ceremonial location. The site has a landscaped area, a statue and engraved writings of names of prominent people who contributed to Ybor City. This space is also used as a venue for the Sunday Fresh Market as illustrated in Figures 3.14 and 3.15. During this event, vendors and artists erect canopies and tents to sell their products. On a grander scale, the park hosts the annual arts and crafts festivals during the months of May, September and November. The figure shows the usage of Park during the arts and crafts festival. During the Art Festivals, 8th and 9th Avenues adjoining the Centennial Park are blocked so that additional space can be provided for the vendors. Part C (parking lot) of the proposed site can be used in the program as spill over areas (see Figure 3.8).

Figure 3.14 Sunday Fresh Market at the Centennial Park, Ybor City

Figure 3.15 Sunday Fresh Market at the Centennial Park, Ybor City

Traffic Flow

The proposed site has roads on all the sides with a streetcar line on the south. The streetcar system (as illustrated in Figures 3.16 and 3.17), being a 2.5-mile vintage electric car system by the TECO line is the main source for moving people. This streetcar system provides a transit link connecting the Central Business District, the Channel side and the Ybor City. The streetcar runs past the Centennial Park through to 20th Street. The other source of traffic is through surface transport especially the light motor vehicles.There is a prominent flow of pedestrian traffic from the Centro Ybor and the famous 7th Avenue due this proximity and prominence of this location.

Figure 3.16 Streetcar Station at Centro Ybor, Ybor City

Figure 3.17 Streetcar at Centennial Park , Ybor City

The Importance of the Ybor City State Museum

According to Gonzalez (1994), the present day Ybor State City Museum was formerly known as the Ferlita Bakery, built in 1923. This one story, light yellow brick building was used as a bakery for many years. The original ovens, which reflect the past, are still retained in the part of the museum depicting the past as shown in figures 3.21 and 3.22. The front of the museum building is made of decorative bricks with a

63 large arched parapet wall as illustrated in figure 3.18. The museum is presently run by the State of Florida, which believes in retaining the history of Ybor City, and contains permanent exhibits on Vicente Martinez Ybor, the founding and early history of Ybor City, and the Ferlita Bakery itself. It also houses a museum store with a variety of items for sale reflecting the ethnic heritage of the community, the cigar trade and the site’s history. For a change in atmosphere, the exhibition space in the museum is changed twice a year. A cigar worker from Cuba who demonstrates cigar-making techniques for the visitors’ further enriches the experience. The Ybor Museum Society is currently undertaking the modernization of its exhibits in the museum. It is also looking forward to reflect the image of a contemporary museum, with better design of space, graphics and lighting. The Museum Society has also shown interest in the publication of selections from the Oral Histories Selection. To add to this, the museum’s permanent collection is more diversified with vital information about the people, life style, trade and folkways. Therefore, a high-priority initiative of the museum staff is the cataloguing and preservation of objects in these collections with goals of exhibiting and making them available to scholarly study. The future plans include addition of a museum theater, a living history, field trips and museum publications. Clearly, the museum needs to be expanded to meet future needs.

Figure 3.18 Ybor City State Museum Facade

Figure 3.19 Museum’s Exhibit Area

Figure 3.20 Museum’s Exhibit Area

Figure 3.21 Ferlita Bakery’s retained earthen ovens

Figure 3.22 Ferlita Bakery’s retained earthen ovens

The Importance of the Cigar Workers’ Houses (Casitas)

The Casitas (as illustrated in figure 3.23) include three shotgun houses that were relocated from other parts of Ybor City. These structures were originally built around 1895 and were located on 5th Avenue before being relocated. Preservationists wanted everyone to experience the way the street looked before 1900. According to Gonzalez (1994), these houses were built for the cigar workers to live in. The cigar factory owners rented or leased them to the workers as they paid a part of their pay each month to live in them. The houses are modified shotgun houses built from Florida pine with cypress or cedar wood shingles. From the design point of view, there were three rooms in a row with doorways. The houses were planned in relation to the local climate with very good cross ventilation, being built so that air could circulate with windows across each other. Windows with louvers gave them privacy. Until 1910, these houses lacked electricity, indoor plumbing and a link to the city sewer system. The most important part of these houses was the porches where the family spent most of their time. The porch was also the place where the bread was delivered every day. Today, these houses contain exhibits of every day life of the people as shown in Figure 3.25. The coffee filters and

66 the ice pack are some interesting exhibits. The Ybor City State Museum offers daily tours for the visitors through the Casitas with an experienced guide (see Figure 3.). The importance of the Casitas is that they form an integral part of the experience of Ybor City as an expansion of the museum.

Figure 3.23 The Casitas

Figure 3.24 Ybor Museum Tour at the Casitas

Figure 3.25 Interior Exhibit Area in the Casitas

Local Architectural Style and Materials

The built environment in Ybor City has a governing contextual sense due to the presence of the existing architectural style. Since the founders of the city were from a Spanish background, elements of their vernacular architecture can be seen in the built forms. Brick was the locally available building material in the Tampa Bay area, which led to its predominant use in the cigar factories. The roads were also paved with brick that can be still seen in many parts of the area, mainly on 7th and 8th Avenue. The built forms clad with bricks had decorative motifs and coping. Balconies, which opened towards the street front at the upper level, had ornamental metal railings. Metal columns with ornate bases and capitals were used to support the balconies along with the decorative brackets. The houses of the cigar workers were much simpler in structure and materials with the use of cedar wood.

68 Program and Functional Requirements

Table 3.2 Design Program

NO DESIGNATION AREA IN SFT

1 MUSEUM First floor Display area 1850

Basement Floor Display Area 6730 Open Court Yard 3000 Rest room 500

2 INFO CENTER 600

3 RENTABLE GALLERY Basement Floor Display Area 4120 Rest room 500

4 EXPERIMENTAL THEATER First floor Lobby 1580 Stage/ Multipurpose Area 2800 Seating Area 1850 Service & Spill over Area 1650 Back Stage Area 900 Restroom 900

Second floor Seating Area 1100 Restaurant 1400

69 Table 3.2 Continued NO DESIGNATION AREA IN SFT

Kitchen 450 Service/ Spill over Area 1580 Rest Room 450

Basement Floor Back Stage/ Rehearsal Area 2300 Green Room 600 Service & Spill over Area 1000 Restroom 900 Storage Area 600

5 RETAIL AREA

First floor Retail Area 2400 Spill Over Area 1200

Second floor Retail Area 2400 Spill Over Area 1200

6 SERVICE CORE Basement Floor 600 First floor 1200 Second floor 1200

TOTAL AREA 47560

TOTAL SITE AREA = 55,608 sft

CHAPTER 4: DESIGN PROPOSAL

1.Design Process

The intent of the project was to create a mixed-use built environment complimenting the existing program, which includes Ybor City State Museum and the Centennial Park. The design proposal aims to apply the design tools derived from the review of literature of this thesis to the existing urban setup. The design approach includes logical identification elements of reference, analysis of the elements of past and then using them through logical manipulation to enhance the spatial experience of the user. The design process is divided into: 1. Segregation of zones 2. Use of reference 3. Positive and negative spaces 4. Transformational devices 5. Multiple usage of space

1. Segregation of Zones

The journey through different time zones begins from the existing Ybor City State Museum. The design response aims to augment this visual experience by transition through the different time zones. The courtyard between the Museum and the Casitas as shown in Figure 4.1, possesses the ambience of the past, making it a potential area

71 for the Museum expansion. The Centennial Park area as shown in Figure 4.1 is used as a transition zone from past to present and present to future. So, the prospective programs for this area are rentable art gallery, open-air theatre and experimental theatre with restaurant facility. The existing parking lot along 8th Avenue is identified as a zone for the future catering to retail spaces and the Sunday Fresh market. The primary axis begins from the courtyard area, transits through Centennial Park and then ends at the existing parking lot.

Figure 4.1 Site for the proposed mixed-use development

2. Use of Reference

For visual transformation or change, it is very important to identify contextual elements of reference in the present urban setup. The first element of reference is the

72 “Grid”. Ybor City planners visualized the city in form of a grid-iron street pattern. Hence, the layout of the city shows rectangular zones between the perpendicular roads in two directions as shown in Figure 4.2. Therefore, at the macro level, the existing grid is a vital element of reference.

Figure 4.2 Grid-iron street pattern in the Ybor City

A grid can be represented in diverse ways like perpendicular roads, lines, or an array objects as shown in Figure 4.3. The array of objects can be solids arranged in a grid.

Figure 4.3 Representations of grid

73 A 24’-0”x24’-0” cuboid is identified as the element of reference, which is placed along the primary axis in a grid as shown in the Figure 4.4. The cuboids act as crucial nodes of transition in the design scheme.

Figure 4.4 Use of cube as an element of reference along the primary axis

The cuboid is subjected to transformation along the primary axis as illustrated in the Figure 4.5. The sloping roof grows along the primary axis indicating the transformation with time. The exterior of the cuboid is made of locally available brick and the growing form holding the sloping roof is clad with glass. The change of form and material portrays the change in time.

Figure 4.5 Growth of form along the primary axis

The concept of Lector has the potential to be used as a metaphor in the design. Lector was the source of entertainment in the factory for the cigar workers during their working hours. He used to occupy a higher position so as to be seen by every worker as shown in the Figure 4.6. The usage of the stage at higher level in the open-air theatre as indicated can be the present day metaphor of the Lector with activities below and around it.

Figure 4.6 Metaphorical representation of the concept of Lector as an open-air theater

75 The every day museum tour organized by the Ybor City State Museum highlights the presence of the secret underground passages in the parts of the historic core. These passages were used for storing illegal liquor and Mafia activities during the prohibition time. So, the underground passage has a potential of being a part of this tour for a better visual experience. This is used as an element of transition from past to present. The underground passage is used as an element of surprise connecting two main courtyards as shown in Figure 4.7.

Figure 4.7 Underground passage as an element of transition from the past

2. Positive and Negative Spaces

The idea of underground passage is improvised to connect the Museum Court and the Open-air Theater. There is a shift in the direction of the underground passage from the primary axis to emphasize its use as an element of surprise as shown in Figure 4.8. Therefore, the ground level is used as the element of reference and the user makes a

76 transition from the lower Museum Court to the higher Open-air Theater through the passage that houses exhibits. The past is represented through negative spaces.

Figure 4.8 Representation of past through negative subterranean spaces

4. Transformational Devices

Transformational devices are used to accentuate the transition through different time zones. A colonnade of freestanding circular columns begins at the culmination of the underground passage (as shown in Figure 4.9) which increase in height along a path of an arc showing transformation from past to present. Frames are also used as transformational devices along the overhead bridge connecting the experimental theatre and retail area along the primary axis. The Experimental Theater is intentionally rotated to create a sense of dynamism from the preceding static ambience. Frames are used

77 along the inclined wall of the theatre as a transformational device to lead the visitors towards the museum, which is the origin of the journey.

Figure 4.9 Transformational devices

Figure 4.10 Conceptual elevation and section

Figure 4.11 Conceptual view

5. Multiple Usage of Space

Timelessness can be achieved by the use of cross programming and multiple uses of a single space. The Experimental Theater is designed to cater exhibition and restaurant activities. The balcony area on the first floor of the theatre can be used as an extension of the restaurant overlooking the stage. So, the balcony is a combination of the dining and theatrical experience. Furthermore, the stage area is used to accommodate the activities of a gallery when there are no theatrical performances (see Figure 4.12). This is achieved by suspending movable partitions from space frame or by the use of partitions with wheels. The intent here is to make a single space be used in different ways over different periods of time. The futuristic space is viewed as a timeless space, which can cater to different activities in different periods of time. A grid of columns is provided for Sunday’s Fresh

79 Market area so that they can build temporary shelters by connected fabrics. The composition of the stall layout for the market can change in different ways for the same column grid as illustrated in the Figure 4.13.

Figure 4.12 Multiple usage of stage area in the Experimental Theater

Figure 4.13 Columnar grid as an element of “timelessness”

2.Images of the Proposed Development

Figure 4.14 First floor plan

Figure 4.15 Section A-A

Figure 4.16 Second floor plan

Figure 4.17 Section B-B

Figure 4.18 Basement floor plan

Figure 4.19 Section C-C

Figure 4.20 Roof Plan

Figure 4.21 Aerial View

Figure 4.22 Aerial View

Figure 4.23 Aerial View

Figure 4.24 Museum Court

Figure 4.25 Museum Court

Figure 4.26 Museum Court

Figure 4.27 View from the 8th Avenue

Figure 4.28 Open-air theater

Figure 4.29 Approach to the Open-air Theater from the underground passage

Figure 4.30 Approach to the Open-air Theater

Figure 4.31 Open-air Theater

Figure 4.32 Open-air Theater

Figure 4.33 View of the Experimental Theater from the 9th Avenue

Figure 4.34 Columnar grid for the fresh market area

Figure 4.35 Area view of the retail area

CHAPTER 5: FINAL DISCUSSION OF THE PROJECT

The proposed Centennial Park project fulfills the intent to serve as an example for the application of space-time continuum, as a design approach. The design logically identifies, uses diverse tools derived from the literature review in the proposed built environment by addressing the present contextual setup. The project fulfills the idea of the journey from past to present and future through the use of design tools in the built environment.

Revitalization of the Present Urban Setup

The Centennial Park project successfully fulfills the idea to revitalize the existing contextually rich urban setup. The design approach addresses the past by incorporating logical metaphors of its history in the built environment in a view to link the past with the present. This is realized in the approach for the museum expansion and open-air theater. The design elements, massing, segregation of areas and architectural forms are designed to compliment the existing built environment. Brick is used as a dominant building material in the design to maintain the fabric of the Ybor City. Combination of glass and concrete is used a contemporary building materials. Furthermore, the design also meets the criteria of the “Vision Plan” of the Tampa government by proving innovative solutions to increase the daytime pedestrian activities through the use of multifunctional spaces. Additional spaces are added to the existing program to attract higher inflow of visitors and tourists. These spaces include experimental theater, art gallery space, open-air theater and retail areas.

Design for the Future

The Centennial Park project provides multiple options in the usage of space by providing non-suggestive urban spaces. For example, the steps of the open-air theater can be used to view a street play or as a seating area. The columnar grid in the fresh market area provides unlimited options in organizing events for varied events in different periods. The use of stage area in the experimental theater as a gallery space also corroborates the idea of multiple facets of a single space. These spaces will aid to accommodate future activities.

Conclusion

The Centennial project in Ybor City fulfills the application of the concept of space- time continuum in a real world historically rich urban setup. The design solution derived by addressing complex site-specific issues not only makes it an explicit design solution, but also a step towards the realization of rationalism in the built environment.

REFERENCES

Arguelles, J. (1975). The tranformative vision. Boulder: Shambala. Baker, G.H. (1993). Design strategies in architecture- an approach to the analysis of form. London: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Carpenter, E.S. (1960). Eskimo. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Clark, K. (1969). Civilization. New York: Harper & Row. Chaira, J. D. (1992). Time-saver standards for interior design and space planning, New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc. Davies, P. (1983). God and the new physics. New York: Simon and Schuster. Neufert, E. (1992). Architect’s data. London: BSP Professional Books. Gale, R.M. (1967). The philosophy of time. Garden City, New York: Doubleday. Giedon, S. (1940). Space, time and architecture. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Gonzalez, R. R. (1994). Discovering Ybor City, Tampa: Tampa Preservation,Inc Heidegger, M. (1972). Time and being. New York: Harper and Row Publishers. Jencks, C. (1990). The new moderns. New York: Rizzoli International Publication Inc. Kipnis, J. and Lesser T. (2000). Chora L Works. New York: Monacelli Press. Lam, W.C. (1977). Visual perception and lighting – as the form givers of Architecture. New York: Macgraw Hill. McLuhan, M. (1965). The Gutenberg galaxy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Pauly, D. (1993). Le Corbusier: La Chapelle de Ronchamp, Basel. Germany: Birkhauser Publishers. Poulet, G. (1956). Studies in Human Time. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. Shlain, L. (1991), Art & physics- parallel visions in space, time and light. NewYork: William Morrow and Company, Inc.

94 Taylor, J. L. (2001). Physics, philosophy and the nature of space and time, Space Physics Journal. Tschumi, B. (1999). Architecture and disjunction. Cambridge, Massachussetts: MIT Press. White, J. (1987). The birth and rebirth of pictorial space. Cambridge: Belknap Press. Ybor City Vision Plan (2005). From Ybor City Development Corporation. Retrieved March 12, 2006, from http://www.tampagov.net/dept_YCDC/files/ybor_vision_plan_2005/Section%20IV F %20Vision%20Plan%202.pdf)

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Raghavendra S. Shanbhag completed his Bachelors in Architecture from B M S College of Engineering, Bangalore, India. Upon graduation, he pursued a Diploma in Advanced Computer Arts from the Center for Development of Advanced Computing (C- DAC) in Bangalore, India. Raghavendra also worked as an assistant architect in Gayathri and Namith Associates Pvt Ltd, a nationally acclaimed architecture firm in India. He also setup a firm of with his colleagues named Utopia, where he was involved primarily with residential. He was awarded Master of Science in Interior Design from Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida, and is further interested in pursuing a career as a designer.

The members of the Committee approve the thesis of Rupa Sharma defended on April 14, 2003.

______

Robert E. Deyle Professor Directing Thesis

______

Ivonne Audirac Committee Member

______Harrison T. Higgins Committee Member

The office of Graduate Studies has verified and approved the above named committee members.

Dedicated to my Dadu – for teaching me all the right things.

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This thesis would not have been possible without the involvement of several people. I would especially like to thank Dr. R. E. Deyle, without his contribution and support this work would not have been completed. He always found time for me in his busy schedule. I would like to thank Dr. I. Audirac for her invaluable insights and encouragement. I would like to thank Mr. H. T. Higgins for helping make the thesis comprehensive yet as thorough as possible. Outside of my committee, I would like to acknowledge Dr. G. L. Thompson for extending resources and sharing knowledge with me that proved central to the development of evaluation framework of the indicator set. I would like to acknowledge Dr. C. Connerly for his valuable inputs regarding literature on neighborhoods. I would like to extend a special thanks to Dr. l. Richardson and Dr. S. Kelly, for information on social capital.

I fondly thank Cynthia and her husband Roy Brown, for taking care of me like a daughter and almost adopting me.

Thank ya’all!!

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables vii List of Figures viii Abstract ix CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 2: SUSTAINABILITY AND ITS MEASUREMENT 5 2.1 Community Sustainability 6 2.2 Defining Sustainability 7 2.3 Operating Boundary 10 2.4 Conclusion 12 CHAPTER 3: COMPONENTS OF AN INSTRUMENT 13 3.1 Impact of Capital Stocks of Human Communities on Sustainability 17 3.2 Interactions Among Capital Stocks of Human Communities 17 3.3 Conclusion 19 CHAPTER 4: SUSTAINABILITY AND INDEX 20 4.1 Neighborhood as a Planning Construct 21 4.2 Approaches to Defining a Neighborhood 22 4.3 Effects of Neighborhood Scale Planning on Environmental Capital 26 4.4 Sustainability and Neighborhoods 26 4.5 Conclusion 29 CHAPTER 5: DEFINING BOUNDARIES 30 5.1 Approaches to Neighborhood Boundary Identification 30 5.2 Conclusion 34 CHAPTER 6: INDEX STRUCTURE AND INDICATOR MEASUREMENT 35 6.1 Instrument Evaluation Framework 35 6.2 Structure of Instrument 37 6.3 Method of Measurement 40 6.4 Sustainability Standards 41 6.5 Calculation of Indicator Sustainability Values 42 6.6 Indicator Calculation 43 6.7 Missing Data 46 6.8 Conclusion 48 Chapter 7: INDICATORS FOR THE THREE COMPONENTS OF COMMUNITY CAPITAL 49 7.1 Components, Subcomponents, and Indicators 49 7.2 Indicator Evaluation Criteria 52

v 7.3 Indicator Evaluation and Selection 55 7.4 Components and Subcomponents of Environmental Capital 58 7.5 Components and Subcomponents of Economic Capital 64 7.6 Components and Subcomponents of Social Capital 77 7.7 Conclusion 83 Chapter 8: CONCLUSION 84 8.1 Index and its Limitations 84 8.2 Additional Research 87 APPENDICES 88 REFERENCES 112 BIOGRAPHIC SKETCH 123

LIST OF TABLES

7.1 List of sources consulted 51 7.2 Components, subcomponents, and indicators of environmental capital 64 7.3 Components, subcomponents, and indicators of economic capital 76 7.4 Components, subcomponents, and indicators of social capital 83

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

2.1 (a): System of interactions 10 2.1 (b): System of study 10 2.2: Boundary definition 11 3.1: Relation between factors that promote sustainability 18 4.1: Influence of neighborhood scale phenomena on community capital 75 6.1: Contribution of economic, environmental, and social capital towards sustainability 38 6.2: Hierarchy within index structure 40

viii

ABSTRACT

This thesis work addresses two research questions regarding sustainability that may be of interest to the planning profession, namely, is it useful and meaningful to measure the sustainability of residential neighborhoods in terms of their long-term viability? And if it is, is it then feasible to design an instrument for measuring neighborhood sustainability that can be used to inform neighborhood-scale planning and decision making? Interpreting from a review of planning literature regarding sustainability at the neighborhood scale that efforts to measure neighborhood sustainability provide insight and knowledge to planners about neighborhood conditions, I followed a step wise process to construct an instrument. This process involved defining sustainability as is relevant at neighborhood scale, identifying forces that influence it, defining the unit of analysis for the measurement instrument, and operationalizing the instrument. It is my conclusion that while it is feasible to construct an instrument for measuring sustainability, it is through additional research work outside of the graduate thesis that such an instrument can successfully be constructed. Due to time and resource constraints, I have only been able to develop an instrument of measurement that may be useful to planners chiefly as a heuristic tool rather than a policy making analytic tool.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

“It is almost commonplace in the literature on sustainability to deplore the vague or ill-defined character of this concept, that the only consensus on sustainability appears to be that there is no shared understanding” (Becker & Jahn, 1999, p.4). Sustainable development is also “[a] phrase more honored in breach than in observance” (Barton, 2000). Nevertheless, Cartwright (2000) reports a third of respondents to a recent survey to prefer the World Commission on Environment and Development’s (WCED) definition of sustainable development. Also commonly known as the Brundtland Commission of 1987, WCED defines sustainable development as that which “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED, 1987, p. 8). This definition is anthropocentric, that is, people centered, and proposes to promote two divergent interests of economic growth and environmental sustainability as the primary objective. The other approach to sustainability is ecocentric i.e. one which puts global ecologic sustainability as of primary importance.

Over the past decade, issues regarding sustainability have gained prominence in all planning spheres. Planners have questioned and debated over the conceptual framework of sustainability, where differing theories regarding the definition of sustainability itself, the means of achieving it, the purpose of achieving it, and even the feasibility and probability of achieving it have been widely discussed. Planning programs towards sustainability have been undertaken at differing scales including at the neighborhood level, the assumption being that neighborhoods can achieve a state of sustainability. In this thesis work, I have tried to raise and address meaningful research questions regarding sustainability at the neighborhood scale and direct effort towards developing a methodology to measure the sustainability of the neighborhood in terms of its long-term viability. My interest in measurement stems primarily from the nature of the planning objectives of most neighborhood planning programs. Neighborhood planning/development programs are intended to achieve different social objectives in the context of sustainability. A broad range of issues are addressed, for example, crime abatement, improving housing conditions, encouragement of local businesses, improving public transportation and transit services; environmental mitigation activities like monitoring point sources of air pollution, etc. etc. However, factors influencing sustainability at the neighborhood scale may not only be forces endogenous to the neighborhood but external stochastic and deterministic forces also largely affect a 1

neighborhood. This conundrum then raises the question of whether it is useful and meaningful to measure the sustainability of residential neighborhoods in terms of their long-term viability? And if is, is it then feasible to design an instrument for measuring neighborhood sustainability that can be used to inform neighborhood-scale planning and decision making?

This thesis work therefore seeks to achieve two objectives. The first objective is to distinguish factors that affect long-term viability of a neighborhood to determine whether it is meaningful to measure sustainability of residential communities. The second objective is to devise a measurement instrument that can be used to assess the long-term viability of a neighborhood.

I have addressed the first objective by applying the sustainability theory at a neighborhood scale, to determine conditions that define long-term viability of a residential neighborhood. The approach that I have taken is grounded in concepts of sustainability but is limited in its perspective to the state of a neighborhood viewed as a semi-open system at equilibrium at one point in time. In essence, effects of outside forces on the state of community capital are considered. However, the impact of the neighborhood on regional or global sustainability is not considered.

I have addressed the second objective by incorporating the components of the environmental, social, and economic systems of a neighborhood that affect its long-term viability (represented as capital stocks) into a quantified index and assessing them against minimum sustainability standards for human health, safety, and welfare. The index provides an aggregate measure of the viability of a given neighborhood, and has a generic structure comprised of a suite of indicators aggregated into components and subcomponents that comprise three components of community capital: (1) environmental capital, (2) social capital (human capital + institutional capital), and (3) economic capital (manmade capital). Each indicator measures a variable. However, there is potential for inclusion as well as exclusion of specific indicators from this array of indicators to encompass variable(s), which may be eminent to the assessment of the viability of a given neighborhood.

I have structured the thesis around three topics: (1) context of sustainability with respect to neighborhood scale, (2) neighborhoods, and (3) construction and structure of a new index.

Chapter 2 addresses the question of whether it is useful and meaningful to measure the sustainability of residential communities and justifies the need for an instrument of measurement for sustainability of a residential community. It discusses in detail community sustainability as I have defined it, with focus on the drawbacks and advantages of adopting such a definition by planners. Chapters 3 – 8 address the feasibility of designing an instrument of measurement.

Chapter 3 establishes the identifiable capital stocks of the three systems of a community that are relevant to sustainability to be the social, economic, and environmental capital and defines the role of each of the three capital stocks in the sustainability/long-term viability of residential neighborhoods. It also presents the fundamental components of which the measurement instrument should be comprised.

Chapter 4 establishes the importance of the neighborhood in planning. It gives the different categories of neighborhoods identified by planning, drawing from the historical importance of each category. There is also a brief overview of the neighborhood level phenomenon from other disciplines, with attention to where it overlaps with the planning literature.

Chapter 5 discusses alternative ways of defining spatial neighborhood boundaries. It also discusses the strengths and weaknesses of each approach.

Chapter 6 discusses index structure, which has been developed in accordance with a set of instrument development criteria drawn from literature. It presents a typology for indicators of sustainability that I have developed, where the system of classification is organized by the nature of the variable data collected and the sustainability conditions imposed. Therefore, it discusses (1) sustainability conditions typical to a neighborhood viewed as a semi-open system, (2) the methodology to calculate indicator values for different indicator types, and (3) alternative ways of addressing the problem of missing variables.

Chapter 7 discusses each of the three capital stocks: environmental capital, economic capital, and social capital and is organized by capital stock, components, subcomponents, and variables. The introduction to each capital stock section lists the components that are included within that capital stock. For each variable I have presented an explanation on (1) why it is an important measure of the particular community capital stock with which it is associated, (2) why it is critical to the sustainability/long-term viability of residential neighborhoods, (3) how it would be measured, and (4) list the indicators that I recommend including in the index that are based on this variable. Separate subsections follow for each of those indicators that include the following: (a) description of the indicator, including literature citations to the source(s) from which I have derived the indicator, (b) how it is calculated using the typology from Chapter 6, and (c) what standard should be used to assess sustainability (with supporting literature citations). A summary table of indicators is presented for each capital stock. A composite table of all indicators is included as an appendix that summarizes the evaluations of them against the indicator evaluation criteria. The indicator evaluation criteria as well as their operationalization are also presented in the beginning of this chapter.

Chapter 8 is the concluding chapter, which presents an overall assessment of the proposed instrument. It discusses the strength(s) and weakness(es) of the proposed instrument as a heuristic tool for informing planners in policy making decisions that

impact the long term-viability of a neighborhood, by analyzing the extent to which the instrument is reliable in quantifying output measures of neighborhood sustainability. It discusses the limitations in the descriptive power of the index due to the constraints and assumptions in which the Sustainability Index is grounded in.

CHAPTER 2

SUSTAINABILITY AND ITS MEASUREMENT

Sustainability is a completely human- made concept. It is a paradigm1 that refers to a state of existence, resultant of a level of economic development and way of living, that scores satisfactorily when evaluated against a framework of idealized growth and humankind-environment interactions. The concept of the sustainability phenomenon addresses the fine balance of humankind-environment interactions. It assumes there are limits to which the earth’s ecosystems can sustain disruption and injury, without, in turn, causing injury to human health and interests. Attempts to define these limits are driven by the fear that unheeded exploitation of the earth’s finite resources will ultimately severely cripple the human race. There are several species that have been affected adversely by ecosystem disruptions and changes resulting in their extinction. Thus, with precedents of severe injury set for human beings by the loss of other species, the prospect, in today’s world conditions, seems very real if not immediate. The only planet that we know of that can sustain, and that does sustain human beings, as well as other life forms, is the Earth. However, this has not always been the case. Differing theories try to construct the birth of the Earth; the most popularly accepted being the big bang theory. The physical form as well as the environment of planet Earth underwent many changes before it could support any form of human life. The history of Earth and its evolution is captured within different geological times. The current geological era is theorized to be most conducive to human survival. However, the knowledge that environmental change is inevitable has made us question the surety of our future existence on earth. We have found, through experience and study that any significant change to our environment will pose a health hazard to humans, and may severely affect the survival of the human population (WHO, 1997). Such environmental change may be precipitated by human activities such as unconstrained consumption of renewable as well as non-renewable resources, or non-human activity like galactic movement, tectonic cycles, climate change, etc. Thus, only within certain environmental conditions, and within them alone is the continued and healthy existence of human beings guaranteed. With this knowledge has come the recognition that conscious efforts have to be made to foster a durable human-environment relationship. The concept of sustainability thus attempts to define both, environmental conditions conducive to a healthy and continued human existence, as well as activities that while not limiting either our growth as a species or our evolution to more sophisticated living conditions, can help us create such conditions. To some extent, moralistic issues of

intergenerational and global equity also drive the sustainability movement.2 Global equity refers to equal opportunity for livelihood and development across the world. Intergenerational equity means that future generations have the same potential and opportunities for livelihood and development as the current generation (World Bank Institute, 2000).

There has been a profound diversity of thoughts and approaches regarding sustainability and sustainable development among scholars over the past two decades. Most of them agree on what contributes to sustainability. However, they have presented differing theories on how these components contribute to sustainability. In this chapter, I have therefore attempted to identify only the types of capital that are the core focus of concern among scholars, which they claim need to be sustained. It is to be noted however, that this insight is but just a partial glimpse of the impressive volume of work and research on sustainability and sustainable development. Nevertheless, such a brief overview of various schools of thought on sustainability serves our purpose of successfully establishing the need for a sustainability index.

In this chapter, Section 2.1 is a brief discussion on general perceptions on what are regarded as sustainable communities and presents the arguments for an instrument of measurement for sustainability. Section 2.2 examines some of the different dimensions along which sustainability can be visualized and concludes with a definition of sustainability adapted for determining community viability. Section 2.3 details assumptions regarding the operating boundary for the unit of analysis.

2.1 Community Sustainability

Sustainability is an oft discussed and oft mentioned word. Immense work has been accomplished on why we need to be sustainable and how we could work towards it. Rachel Carson’s book “Silent Spring” (1962) planted the seeds of what we call today the sustainable development movement (International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2002). Garret Hardin (1968) in his article “Tragedy of the Commons” completed the picture that Carson had started to paint. Efforts have been made since then to temper “gain maximizing” existence, that is destructive to the earth; to an existence that embraces sustainability and sustainable development as the call of the day. The critical question today, however, is whether we are any better off today on our sustainability levels, than we were, say ten, twenty, or forty years back? Have our efforts really made us more sustainable than we were, say, in the 1960’s? The immediate tendency may be to answer in the affirmative. However, if one pauses to think, it may be that we are really only better off than what we could have been. In essence, we seem to have just slowed down our journey towards Hardin’s predicted doom of a polluted world with depleted resources. So although we may not be as badly off as we could have been, we may yet be less sustainable than we were in the sixties. (For example, certain environmental conditions like the depleted ozone layer, or “ozone

holes” weren’t present in the 1960s but are a product of more recent actions.) However, there may be local instances where we have communities built in more recent times that are more sustainable than those built in the 1960’s. Village Homes, Davis, California is regarded as one such example (Corbett & Corbett, 2000). There are also communities that are exemplified as green communities. Civano, Arizona is regarded as such an exemplary community (Corbett & Corbett, 2000). These communities are not only claimed to be more sustainable than their contemporaries but are also cited as the communities that have all the ingredients of a fully sustainable community.

This then raises a question. Are there communities that are really more sustainable than others? If there are, then shouldn’t there be a common yardstick to measure how much more? One could again ask, if in our collective walk towards sustainability, does it matter how much more sustainable we are, as long as we are more? From a planning perspective, it does. We need to know how much more, so that we may know if our efforts towards sustainability are actually producing proportionally constructive results.

One of the formal ways to measure levels of sustainability is through an instrument of measurement. The instrument should measure the level of sustainability of the community. The utility of the proposed instrument as a tool is seen in informing planners about policy-making decisions that impact the long-term viability of the neighborhood. Explicit boundaries of the community have to be defined before such an instrument can be applied.

The challenge is to identify the critical components of this instrument. Since, the function of the instrument is to measure the level of sustainability, it has to focus on factors and conditions that promote sustainable development and ultimately sustainability. However, it is important foremost to first establish what we mean here by sustainability. This is very tricky, for ideally speaking there may be no such thing as sustainability. As mentioned earlier, sustainability is a completely human-made concept. And since it is a relatively new concept, there is more than one definition of it, and at least as many prescribed ways of achieving it.

2.2 Defining Sustainability

Many different definitions of sustainability exist (Neumayer, 1999; Rees, 1995) Sustainability has been defined along different dimensions by different scholars. Planners and planning bodies do not have a generic definition of sustainability. Definitions of sustainability therefore can differ across regions and planning organizations. However, most condone the 1987 Brundtland Commission definition of sustainability. This definition needs to be adapted to be applicable in a meaningful manner at a neighborhood scale. In this section, I have proposed a definition of sustainability along a dimension and approach that shows merit when applied to a

neighborhood, after overviewing the dimensions and approaches along which the majority of definitions have been conceptualized by scholars.

The sustainability concept can be addressed at a range of spatial scales. Spatial scales range from the local, to regional, national, and global in a hierarchical order. To best understand these ranges, they are viewed as nested within interlocked concentric circles. The interlocking scale of humanity is individual > family/household > community > country citizen > planetary citizen. I have addressed local sustainability at the residential community level, the smallest spatial unit at the local level at which the sustainability concept can be applied. This is because a residential community is the smallest unit for which it is meaningful to measure sustainability since it is the smallest unit of typical urban planning practice.

There exists in the literature on environmental economics, two basic positions on sustainability - “weak sustainability” and “strong sustainability.” Both these positions have been defined by the works of numerous scholars, and the positions seem to be in opposition to each other. Both the strong and weak paradigms of sustainability are focused on the preservation of environmental capital.3 Researchers of both weak and strong sustainability have focused theories on utilization, control, and preservation of the social, economic, and natural capital, such that the natural capital is not irreversibly damaged or depleted. The difference is primarily in their assumptions about the nature of the natural capital.

Weak Sustainability (WS) assumes that natural capital is substitutable (WCED, 1987; Pearce, Barbier, & Markandya, 1990; Beatley & Manning, 1997; Becker & Jahn, 1999; Hart, 1999; World Bank Institute, 2000), by the production of consumer goods and investment of proceeds from the utilization of non-renewable resources to research on renewable resources, and focuses on genuine savings (GS). Neumayer (1999) thus calls WS the “substitutability paradigm” and quotes the work of Hamilton (1994) who defines genuine savings as the green net national product. GS is constructed as the net national product augmented for investments4 in and deducted for deterioration of natural as well as other possible forms of capital.

Strong Sustainability (SS) however, views natural capital as non-substitutable (Ehrlich, 1986; Pearce et al., 1990; Brown, Kane, & Roodman, 1994; Daly, 1996; Neumayer, 1999) and as consisting of two kinds of resources– renewable and non- renewable. SS proponents advise freezing the consumption of non-renewable resources, and maintaining a rate of consumption of renewable resources that is less than the rate of regeneration of the renewable source, for all time periods. Neumayer thus calls SS the “non-substitutability paradigm.” It calls for measuring the sustainability gap, which Neumayer defines as the monetary difference between the actual stocks of natural and manmade capital and sustainability standards. Thus, WS proposes to pass on a constant total amount of natural and manmade capital, within which the mix of capital may shift, to the future generations (WCED, 1987; Pearce et al., 1990; Beatley et al., 1997; Becker & Jahn, 1999; Hart, 1999; World Bank Institute, 2000), whereas SS 8

intends to pass on an intact system of natural capital (Ehrlich, 1986; Pearce et al., 1990; Brown et al., 1994; Daly, 1996; Neumayer, 1999).

My primary interest here is in the health, safety, and welfare of human beings. Therefore, I adopt an anthropocentric approach in defining sustainability as a state of existence and human activity within a narrow range of pre-defined minimum sustainability standards for human health, safety, and welfare, such that the state of existence and activity do not substantially or irreversibly damage the ecosystem resulting in injury to human health and interests. Minimum sustainability standards for sustainability will be based on (1) Safe Minimum Standards (SMS) for the quality of the environmental capital in a state that does not negatively impact the health and safety of human beings, for example, ambient air and water quality or with respect to long-term viability of environmental capital that provides ecosystem services, for example, fishable and swimable condition of aquatic ecosystems (2) Normative quality of life standards for the quality of economic, environmental, and/or social capital in a neighborhood that ensure health, safety, and welfare of human beings, for example, plumbing standards for housing. It is to be noted that the WS and SS nature of the standards depends on how safe is conceptualized by regulatory bodies and their purposes and objectives.

To achieve such a state of existence, capital stocks consumed by a community may be substitutable but their consumption should be limited to thresholds, consumption above which may initiate conditions and processes that could have the potential to negatively impact human health and/or interests in the immediate short term or possibly in the long term. This conceptualization of sustainability can be applied to a residential community on the spatial as well as human scale. In addition, the approach I have taken here is to treat the community as a semi-open system at equilibrium at one point in time. This assumption is to simplify the process of measuring sustainability. Effects of outside forces on the state of community capital are considered. However, effects of the forces within the neighborhood on the outside are not considered. For example, the effects of the regional economy on neighborhood financial capital are relevant, as are the effects of regional air emissions on neighborhood air quality, or upstream wastewater disposal on the water quality of streams or lakes that lie within a neighborhood, or the location of the neighborhood relative to natural hazards such as hurricane storm surges, etc. It is also useful to assess access to public facilities and services that are located outside the neighborhood, e.g. medical facilities, police and fire protection, etc. However, energy consumption of the neighborhood in terms of non- renewable fossil fuels like petroleum, electricity generated by coal fired stations, etc. is not relevant.

In this conceptualization of sustainability, the biosphere can be viewed as consisting of two distinct population groups: humans and non-humans. Human activities can cause damage to the biosphere, which in turn may result in injury to human health, safety, and welfare and non-humans (Refer Fig. 2.1(a)). On the other hand, there are instances where non-humans affect or are affected by a disrupted biosphere, such that the affected non-humans sustain injury and/or extinction, thereby affecting the

biosphere balance which may or may not affect human health, safety, and welfare. Since the health of human beings in this system of interactions is of foremost concern (Refer Fig. 2.1(b)) a deeper understanding of this system of interactions (Refer Fig. 2.1(a)) is essential to prevent adverse effects to human health and interests.

Fig. 2.1: (a) System of interactions (b) System of study Source: Author

An instrument of measurement can be devised based on the principles of this anthropocentric minimum sustainability standards conceptualization of sustainability that provides an overall assessment of the long-term viability of a residential community, where the assessment is limited to current stocks and does not attempt to assess changes over time within the community nor does it attempt to assess flows into or out of the residential community spatial boundary. The instrument for measuring community sustainability will, therefore, adopt safe minimum standards as defined for maintaining a viable environment for humans within a residential community.

2.3 Operating Boundary

Explicit boundaries for the unit of analysis have to be defined before an instrument can be applied. As a semi- open system, I define the physical boundary of 10

the community, the unit of analysis for the instrument, to be its operating boundary. The two strategies most frequently used by planning organizations to determine the boundary are discussed in Chapter 4. It is preferable to have a separate map that clearly describes the physical boundary of the community. The area scribed by this boundary is the area covered by the community, and as such the subject of analysis. In cases where the elements of the residential community extend over the boundary, like forest areas, ponds, lakes, etc., only those elements that lie within the community boundary (overlap between community boundary and shaded area in Fig. 3.2) will be analyzed for sustainability. Dwelling units that are encompassed within this boundary comprise the community housing stock and the total residents of this housing stock form the social stock of the community. The community will also encompass buildings including school(s), church(es), community center, etc.; infrastructure like roads, sewage system, water supply, storm water drainage, etc. that lie within the community boundary.

Figure 2.2: Boundary definition Source: Author

2.4 Conclusion

To protect both human and ecological interests, efforts have been made towards sustainability and sustainable development. Applying an instrument of measurement to measure sustainability is one of the methods with which long-term viability of a residential community can be evaluated. A framework of sustainability standards based on human health, safety, and welfare could be applied towards the instrument.

NOTES:

1William Rees (1995) also calls it a pre-analytic vision or worldview. 2The history of the sustainability movement is captured by the 2002 sustainable development timeline published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (2002). It traces movements and initiatives, which began as a result of general concern about our environment, as early as 1962. 3Capital is defined by Neumayer (1999) as the stock that provides current and future flows of services. Further references to capital in the thesis will adhere to the same definition. 4Net investment is defined as the aggregate total value of man-made capital and natural capital (Neumayer, 1999).

CHAPTER 3

COMPONENTS OF AN INSTRUMENT

A community can be defined by three systems – the social, environmental, and economic. Literature on sustainability and sustainable development primarily focuses on the capital stocks of these three systems. In this chapter, I argue that the sustainability of each of the three systems, and the interactions between these systems, are the two major factors influencing the level of sustainability of a community. The interactions between these systems are influenced by the choices and actions of community residents. Literature on “sustainable communities” and “sustainability initiatives” attributes both, conscious and successful effort towards sustainability, and the success rate of policies aimed at sustainable development, to be a direct outcome of local awareness, initiatives, and participation. This then suggests that for the instrument of measurement to fully depict the sustainability status of a community, it should capture all these elements. This chapter thus presents and defends the critical components of an instrument of measurement that can be used to measure the sustainability of a residential community.

Section 3.1 presents the identifiable capital stocks of the three systems of a community that are relevant to sustainability. Section 3.2 presents the fundamental components that the instrument should be comprised of.

3.1 Impact of Capital Stocks of Human Communities on Sustainability

Researchers claim that the state of a community is defined by its social, economic, and environmental systems (Hart, 1999; World Bank Institute Report, 2000; Harris & Goodwin, 2001). Each system is comprised of subsystems (Munasinghe et al., 2001) and can be defined in terms of capital stocks and flows (Ehrlich, 1989; Pearce et al., 1990; Daly, 1996; Hart, 1999; Neumayer, 1999). Harris & Goodwin (2001) refer to the works of Holmberg (1992) and Reed (1997) to distinguish economic, environmental, and social systems as the central focus of scholarly work on sustainability and sustainable development. Therefore, an assessment of the sustainability of these three systems could provide a measure of the sustainability of a community. A static assessment of capital stocks of a human community, as well as the current rates of

consumption relative to stocks, and projected rates of growth in stocks and consumption, would provide a measure of the sustainability of the three systems, and hence, a measure of the sustainability of the community.

To measure the sustainability of the three systems, operationalization of the three systems in terms of capital stocks and flows is required. As stated in chapter 2, the community is viewed as a semi-open system where the effects of the outside forces on the community are considered but the effects of the community are not considered. Therefore, flows of stocks are not relevant to measurement but a static assessment of the stocks at one point in time is required. Maureen Hart (1999, p. 15) states that the capital of a community is necessary and needs to be managed for communities to function, and hence, needs to be considered in the context of sustainability. Various authors have defined capital stocks that comprise the social, economic, and environmental systems of human communities. As previously mentioned in Chapter 2, advocates of both weak and strong sustainability have focused theories on utilization, control, and preservation of the social, economic, and natural capital, such that the natural capital is not irreversibly damaged or depleted (Ehrlich, 1989; Pearce et al., 1990; Brown et al., 1994; Rees, 1995; Daly, 1996; Beatley & Manning, 1997; Becker & Jahn, 1999; Hart, 1999; Neumayer, 1999; World Bank Institute Report, 2000). Damaged or depleted environmental capital results in unsustainable social, economic, and environmental systems, and hence unsustainable communities.

The World Bank Institute (2000, p. 9) defines the capital stocks K of human communities as comprising seven components:

* K = Km + Kh + Kn + Kf + Ki + Kc + K

o Where, Km is manmade or physical capital. Examples of manmade capital are buildings, roads, industries, etc. o K h is human capital i.e. the stock of knowledge, skills, and health. Examples of stock of knowledge and skills are the level of education, occupation etc. Examples of health are infant mortality rate, occupation related illnesses, etc. o K n is natural capital i.e. the stock of environmental assets. Examples of natural (or environmental) capital are natural resources such as rivers, lakes, forests etc., natural processes such as biochemical cycles, irradiation etc., and ecosystems such as river, coasts, and oceans, etc. o K f is financial capital consisting of equity and debt representing claims on physical or working assets. o K i is social capital of formal and informal institutions consisting of laws, ecopolicies, property rights and codes of conduct. o K c is cultural and spiritual capital i.e. the behavioral influences. The World Bank Institute (p. 9) report defines this as informal institutions that affect human decisions and actions. For examples, NGO’s, environmental groups, etc. The report further states that though this type of capital is particularly difficult to identify, it has a significant impact on how people make decisions.

o K* is natural (environmental) capital which is non-substitutable. The report explains with some examples stating that while some capital such as coal and oil are substitutable, capital such as the ozone layer, carbon sinks, etc. are non-substitutable.

Hart (1999) provides a more simplified aggregation of the capital at a community level than the World Bank Institute report. She presents the concept of “community capital” comprised of natural, social and human, and manmade capital. Munasinghe et al. (2001) similarly define the social, ecological, and economic systems of a community as being comprised of social, ecological, and economic capital.

Hart (1999) and Munasinghe et al. (2001) present very clear as well as consistent definitions, of the three capitals. The ecological capital (which Hart refers to as the natural capital) is defined by Munasinghe et al. as consisting of the ecological systems and sub-systems, i.e. natural resources, ecosystem services, or natural processes that we rely on in some way, and the aesthetic beauty of nature. Environmental sustainability thus demands protecting the integrity and resilience of the ecological systems and sub-systems.

Munasinghe et al. define economic capital as consisting of goods and services. They state that economic sustainability primarily refers to an economic system that promotes public health and safety and does not rule out an increase in either the production or consumption of goods and services. However, their definition questions at what cost such an increase is achieved. Hart defines manmade capital to be the built and financial capital of the community. The built capital comprises the community infrastructure that includes services such as water, sewage, electricity, etc. It also includes the possession level of individual households. Hart however claims that the financial capital, i.e. money, should not be included in the community capital when evaluating a community for sustainability. She argues that this is because, although money is part of the built capital, it is in fact only a way to value and transfer all the different things within each of the three components - natural, human and social, and built capital. She further states that though a monetary value can be assigned to numerous goods and services, such a value cannot be ascribed to any natural, ecological, or human resources.

Munasinghe et al. state that the social capital is comprised of human health and relationships. Hence, social sustainability strives towards social equity and positive human relationships and promotes public health and safety without undermining the viability of the social and cultural sub-systems. Hart however defines social and human capital as comprising two distinct components - people and connections. Human capital is comprised of people – individual physical and mental health, education, skill and abilities, etc. Social capital is defined by connections. Connections are the way people react and relate to each other. Hart states that the simplest connections are between family, friends, and neighbors. On a larger scale, connections formed through community and volunteer groups are important. Social capital also includes the ability of groups of people to form a government to deal with common problems, and the ability of

people to form companies to create goods and services to satisfy the needs of the community. Thus, the social capital can be seen to actually comprise two separate forms of capital – the people and connections.

A recent report published by the Global Leaders of Tomorrow, World Economic Forum, in conjunction with the Center for International Earth Science Information Network at Columbia University and the Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy World Economic Forum (2002), constructs an environmental sustainability index and environmental performance index, as instruments of measurement, applicable at the national level. The “connections” component is reflected in their index in the form of “Global Stewardship.” Three indicators define global stewardship: Participation in international collaborative affairs, greenhouse gas emissions, and reducing transboundary environmental pressures. The Environmental Sustainability Index Report (World Economic Forum, 2001, p. 5) rationalizes this choice stating, “A country is environmentally sustainable if it cooperates with other countries to manage common environmental problems, and if it reduces negative transboundary environmental impacts on other countries to levels that cause no serious harm.” These three indicators measure collective concentrated actions intended to improve sustainability. The three indicators are different forms of Hart’s “connections” aspect of “human and social capital.” Given that the human and social capital of Hart comprise two distinctive capitals – namely people and connections, it may be logical to consider them as two separate stocks of the same capital instead of as a unitary stock. The identification of “Global Stewardship” component by the ESI (World Economic Forum, 2001; 2002) report substantiates this conclusion.

I have adopted a three-stock framework of community capital similar to Hart’s to measure the sustainability level of a community, based on three capital stocks: (1) social capital, (2) environmental capital, and (3) economic capital.

3.1.1. Social Capital

Social capital is capital that is comprised of two components - cultural and spiritual stock and human stock.

The cultural and spiritual stock comprises connections formed through community and volunteer groups. It also includes the ability of groups of people to form a government to deal with common problems, and the ability of people to form companies to create goods and services to satisfy the needs of the community, formal and informal institutions that affect the health of the community, thus influencing human decisions and actions. This component incorporates the “human capital” as defined by Hart (1999) and Kc the “cultural and spiritual capital” and Ki the “institutional capital” from the World Bank Institute Report formulation (2000). This component is analogous to “human relationships” as defined by Munasinghe et al. (2001) and “Global Stewardship” as defined by the Environmental Sustainability Index report (World Economic Forum, 2001; 2002).

Human capital comprises physical and mental health, education, skill and abilities, etc. of a community. This component incorporates Kh the “human capital” from the World Bank Institute Report formulation (2000) and “social capital” as defined by Hart (1999). This component is analogous to “human health” as defined by Munasinghe et al. (2001).

3.1.2. Environmental Capital

The environmental capital comprises natural resources, ecosystem services, and natural processes. This component incorporates ecological capital as defined by Munasinghe et al. (2001), natural capital as defined by Hart (1999), and Kn the “natural capital” and K* from the World Institute Report formulation (2000).

3.1.3. Economic Capital

Based on the arguments provided by Hart (1999), the economic capital is defined as manmade capital and thus comprises only the “built capital” and excludes “financial capital.” The built capital comprises the community infrastructure, built up and landscaped spaces, services that includes services such as water, sewage, electricity, etc., and transportation networks, and access to amenities and recreation. Financial capital i.e. money is not included. This component incorporates “economic capital” as defined by Munasinghe et al. (2001), and Km the “manmade capital” from the World Institute Report formulation (2000).

The components and construction of an appropriate measurement instrument are further addressed in chapters 6 and 7, where the principles and methodology of the calculation of the level of sustainability of the social, environmental, and economic capital of a community are presented.

3.2 Interactions Among Capital Stocks of Human Communities

The three systems of a community are not independent of each other but rather interact with each other. The World Bank Institute (2000) report claims that an interaction between economic, environmental, and social systems is necessary to attain sustainable development. Hence, interactions between the three systems affect the level of sustainability of a community. The World Bank Institute (p. 23) report further states that sustainable development is a dynamic balance between economic, environmental, and sociological imperatives and benefits over time, so that future generations will have the same potential and opportunities for human livelihood and development as the current generation. Hence, a measurement of the interactions of the three systems is also relevant towards measuring its sustainability. The levels of sustainability of all three capital stocks are affected by human activity. Examining the

impact of human activity on the three systems (Refer Fig. 2.1), it can be concluded that each capital has direct or tangible impacts on the other forms of capital.

1) The quality and quantity of environmental capital can affect the quantity and quality of social capital. For example, air and/or water pollution adversely poses a health hazard to residents of a given community.

2) The economic capital can influence the quantity and quality of social capital (like educational and research facilities and technology available to the residents of a community can influence the knowledge and skills of residents) as well as the quantity and quality of environmental capital (like air and noise pollution in the community due to traffic on the community roads, or contamination of soil by faulty septic tanks, etc.)

3) The cultural and spiritual stock of a community (Kc) influences the health of a community, how its members perceive their environment, and the actions they choose to take that affect their environment. Thus, cultural and spiritual stock can influence how they use their environmental capital to produce economic capital and what actions they take to minimize the impacts of economic production on environmental capital (such as awareness about the harmful effects of effluent rich in nutrients entering environmental resources such as lakes, rivers, etc. has resulted in various point source control programs, as well as initiation and implementation of stringent effluent treatment procedures.)

Social Capital

Economic Capital

Environmental Capital

Where, Kc = Cultural and spiritual stock of Social Capital

Fig 3.1 - Relation between factors that promote sustainability Source: Author

Thus, it is seen that the interaction between the three stocks is complex. However, it is clear that the human activity affects environmental capital and economic capital, which in turn affect the human stock as well as the cultural and spiritual stock of social capital. Thus, these interactions should be captured by the structure and functional form of a community sustainability measurement instrument.

3.3 Conclusion

In this chapter, it is proposed that an instrument of measurement of sustainability should be a composite measure of the sustainability of community capital. The community capital consists of the social capital, environmental capital, and economic capital of a community. To successfully measure the sustainability levels of a community, the instrument should determine both, a measure of the level of sustainability of the community capital and a measure of the interactions among the three components of the community capital.

CHAPTER 4

NEIGHBORHOOD AND INSTRUMENT OF MEASUREMENT

Sustainability is often spoken of in regional, national, and global terms, more rarely in terms of neighborhoods. On the other hand, the neighborhood is often the smallest unit considered by urban and regional planning, reflecting the general belief of planners, architects, and sociologists alike that neighborhoods are the building blocks of the city. Neighborhood vitality is averred to largely determine the health of a city, where the quality of life and vitality of a neighborhood itself is determined by its physical and social conditions (Rohe & Gates, 1985). Researchers like Chaskin (1998), Rohe & Gates (1985), and Banerjee & Baer (1984) maintain that a focus on neighborhoods has therefore long been present in the planning field. The use and viability of neighborhood based planning has been seen as an essential part of a comprehensive planning process to inform citywide policy, promote planned social change, and gain input, clarify priorities, and garner support for neighborhood-level details of such plans (Cox, 2000). It has been the assumption of neighborhood planning from its beginnings that the items considered (within the sustainability discourse) as components of social and economic capital vary in meaningful ways at the scale of the neighborhood and can be influenced by neighborhood scale phenomena. Very close to the beginning of the environmental movement, the components of environmental capital were added to the neighborhood- planning sphere. These are the assumptions of neighborhood planning practice among Anglo-American planners. I intend to demonstrate in this chapter that neighborhood is an appropriate unit of analysis for measuring the sustainability of “residential communities” and it is valid to assume that sustainability is meaningful at the neighborhood scale.

The purpose of this chapter is therefore three fold. The first purpose is to establish the validity of adopting a neighborhood as the unit of analysis for the measurement instrument. The second purpose is to demonstrate that the assumption that the three components of sustainability i.e. social, economic, and environmental capital vary in meaningful ways at the neighborhood scale, and that the variation is influenced by neighborhood scale phenomena, is valid. The third purpose is to explore the alternative definitions of neighborhood that might be appropriate for the purposes of assessing neighborhood sustainability.

Section 4.1 establishes the importance of the neighborhood in planning. Section 4.2 gives the different categories of neighborhoods identified by planning, drawing from the historical importance of each category. There is also a brief overview of the neighborhood level phenomenon from other disciplines, with attention to where it overlaps with the planning literature. Section 4.3 gives an argument for neighborhood.

4.1 Neighborhood as a Planning Construct

This section briefly discusses the importance of the neighborhood in the planning profession.

4.1.1 Importance of the Neighborhood in Planning

The literature suggests two reasons why neighborhood as a unit is important to professional planning practice.

(1) Planning has traditionally demanded a de-centralized, participatory planning process, to successfully address local issues. This process allegedly overcomes the limitations presented by the comprehensive planning process. Neighborhood as a unit of planning has traditionally provided organizations the means to apply planning processes at the desirable de-centralized level (Banerjee & Baer, 1984) and continues to do so (Chaskin, 1995).

The strongest commendation for de-centralized neighborhood level planning programs is that they are most responsive to local problems as well as solutions. As Rohe & Gates (1985, p. 171) claim, “neighborhood planning programs have led to a more project-oriented planning process and numerous neighborhood improvements.” Thus, any tool which measures, monitors and/or evaluates sustainability status at the neighborhood level will be most beneficial in informing programs intended to induce local physical and/or environmental improvements.

(2) The neighborhood as a unit is a ubiquitous phenomenon in every American urban and non-urban area. Mumford (1961) presented “neighborhood’ as a “fact of nature,” which comes into existence whenever a group of people share a place. Thus, given such a presence, neighborhood is the ideal and important level of implementation of local planning programs and can serve as a common unit to be subject to local planning practices and policies.

4.1.2 Relevance of Neighborhood as a Unit of Analysis for Sustainability of Residential Communities

The decision on what should be the appropriate unit of analysis for assessing community sustainability should be based on the programmatic goals of the

assessment. In planning practice, community level programs are generally implemented at neighborhood levels. Since the programmatic goal of assessing community sustainability is to provide information that can be applied at local levels for identifying issues, informing development design and local planning practices, tracking environmental trends, and quantitatively assessing the success of community-level policies and programs adopted or enforced by state governments, municipalities, and/or associations, it is proposed to define communities by neighborhoods for the purpose of the instrument of measurement. Thus for example, the instrument can aid a planner to make meaningful ex-post and ex-ante evaluation of the impact of state enforced programs on the sustainability levels of neighborhood(s). This is seen to be addressed as following:

(1) The instrument as a descriptive tool can be used to assess the sustainability status of a given residential neighborhood.

(2) The instrument as an analytic tool can be used by neighborhoods, local governments, developers, neighborhood associations, and residents to evaluate the sustainability of existing or proposed neighborhoods, and to evaluate trends of individual indicators over time.

(3) The instrument as an analytic tool can be used to identify problem areas, which endanger the long-term viability of a neighborhood and consequently contribute towards lower sustainability index values. Identifying problem areas and policy variables could facilitate the development of plans/strategies and formulation of policies to improve the sustainability status of a given residential neighborhood.

(4) The instrument as a descriptive tool can be used to explain the success of various programs. For example, a change in the instrument value after the implementation of a policy or program intended to improve neighborhood sustainability will indicate the effectiveness and/or success of the program.

Based on the discussions and arguments presented, it is concluded to adopt neighborhood, the lowest unit in the hierarchical levels of public planning, and the most popular residential-unit paradigm, as the appropriate unit of analysis for this thesis.

4.2 Approaches to Defining a Neighborhood

At different points of time, neighborhoods have been defined in different planning contexts based on the functions of specific community systems. These functions can be linked to two of the capital stocks of concern in an assessment of community sustainability: social capital and economic capital. The following subsections discuss the three categories of neighborhoods identified by planning – social neighborhood,

physical neighborhood, and political neighborhood, drawing from the historical importance of each category.

4.2.1 The Social Neighborhood

A neighborhood can be identified as a system of social interactions. In planning, neighborhoods maybe defined as a social unit for empirical analysis, using both participant observation and statistical techniques to apply to program development.

According to Rohe & Gates (1984), the origins of this method of identifying a neighborhood can be traced back to the Settlement House Era. In this era, neighborhood evolved primarily as a social concept, targeted to improve social conditions within its framework. The era of the industrial revolution was marked by new production and its accompanying evils of urban poverty, illiteracy, unsanitary conditions, and crime. To eradicate such social evils, the settlement movement was launched formally in 1884 in the United States. This movement was marked by the establishment of a house where settlement activists, men of education and culture, attempted to help integrate low income and immigrant groups into modern living by imparting to them “[i]mportant values [that] included a work ethic, stable family life, frequent physical recreation, and the appreciation of art and cultural activities” (Rohe and Gates, 1985, p. 15), thus forging strong bonds of social relationship and mutual concern, and welfare among residents of the area surrounding the settlement house. This area, in years following the establishment of a settlement house, was formally referred to as the neighborhood and was primarily seen as a social unit of activity and analysis. This movement was driven by Christian, democratic, and scientific ideologies, and was focused on the local community or neighborhood as an important social unit for finding solutions to rampant urban problems.

Rohe and Gates (1984) list the following as the programmatic goals of defining neighborhoods as social units:

o Establish contacts with groups of people targeted for help. o Motivate residents to develop strong family and neighborhood units by involving them in activities that foster such association. o Advocate self-help by providing locals with necessary motivation and skills.

4.2.2 The Physical Neighborhood

The end objective of most planning programs is to achieve certain social objectives. The primary objectives addressed in planning programs are healthy, secure communities. Thus, neighborhoods have very often been defined as a physical entity in planning because a neighborhood, which is sound in design and service, is believed to nurture healthier and more social communities, i.e. supports social behavior (Rohe & Gates, 1985). A healthy and socially interactive neighborhood is projected to suffer less from urban problems of crime, ill health, etc. as well as other social, physical, and

political problems. Rohe & Gates (1985, p.26) state that “[f]or [Clarence] Perry and others concerned with the design of new residential areas, the neighborhood was a physical entity that produced certain social consequences.”

Rohe & Gates (1985) state that planning of a physical neighborhood is mostly based on standardized design and planning guidelines. Exemplified is the work of Clarence Perry, an architect, who outlined six basic principles of good neighborhood design. According to Banerjee & Baer (1984), these principles were endorsed by most planning and design organizations in designing and identifying a neighborhood.

Rohe & Gates (p. 27) state that Perry’s principles have been the building blocks of many neighborhoods such as Radburn, New Jersey; Greenbelt, Maryland; Greenhills, Ohio etc. They argue, however (p. 30-31), that there are distinct advantages and disadvantages to defining neighborhoods in such physical terms. The main advantage being that it does create more desirable, livable, and socially healthy residential neighborhoods. It also brings comprehensive planning to local levels, where transportation, housing, public facilities, etc. become interdependent systems rather than separate phenomena. According to Rohe & Gates (p. 26-28), beginning in the early nineteenth century, planning programs were aimed at improving social bonds as a direct outcome of improvement in the physical conditions of a neighborhood.

The concept of a physical neighborhood has been subject to numerous criticisms. Rohe & Gates (1985) quote Isaacs (1940) who criticized the desirability of the neighborhood concept, stating that the emphasis on a homogeneous area promoted social and economic segregation. Rohe & Gates (p. 31) state that critics have also categorized the physical neighborhood concept as too romanticized and idealistic a delineation to be practical for modern life. In a transient urban life, stable residential areas are unrealistic (Isaacs, 1940). Rohe & Gates (1985, p. 31) quote Dahir (1950) who argues that many people want the anonymity of the city and enjoy the city’s high level of stimulation as opposed to local isolationism promoted by a physical neighborhood, which supports social behavior, especially face-to-face human contact. Rohe & Gates (1985) also quote Pahl (1970), Kuper (1970), Gans (1961), and Solow, Ham, & Donnelly (1969), who argue that the physical determinism implicit in the physical neighborhood concept is unsubstantiated. They argue that physical design is mediated, if not overshadowed, by other influences like the social characteristics, social values, norms, etc. of residents.

Rohe & Gates (1985, p. 32) state that specific assumptions about the neighborhood concept have also been criticized. They quote Keller (1968) who states that sometimes, a physical neighborhood is too large to promote social behavior and neighborly relations; for example, a neighborhood with a population of five thousand. They quote Isaacs (1948) who criticized Perry’s idea of the school as focal point as being impractical and too child centered; community facilities are inadequate and often far for some residents. Rohe & Gates (p. 32) also state that some critics question the utility of Perry’s concept of a common meeting area, given the diversity of individuals

usually found in an urban area. Critics also question the economic efficiency of the neighborhood as a service district for urban services. Also, neighborhood schools would be too small to undertake specialized activities that are economically feasible in large schools. The proliferation of small parks and other public spaces also necessitates expensive maintenance service.

However, the incorporation of the principles in sub-division regulations (Rohe & Gates, 1985, p. 27; Banerjee & Baer, 1984), and many examples of successful implementation (Rohe & Gates, 1985), demonstrates the functionality of Perry’s neighborhood principles. Thus, the concept and identification of neighborhood as a physical unit seems to be defensible.

4.2.3 The Political Neighborhood

This is the most popular method of identifying neighborhoods in planning today. This method of neighborhood identification is useful, when implementing community action programs. A political neighborhood is identified by the existence of neighborhood associations or other political organizations that control and/or organize neighborhood activities. According to Rohe & Gates (1985), the political neighborhood originated in what is called the community action era, which began in the late nineteen sixties and early seventies. It is based on a democratic ideal and is aimed at increasing citizen participation and involvement at the community and neighborhood levels, to address the problems of “cultural” and “structural barriers” (p. 43). Cultural barriers arise from subcultures within society, and result in both, isolation of communities from other communities, and aggregation of similar communities on cultural and ethnic bases. Structural barriers are discrimination, lack of home, food, and security, etc. This era has seen the advent of community action programs and projects, delinquency programs, etc., which place importance on the neighborhood as a political unit rather than as a social or physical unit, to achieve program goals. These programs are mostly first applied at higher units of societal aggregation, like large communities or large subsections of cities inhabited with a majority of poor. The programs then identify neighborhoods by political groups, group associations and/or other local political organizations within these large communities or sub-sections, to foster involvement in the programs. Rohe & Gates state that the programs either identify local neighborhood groups politicized by previous programs or encourage the development of new ones.

The major advantage of identifying the neighborhood in this manner is the success achieved in creating strong local participation, an achievement weakly echoed by the previous two eras. This has also created a “new expectation in the area of citizen participation” (Rohe & Gates, p. 46).

However, the main disadvantage of employing such a method of identifying neighborhoods is that the administrative boundaries and political boundaries of a neighborhood sometimes do not always match completely. This mismatch in many

instances prevents successful implementation of public policy programs targeted to benefit neighborhoods (Chaskin, 1998).

4.3 Effects of Neighborhood-Scale Planning on Environmental Capital

Generally, when planners practice social planning, economic planning, and political planning at the neighborhood level, they implicitly assume that actions taken at the neighborhood level affect social and economic capital. When implementing a social program, planners intend improvements of social capital. For example, drug control, crime prevention, and community policing programs tend to view neighborhoods as a conjunction of social and physical units (BJA, 1997; NCPC, 2002) and implicitly assume that successful program implementation would result in enhancement/improvement of social and economic capital.

Similarly, when planners practice environmental planning at the neighborhood level, they implicitly assume that actions taken at the neighborhood level affect environmental, social, and/or economic capital. The practice of environmental impact assessment and the assessment of localized impacts of land use changes on environmental quality in terms of both ecosystem and public health can be assumed to support the argument that neighborhood scale planning affects environmental capital. Specifically, the sub-field of environmental equity and environmental justice and the focus there on neighborhood scale effects of sources of environmental contaminants such as hazardous waste and solid waste facilities as well as air and water discharges from industries supports this assumption, for example, planning and siting of environmental LULU’s (Locally Unwanted land Uses) like sewage treatment plants, garbage dumps, transportation facilities etc., within neighborhood. These facilities/plants etc. are associated with anticipated local impacts, like impacts on land use through speculation in anticipation of development during the planning and design phase; noise pollution, air pollution etc. during the construction phase; noise, air, etc. pollution during operation of facility; and aesthetic impacts etc. during operation of facility. (Canter, 1977).

Berke, Beatly, & Stiftel (2000, p. 178) state “local governments play an increasingly important role in environmental policy, in part because of their traditional responsibility for land use and planning, and in part because of new notions about the appropriate role for this governmental level. These notions have local governments acting to protect and enhance the environment in various ways…..’

Thus, it is appropriate to assume that neighborhood-scale planning affects environmental capital.

4.4 Sustainability and Neighborhoods

Discussions and arguments presented in section 4.1 establish the validity of neighborhood as a functional unit of planning practice. Section 4.2 describes three methods of defining neighborhoods. In this section, it is shown that neighborhood planning is practiced with the intent of influencing the quantity and quality of community capital stocks. It is also shown that all three-neighborhood definitions are relevant to the three dimensions of sustainability – social capital, environmental capital, and economic capital. An argument for a pragmatic definition of neighborhood that fits the planning context in which questions of community sustainability are raised is therefore presented.

4.4.1 Variation in Community Capital at Neighborhood Scale

The three capitals vary in meaningful ways at the neighborhood scale. Also, different neighborhoods possess differing qualities and quantities of the three capitals. The human stock will comprise different demographic (age groups, gender ratios, religion, culture, ethnicity, education level, health condition, skill set, etc.) mixes in different neighborhoods and the cultural and spiritual stock will comprise different attributes such as level of resident-resident connections, association with other institutions, etc. The economic capital similarly will comprise different elements such as buildings, services, etc.; and environmental capital will comprise different elements such as water bodies, air quality, etc.

These changes of the three capitals within neighborhoods and their variation across neighborhoods are influenced by various neighborhood scale phenomena:

1) Change in the human stock by improving the assets of individuals within neighborhoods, such as skills set, education, etc. through social services, formal and informal institutions, and ensuring the safety and health of the individuals within neighborhoods. Enhancement of the cultural and spiritual stock by improvements in depth of leadership qualities, associations with formal and informal institutions, etc.

2) Change in the economic capital by improving housing, transportation, etc. Conversely, a decline in housing, transportation etc. results in degradation of economic capital, increasing population density, etc.

3) Change in the environmental capital through pollution abatement programs, etc.

Thus, I shall assume that neighborhood level phenomena impact the factors that influence neighborhood change, which in turn induce meaningful changes in the three components of community (refer to Figure 4.1.)

Fig 4.1 – Influence of neighborhood scale phenomena on community capital Source: Author

4.4.2 The Appropriate Definition

As discussed previously, neighborhood-scale planning is practiced with the intent of influencing the quantity and quality of community capital stocks. Each definition of neighborhood, as discussed in Section 4.2 defines within it, identifiable and distinct community capital: social capital, economic capital, and political capital.

A social neighborhood comprises a residential neighborhood whose spatial boundaries are defined by a system of social interactions. Thus, the residents of the community define the boundary of the neighborhood. These residents themselves comprise the social capital of the neighborhood. The spatial boundary described by a socially defined neighborhood can be the basis for defining the economic capital of the neighborhood in terms of the relevant built capital of the neighborhood. The spatial boundary described by a socially defined neighborhood also can be the basis for defining the environmental capital of the neighborhood in terms of the natural resources and natural processes that affect the neighborhood.

The spatial boundary of a physical neighborhood is defined by the design of the neighborhood. These designed neighborhoods attract residents, who primarily decide to settle into the neighborhood, with prior knowledge of the physical and structural boundaries, attractions, and limitations of the neighborhood, and identify themselves as residents of that neighborhood, when questioned about where they live. Thus, though it may be presumptuous to state that they experience a sense of belonging to a community, they certainly identify as members of the associated physical, residential community that they inherit with the purchase of a house, where the said residential community necessarily has an imposed identity and boundary. Thus, these residents can constitute a meaningful social capital of the neighborhood. Neighborhood associations are often created for such physical neighborhoods as well. Also, these neighborhoods, by definition contain within them distinctive economic and environmental capitals. Examples of such communities are Radburn, Greenbelt, Maryland, etc.

A political neighborhood is identified by the existence of a neighborhood association or other political organization that may be created as a form of governance, 28

for example, to enforce covenants, to influence the local political process, or to control and/or organize neighborhood activities. Thus, the definition is relevant to the cultural and spiritual stock of social capital. As discussed in Section 4.2, a political neighborhood is aimed at increasing citizen participation and involvement at the community and neighborhood levels, to address the problems of cultural and structural barriers. Cultural barriers are identified within the social system of a community, and structural barriers are identified within the economic system of a community. Thus, a political neighborhood is relevant to the economic capital and social capital. The political organizations or neighborhood associations that control neighborhood activities define the spatial boundary of a political neighborhood. Thus, meaningful environmental capital is encompassed within the spatial boundaries of the neighborhood.

Hence, it is concluded that all three types of neighborhood can be valid units to be evaluated for sustainability in terms of long-term neighborhood viability. Therefore, the definition of neighborhood for applying the index should depend on the nature of the planning questions for which the index is being applied.

4.5 Conclusion

In this chapter, neighborhood is presented as a valid unit of planning analysis for research. This chapter also demonstrates that the three components of sustainability i.e. the social, economic, and environmental capital are relevant to all three definitions of neighborhood and can vary in meaningful ways at the neighborhood scale where the variation is influenced by neighborhood scale phenomena. There is a discussion on the alternative definitions of neighborhood that might be appropriate for the purposes of assessing neighborhood sustainability: social neighborhood, physical neighborhood, and political neighborhood. It is concluded that the definition of neighborhood for applying the index should depend on the nature of the planning questions for which the index is being applied.

Chapter 6 and 7 further discuss how the three capital are composed of components, subcomponents, indicators, and variables, and how each indicator selected varies at the neighborhood scale, what forces influence the indicator, and how the forces affect the index value.

CHAPTER 5

DEFINING BOUNDARIES

The process of identifying the boundaries of a neighborhood depends in part on the definition of the neighborhood that is appropriate to a particular planning initiative or study i.e., social, physical, or political. However, researchers acknowledge that defining neighborhoods in any given case is problematic (Galster, 1986; Chaskin, 1998; Rohe & Gates, 1985; Banerjee & Baer, 1984; Cox, 2000). This is because “neighborhood” does not mean the same thing to people inside and outside of a neighborhood. Barton (2000, p. 3) states “Neighborhood is a loaded concept.” He further states (p. 3) that “[t]o some, particularly children and old people, it appears a self-evident reality, familiar and homely, providing daily needs and a community of shared experience and mutual support.” However, to others, it is a concept that is no longer relevant in contemporary times. Also, different professions and separate literatures describe neighborhoods differently. Furthermore, urban designers, health and social care professionals, banking institutions, etc. recognize different neighborhood constructions. Consequentially, there is no one ideal way of defining a neighborhood and its spatial boundaries. The question therefore is, how then should neighborhoods and their boundaries be defined for the purpose of this thesis.

I present in this chapter an argument that a heuristic approach to defining neighborhood boundaries for the purposes of assessing community sustainability is appropriate given the pragmatic approach to defining neighborhoods in the context of specific planning applications. Section 5.1 therefore discusses the alternative approaches to defining neighborhood boundaries.

5.1 Approaches to Neighborhood Boundary Identification

Planning organizations use one of two strategies to define a neighborhood: (1) adopt pre-defined boundaries, which came into existence at the time of subdivision or were established by forces endogenous or exogenous to the neighborhood or (2) redefine boundaries based on the perceptions and activities of residents and formalize the boundary. It is to be noted however, that both approaches can result in highly variable sets of boundaries, some of which may overlap.

5.1.1 Boundaries Defined by Endogenous or Exogenous Groups

Planning organizations sometimes adopt neighborhood boundaries defined by groups endogenous or exogenous to a neighborhood. These groups may define neighborhood as a political, social, or physical unit.

o Political Neighborhood: Chaskin (1998, p.4) cites the work of Taub et al. (1977), Florin (1989), and Combs (1984) who describe internal groups that are endogenous organizations that seek to define neighborhood boundaries, relevant to their objectives, to “clarify their constituencies, gain legitimation within the neighborhood, [and] make connections with the broader resources in the cities.” These may be formally constituted neighborhood associations or ad hoc organizations formed to address a specific issue or problem.

o Social Neighborhood: Chaskin (p.5) also cites the work of Taub et al. (1977; 1982) stating that social neighborhoods are defined by external entities such as banks and real estate developers that seek to define new markets; government agencies, and private service providers that define neighborhoods for program administration purposes, and researchers who attempt to “aggregate perceptions of local residents and those of agency heads and leaders of community organizations into composite maps” or who use census tracts as “proxies for neighborhoods to facilitate analysis.”

o Physical Neighborhood: Physical neighborhoods are defined by government agencies for program administration purposes. They also may be formally defined at the time that subdivision plats or planned unit developments (PUDs) are proposed or approved. In some cases, formal neighborhood associations are established at the time subdivisions are created to provide a governance structure for maintaining infrastructure that is not dedicated to a local government entity. Thus, a political neighborhood may be defined on the basis of physical neighborhood.

According to Taub et al. (1982), although these entities put forward definitive neighborhood boundaries, the boundaries put forward by any two for the same general neighborhood rarely match. Often however, these organizationally defined boundaries agree on the central blocks of a given neighborhood with consensus falling off at the outer edges.

5.1.2 Boundaries Defined by Individual Residents

Planners have tried defining neighborhood boundaries by using resident perceptions. However, in most instances, this approach has not been successful in producing a reliable synthetic definition of neighborhood boundaries for planning purposes. The inability to identify neighborhood boundaries correctly based on resident

perceptions has been analyzed by numerous scholars and two obstacles to this approach are most popularly advocated. Firstly, as Chaskin (p. 4) states, “the degree of consensus that can be reached about any particular set of boundaries is questionable” since neighborhood perceptions are likely to vary among different groups within a residential population. Chaskin presents the works of Suttles (1972), Hunter (1974), and Guest & Lee (1983) in stating that residents, especially urban residents, often view themselves as members of more than one community/neighborhood. Some residents may perceive different boundaries of their neighborhood or may see themselves as members of different neighborhoods altogether, based perhaps on distinctions between the boundaries of the physical, social, or functional dimensions of neighborhood. According to Chaskin (p. 3), Lee & Campbell (1990) found that African Americans are likely to stress social dimensions more than whites, hence they delimit a smaller area as their neighborhood. Chaskin cites Guest & Lee (1984) who claim that women, long-term residents, and residents with small children tend to define a smaller neighborhood area, and few don’t even tend to think in terms of neighborhood at all.

Secondly, even for individuals, neighborhood may be a nested concept rather than a unitary concept. Thus, resident perceptions result in non-definitive neighborhood boundaries. This approach to boundary identification is of little advantage to a planner except that it provides him with a powerful tool to motivate and/or instill interest, excitement, empowerment and/or responsibility in the local residents towards their neighborhood.

One of the methods that can be employed by planning organizations to define neighborhood boundaries based on the collective perceptions and activities of the residents rather than on the political or programmatic objectives of endogenous or exogenous groups is called cognitive mapping. Chaskin (1998) commends the method of cognitive mapping as described by the works of Downs & Stea (1973), and Gould & White (1974). Individuals are each asked to draw a set of neighborhood boundaries. Each set is comprised of maps drawn each day, as individuals map their choice of mass flows through movement, social interaction, and interpretation of their surroundings. The elements of influence in the construction of these sets of maps include: o Physical

1. the paths through which the individuals choose to move, i.e. the network of streets, roads, walkways, pedestrian paths, etc. 2. the identification of landmarks (Lynch, 1960) 3. unique edge boundaries e.g. rivers, major roads, commercial zones, buffer zones, etc.

o Social

1. unit of linked spaces where various activities occur or which encourage social activities 2. the unit as a set of social relationships 3. the unit as a symbolic entity – maybe historical, marked by the presence of certain social groups, etc. o Functional

1. the area’s demographics 2. the presence of major institutions 3. the perception of safety or danger 4. the presence of opportunities.

Thus, although planners have used the technologies of cognitive mapping to systematically define neighborhood boundaries based on individual perception, this method is generally not useful for developing a synthetic definition of neighborhood boundaries for planning purposes because of high variation among residents.

5.1.3 Selecting an Appropriate Method

Given the two broad approaches to defining the boundaries of a neighborhood, in this section, I have discussed the alternatives to boundary definition available to a planner under each of the two sets of circumstances:

1. Boundaries have already been defined for use in planning practice: In instances where the boundary may have already been defined by a previous attempt either by endogenous or exogenous groups or using resident perceptions, for use in planning practice, it is feasible to use the boundaries if they are appropriate to the planning tasks/questions for which the assessment of community sustainability is needed.

In instances where multiple boundaries exist, the boundary definition that is most relevant to the planning task/questions for which the sustainability assessment is needed may be adopted.

2. Boundaries have not already been defined or those that have been defined are not relevant to the planning tasks/questions for which the sustainability assessment is needed: There are three options open to the planner when such a situation exists. Each option has distinct advantages and disadvantages associated with it. The planner may (a) attempt to aggregate cognitive maps of residents, (b) use census boundaries, or (c) use subdivision boundaries not currently recognized as neighborhood boundaries. As discussed earlier, the disadvantage with cognitive mapping in that the degree of consensus on the

neighborhood boundary falls off at the edges, although, most of them concur on the central features of the neighborhood. Therefore, aggregating the variable boundaries by different residents is a difficult task. There is no formal methodology to such an aggregation. Generally speaking, based on the different boundaries sets from different maps cognitively mapped by residents, planning organizations develop boundaries, and formalize them after consensus is reached and alterations made during neighborhood meetings. Thus this option may result in non-definitive boundaries.

On the other hand, using census tract boundaries or sub-division boundaries is also not a fall back option. A census tract or subdivision in itself is not socio- intuitive. Therefore, the inherent lack of sociocultural character of a census tract or sub-division boundary may disqualify it as a unit of analysis for the measurement instrument. Only in the unique case will a census tract or subdivision boundary used to define a neighborhood, also reflect its sociocultural and socioeconomic dynamism.

5.2 Conclusion

Thus, it is concluded, after an evaluation of neighborhood boundary identification methods, that to demarcate a neighborhood, planners could adopt either of the two strategies; employ pre-defined boundaries or redefine boundaries using resident perceptions. The instrument can then be applied to the demarcated spatial unit of neighborhood.

It should be noted that this chapter just provides two alternate (and widely practiced) approaches to demarcate and assess our unit of analysis as a whole and distinguish it from its surroundings for the purpose of applying an instrument to it to determine its sustainability in terms of its long-term viability.

CHAPTER 6

INSTRUMENT STRUCTURE AND INDICATOR MEASUREMENT

This chapter addresses three broad issues regarding instrument construction. Firstly, for the purpose of creating an instrument, development criteria are required to guide the design and development of the instrument: one set of evaluation criteria for the instrument and a second set of evaluation criteria for the indicators. I have in this chapter presented the first criteria set (the criteria set for indicators is provided in next chapter). I have then presented a discussion on the structure of the instrument and the method of measurement. Secondly, for the purpose of methodological measurement, indicators of sustainability can be subclassed, based on the nature of variable data collected and sustainability conditions defined. I have therefore come up with a system of classification, where the system of classification is organized by the nature of the variable data collected and the sustainability conditions imposed. Also, I have presented a definition of sustainability standards that can be applied to the index. The third topic of discussion is the problem encountered by missing data. This will have a definite impact on sustainability values. I have discussed alternative ways of addressing this problem, which can be applied towards calculating sustainability index values.

Section 6.1 outlines the development criteria for the instrument of measurement. Section 6.2 discusses the structure of the instrument. Section 6.3 discusses measurement method. Section 6.4 discusses sustainability standards. Section 6.5 presents a methodology for the calculation of indicator sustainability values. Section 6.6 discusses indicator typology. Section 6.7 discusses the problem of missing variables.

6.1 Instrument Evaluation Framework

The purpose of the instrument evaluation framework is to provide criteria that guide design and evaluation of the structure of an instrument that is developed to measure the sustainability of neighborhoods. Adherence to these guidelines is intended to ensure: (1) correctness in the form and structure of the instrument and (2) methodological soundness in the aggregation of the component values of the instrument.

35 The evaluation criteria for the instrument are encompassed within three tests. Satisfying these three tests is a fundamental requirement for the instrument to measure sustainability at the neighborhood level successfully. The three tests are:

(1) the test of applicability, (2) the test of fundamental composition, and (3) the test of methodological soundness.

Each of these is described in the following sections.

6.1.1 Test 1: The Test of Applicability

The test of applicability requires that the unit of analysis of the instrument designed to measure local sustainability, be the neighborhood unit.

6.1.2 Test 2: The Test of Fundamental Composition

The test of fundamental composition requires each of the following criteria to be satisfied to demonstrate soundness in instrument composition, where the instrument is a composite measure of sustainability:

1. Face Validity – Babbie (1998, p.151) states that a composite measure should exhibit face validity. Face validity is the appropriateness of the components of a composite measure. The Im is a composite measure of sustainability of neighborhood. Thus, it must be comprised of the three fundamental components that are the pillars of sustainability – the social capital of neighborhood, the economic capital of neighborhood, and the environmental capital of neighborhood.

2. Unidimensionality – Babbie (1998, p.151) states that an Im should be unidimensional. Thus, the Im should represent only one dimension i.e. sustainability of neighborhood. It is not appropriate for the Im to be used as a measure of another variable, even if the two variables are empirically related. For example, even though sustainability and sustainable development are empirically related, the Im should not be a structured in such a way that it could also be used as a composite measure of sustainable development.

3. Specificity - Babbie (1998, p.151) states that the nature of the items included in the index determines how specific or general a composite measure is. Each component should address all aspects of the capital that it represents, for the composite measure to be specific. Thus, each component of the Im should be very specific such that:

36 a) The environmental component measures the level of sustainability of natural resources, ecosystem services, and natural processes that we rely on in some way, and the aesthetic beauty of nature of the neighborhood.

b) The social component measures the level of sustainability of the human as well as the cultural and spiritual capital in the neighborhood, which includes the education, health, and skill level of residents, as well as their sense of community.

c) The economic component measures the level of sustainability of the built capital of the neighborhood, which includes services like water, sewerage, and electricity.

6.1.3 Test 3: The Test of Methodological Soundness

The test of methodological soundness is framed by a criteria set. For the Im to satisfy the test of methodological soundness, it should meet each of the following criteria:

1. Mathematical Function: The Im should be an appropriate and defensible mathematical function of these components of partial sustainability1– the social capital of neighborhood, the economic capital of neighborhood, and the environmental capital of neighborhood.

2. Component Aggregation: Each component should be a mathematical function of individual indicators.

3. Scale: Each component should be measured at a comparable scale (Schneider, 1994), for example, aggregate local data or disaggregate regional data. Local data cannot be equated directly to regional data.

4. Unit: Each component should be measured in comparable units (Schneider, 1994). For example, three components measured in miles and a fourth component measured in tons per day are not comparable units. All three components should either be measured in miles or tons per day. Alternatively, components could be unitless ratio values.

6.2 Structure of the Instrument

The structure of the instrument could be approached from several different viewpoints. One approach to instrument construction is to identify indicators that can be measured though available data sets, such that it gives a measurement of the sustainability of each of the three components. These indicators could be aggregated to

37 define the average status (quantitative) of each component. A further aggregation of the three components could give a value, which should be proportional to sustainability (See Fig. 6.1). Such an average is called an index (Fisher, 1967). Webster’s (Webster’s dictionary of English usage, 1989) defines index to be a number derived from a series of observations used as an indicator or a measure, as of a condition, property, or phenomenon.

The sustainability index (S.I.) will be comprised of three capital stocks, each of which will be assigned a quantified value called a partial sustainability value. Each capital stock is in turn comprised of components and sub-components. Indicators will inform each subcomponent. There is no set number of indicators that should inform a subcomponent. Each subcomponent can be seen to represent a pie. Each indicator is seen as a slice of pie, representative of the complete pie. The average quality of two slices of pie will give a more confident approximation rather than one of the pie as a whole. Similarly, an approximation of three slices will give a more confident approximation of the whole pie. However, theoretically, each slice of pie in itself represents the pie. So, the number of indicators only increases the confidence. However, since we do not know the confidence level, extrapolation from two indicators rather than one will fine tune our observation but we would not be certain about the range of precision.

Fig 6.1 - Contribution of economic, environmental, and social capital towards sustainability Source: Author

38 Each indicator will be determined by one or more variables. Aggregation of variable values to define each indicator can be done with either the geometric mean or arithmetic mean, depending on the type of data at hand.

Where indicators interact with each other, the geometric mean should be used. Where indicators are independent, the arithmetic mean should be used.

The geometric mean is given by the formula: N G.M. = √ (a * b * c * ………. * n)

An average found by the arithmetic mean is given by the formula: A.M. = a + b + c + ………. + n N

Aggregation of indicator, subcomponent, component, and capital stock values to define the subcomponent, component, capital stock, and index values will be done by the geometric mean, the assumption here being that all are interrelated. All indicators, subcomponents, components, and capital stocks will have equal weightage in all calculations.

It is known at this point that the S.I. will be a composite measure that has a generic structure and will be comprised of numerous indicator sets. It should be noted that the indicator pool of the proposed S.I., when assembled could further be analyzed to check for distinctiveness of indicator variables and the data. Visualization of data along three dimensions may have resulted in overlapped data, where it may be that indicators measure more than one variable and therefore phenomenon. Factor analysis is one method that is sometimes employed to reduce the dimensionality of a dataset. It is employed to condense the many variables of components into much smaller number of indices by identifying patterns in their inter-relationship, with as little loss of information as possible (Bartholomew, 1987). Thus, factor analysis could be performed on the variables of the three components of the index, to determine if there is any possibility of reducing the dimensions based on principal components.

There are two drawbacks to this method. Many researchers question the utility of performing factor analysis since in most instances the principal components generated do not provide a meaningful aggregation and interpretation. After performing factor analysis on the ESI dataset, the ESI report (World Economic Forum, 2002, p. 47) concluded that factor analysis is not a useful way to reduce the dimensionality of the ESI data set. Using the variables of the ESI dataset, 17 principal components were generated; using 22 indicators, 5 principal components were generated. However, the principal components generated in either case did not provide a meaningful aggregation and interpretation.

The other possible drawback to this method in the context to sustainability of indicators may be as reported by the ESI report (2002) which states that too much data

39 reduction through the process of factor analysis also may prevent exploration of causal interactions. Thus, it is preferable to keep the indicators separate “to permit investigation into potentially useful causal connections among them and to permit reporting of measures that are relevant for discrete policy communities.”

Hence, it is proposed that the components of the S.I. not be subject to factor analysis to eliminate the possibility of data reduction based on principal components, in view of the conclusions of the ESI report.

6.3 Method of Measurement

The S.I. employs a multiscale analysis assessment methodology where the lowest unit of measurement in the sustainability index is the variable. Data is to be collected for variables that define each indicator. The partial sustainability value of a variable is determined by the ratio of the site conditions divided by a measure of sustainable conditions (defined by a minimum sustainability standard.) Aggregation of the variable ratio values by way of the geometric mean will yield ratio values. Aggregation of the ratio values at each subsequent level using the geometric mean will thus also yield ratio values. The final sustainability index value is also a ratio value that can be converted into a percentage.

S.I.

C apita l (Sm ; S s; S e)

Components (Sn )

Sub-components (S’n )

Indicators (In )

Variables (sn )

Fig. 6.2: Hierarchy within index structure Source: Author 40 6.3.1 Ratio Scales

Schneider (1994) states that multiscale analyses require ratio scale units. He states that multiscale analysis can be visualized as the operation of zooming in towards greater detail, or conversely, expanding the scale to reveal larger scale patterns and processes. To represent this in formal terms, so that calculations can be made, units that can be halved or doubled repeatedly are required. Also, units that can be combined to make new units via multiplying or dividing are required. Ratio scales possess both these properties.

6.3.2 Mathematical Rules for Ratio Scales

Schneider (1994) states that mathematical rules that apply to ratio units differ from those that apply to numbers. He examines rules that have been laid out for ratio scales. I am highlighting only the ones that are relevant to the construction of the sustainability index. Rules 1 and 2 address addition and subtraction: ratio units can be added or subtracted only if they have similar or equal units. Schneider clarifies this with an example of apples and oranges, stating that apples and oranges are not similar units. Thus, we cannot add them. However, we can define a new unit called “fruit” that allows the addition of one group of fruit (all apples) to another group (all oranges). In this instance, we are defining a new unit called sustainable community capital (=fruit) and the fruits that are being added are three groups of capital stocks (partial sustainability of economic capital, environmental capital, and social capital.) Rule 3 and 4 address multiplication and division: ratio units can be multiplied, whether equal, similar, or dissimilar. This generates new units that sometimes have a name, and sometimes do not. The division of one quantity with another gives a measure of scaling. A unit scaled to a similar number is a number with no units. These four properties lay the basis for measuring sustainability for our purposes. To calculate the partial sustainability value, a scaled value will be calculated. Each scaled value is a ratio of an actual existing quantity, quality, count, mass, volume, area, etc. against certain standards. These standards determine sustainable states.

6.4 Sustainability Standards

The index is based on a set of standards that can be called the minimum sustainability standards. The minimum sustainability standards uses two types of standards for sustainability conditions 1) safe minimum standards and 2) quality of life standards. Discussed below are the two types of standards with a brief description of some other terms that I will use in the following chapters.

6.4.1 Basic Terms

o Sustainable condition: (X)

41 The user will define these conditions based on minimum sustainability standards or level of service standards.

o Site condition: x1

These constitute measures of the actual state of individual variables that comprise social, economic, and environmental capital within a given neighborhood.

6.4.2 Minimum Sustainability Standards

Minimum sustainability standards can be based on any of the two sources:

6.4.2.1 Safe minimum standards

Safe minimum standards are set by some standards based on human health or safety or environmental quality and set by some recognized authority such as a state or federal regulatory agency. The safe minimum standards (SMS) rule is to prevent reductions in the natural capital stock below the safe minimum standard identified for each sub-component of the stock unless the social opportunity costs of doing so are ‘unacceptably’ large. Therefore, most SMSs are relative rather than absolute and values may change over time. SMS values for environmental capital can be taken from regulatory bodies like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, World Health Organization, etc. Safe minimum standards also apply to measures of human capital, which are part of Social Capital.

6.4.2.2 Quality of life standards

The economic and/or environmental capital determines to a large extent our quality of life (QOL). Dimensions like housing, infrastructure services, aesthetic beauty, transportation services, ecosystem services, access to amenities and recreation, green spaces, reduced crime, high living standards, etc. in a neighborhood determine its quality of place (QOP) and QOP is largely accepted to directly affect the QOL. The physical characteristics that determine QOP consequently directly affect the measures of QOL (Andrews, 2000). Infrastructural impacts along these dimensions determine QOP, and impacts of human need along these dimensions define QOL. A sustainable neighborhood should exhibit high QOP and QOL. Normative quality of life or economic standards that affect QOL are set by some organization external to the neighborhood, for example level of service standards for highways set by the state department of transportation or level of service standards for schools or parks set in a city or county comprehensive plan.

6.5 Calculation of Indicator Sustainability Values

The index structure is set up such that at each level, i.e. the indicator, subcomponent, component, and capital stock level, values will be computed within the

42 range of 0 to 1. Final computed values at the variable level also would be on a 0 to 1 scale. However, there will be two approaches to variable measurement. For some variables, sustainability may be defined as binary, i.e. the presence or absence of a certain condition, event, or phenomenon. For such variables, the value taken will be either 0 or 1. However, for most sustainability variables, sustainability is not a simple 0/1 situation (Becker & Jahn, 1999), i.e. sustainability or lack of sustainability. Thus, there can be a gray area of “partial sustainability” with values between 0 and 1. These variable values will serve as partial sustainability vales for indicators, further, indicator values will serve as partial sustainability values for sub-components, and so forth. Thus, partial sustainability values (s) at each hierarchal level will be calculated (Refer Fig. 6.2). Consequently, values of indicators, sub-components, components, capital stocks, and the index will range between 0 – 1. A value of zero will be interpreted as zero partial sustainability. A value of 1 will be interpreted as complete partial sustainability. There will be two assumptions to this calculation.

1. For calculation purposes, the value of 0 will be taken as .001, representing .1% sustainability or 99.9 % unsustainability ~ zero sustainability, since multiplying other indicator values with a zero indicator value will give the index a value of zero.

2. For neighborhoods where one or more of the components of environmental capital may not be present within the neighborhood boundary, a value of s=1 will be assigned to each component not present, since the danger to exposure and hence the possibility of negative impact on the health, welfare and safety of residents is assumed to be zero.

To calculate the sustainability value for a capital stock variable, the user must set a value for the sustainable condition (X) based on a minimum sustainability standard or quality of life standard. Three criteria can then be defined for partial sustainability conditions based on a measure of the actual state of the capital stock variable (x1):

1) when sustainability is x1 < X, 2) when sustainability is x1 ≥ X, and 3) when sustainability is X’ < x1 < X.

6.6 Indicator Calculation

I have classified indicators into three basic types, based on how they are calculated: Type A, Type B, and Type C. All three indicator types are based on minimum sustainability standards i.e. SMS or normative quality of life standards. A fourth special set of indicators – Type D, is defined for binary indicators. In the following section, I outline the calculation methodology to be adopted to calculate indicators that

43 fall under each category. All the indicators in the S.I. will be evaluated based on one of these four categorizations.

6.6.1 Type A

Type A classification of indicators is based on criterion 1 where sustainability is x1 < X. Thus, for lower values of x1 ( x1 < X) sustainability is higher. s = 1 – (x1 / X) Conditions: If x1 = X or x1 > X then, s = 0

Illustrative Example 1: The calculation of the variable total suspended particulate matter can be an illustrative example. Total suspended particulate matter should be less than 70 micrograms per cubic meter annually (USEPA, 2003).

Thus, for X = 70 o For x1 (Site conditions) = 10; s = 1 – 10/70 = 1 – 0.14 = 0.86, i.e. 86% partial sustainability o For x1 = 35; s = 1 – 35/70 = 1 – 0.5 = 0.5, i.e. 50% partial sustainability. o For x1 = 70; s = 0, i.e. zero partial sustainability.

6.6.2 Type B

Type B classification of indicators is based on criterion 2 where sustainability is x1 ≥ X. For higher values of x1 ( x1 ≥ X) sustainability is higher. s = (x1 / X) Conditions: If x1 = X or x1 > X then, s = 1

Illustrative Example 2 Green buffer width should be 10 ft. Thus, X = 10 (this is just an assumption for illustrative purposes). o For x1=3; s=3/10 = 0.3, i.e. 30% partial sustainability o For x1=5; s=5/10 = 0.5, i.e. 50% partial sustainability. o For x1 ≥ 10; s = 1, i.e. 100% partial sustainability.

6.6.3 Type C

Type C classification of indicators is based on criterion 3 where sustainability is X’ X) sustainability is lower and is unsustainable at X1 AND for lower values of x (x1 < X’) sustainability is lower and unsustainable at X1’. Condition:

44 If X’ < x1 < X s = 1 Condition: If x1 > X s = 1 - (x1 – X) / (X1- X) Condition: If x1 < X s = 1 - (X’ - x1) / (X’-X1’) Condition: If X1’ > x1 > X1 s = 0

Illustrative Example 3 Surface Water Quality: pH should be between 6.5 and 8.5. Thus, 6.5 < x1 < 8.5. Also, unsustainability occurs at pH 3 and 11. o For x1= 6.0, s = 1 - (6.5 – 6.0) /(6.5-3) = 1 - .14 = .86, i.e. 86% partial sustainability o For x1= 9.0, s = 1 - (9 - 8.5) /(11 – 8.5) = 1- .20 = .80, i.e. 80% partial sustainability o For x1= 6.7, s = 1, i.e. 100% partial sustainability o For x1= 2, s = 0, i.e. 0 % partial sustainability

6.6.4 Type D

This is based on the presence of one or more conditions, events, or phenomena.

x = Presence or absence of condition. For example, presence of institution(s) is the representation of an institution in the neighborhood. Variable x can hold only two values – 0 or 1. If no institutions exist, a value of zero will be assigned to x. Presence of an institution is assigned a value of 1. If more than one institution exists, they will be counted as weight (w). For example, if three organizations exist, x will be assigned a weight of 3. s = x ^ w

The value of “w” will be added to the nth geometric mean of all factors while aggregating Type D indicators with other types of indicators. Thus, if the geometric mean of 3 other indicators (s1, s2, s3) and a type D indicator (s4) is being taken, then s not the fourth root of (s1 * s2 * s3 * s4). It will be the (w+4) root of the product of the four indicators.

45 6.7 Missing Data

For a given neighborhood, there may be several important variables that may have no coverage data. In such cases, one of two strategies can be adopted: (1) creating a primary source data base, (2) imputing values from (a) models or (b) census or sample data.

6.7.1 Creating a Primary Source Data Base

The first strategy is to construct a new database sourced by primary data. This could be created from a database that has the required information at the neighborhood scale or through data collection at the neighborhood scale. Primary data for a particular neighborhood can be collected by field surveys/observations. An example of primary data collection is Roadwalk, which is a method of collecting primary data where researchers walk down the neighborhood roads and take stock of each dwelling unit individually and/or other buildings within the neighborhood, and record all the data relevant to the study for which data is being collected and/or administer surveys to neighborhood residents.

6.7.2 Imputing Values

In situations where it is not possible to obtain values for certain variables, the second strategy of imputing missing values can be adopted.

6.7.2.1 Imputing values from models

ESI (2002) states that value imputation can be done by employing models. Model data can be generated successfully, in many instances, for variables like water quantity, air pollution emissions, etc. Tested models are fed best available empirical observations as inputs. These models use tested methods for generating estimates of either individual variables or interaction among variables. However, model data are sensitive to scale and place rather than source. Thus, it is imperative to be selective when choosing modeled data. ESI states that the models that their calculations drew from were subject to scientific peer review and/or endorsed by international organizations. A similar procedure should be followed when relying on models to impute data for the purpose of calculating the sustainability index of a given neighborhood.

6.7.2.2 Imputing values from census or sample data

There may be situations where neither collecting primary data nor imputing data from models is feasible. In such a situation, I suggest creating S.I. value ranges where two alternatives are available to the planner for value imputations: (1) where data are derived from several polygons intersected by the neighborhood, e.g. census blocks, or they are derived from a larger spatial unit within which the neighborhood is located, e.g.

46 census block group or census tract, and (2) where data are census data or sample data. In the case of census data, no standard error is needed. However, in the case of sample data, standard error will be used to define value ranges. For example, assume a situation where there is no census data but sample data are available for the following variable:

Missing data for one variable: Number of years of education The strategy would be to calculate the range of values between which the mean for the neighborhood would lie. i.e. calculate the highest and lowest values possible in the given situation. The lowest mean possible in a neighborhood will be highschool i.e. 12 years of education. Compare this with the value for the U.S. Census data for the census block in which the neighborhood is located. If the mean value for the census block is higher than 12 years, it is reasonable to assume that the mean number of years of education in that neighborhood is not lower than 12 years. However, if the mean for the census block is lower than 12 and is at 10 years, it is logical to set the lowest value of the mean at 10 years for the neighborhood. The highest mean for the neighborhood could only be 22 years (this however is quite improbable, since it means that more or less every individual has completed graduate level studies). Thus, our minimum – maximum range is 10 –22 years. Thus, we input first a value of 10 for the variable and calculate our S.I.(say 70%) value. Next, we input a value of 22 for the variable, and calculate our new S.I. (say 74%), which will be higher than the previous S.I. Thus, the neighborhood sustainability should be within this range i.e. it could be stated that the neighborhood has a probable sustainability of 70 –74%.

Missing data for two or more variables: In situations where there are missing data for two or more variables, the strategy should be to calculate the probable minimum- maximum (mini-max) data value for each variable, and then calculate two values of S.I., one by inputting minimum values for each variable, and the second by inputting maximum values for each variables. This again creates the probable range of sustainability levels for the neighborhood. So as in the previous example, if there is missing data for the variable “incidence of AIDS” and the variable “mean travel time to work” as well as the variable “mean number of years of education,” then a set of probable mini-max values for each variable will be calculated. Mini-max for “Incidence of AIDS” – If this value for the block group is 16 persons per 100 people, with a margin of error of 4, then the mini-max for the block group would be 12 – 20 persons per 100. If the neighborhood has a population of 500 people, this translates to a probable mini-max value of 60 – 100 people in the neighborhood. Mini-max for “Mean travel time to work” – following the same logic as above, if the mean travel time to work is 25 minutes for the census block, with a margin of error of 3, then the probable mini-max value of neighborhood would be 22 – 28 minutes. S.I. range: To calculate the minimum probable S.I. value, the minimum probable value of 10 (mean years of education); 100 (incidence of AIDS); 28 (mean travel time to work) will be input and an S.I. value will be obtained (say 65%). Then the maximum probable value of 22 (mean years of education); 60 (incidence of AIDS); 22 (mean travel time to

47 work) will be input and the maximum probable S.I. value will be obtained (say 75%). Thus, it could be stated that the neighborhood has a probable sustainability of 65 –75%.

6.8 Conclusion

The S.I. is based on a multi-scale calculation method. The calculation of S.I. is based on a hierarchical calculation process, where a ratio scale is used at the indicator level. There are four computational methods for ratio measurement. The final SI is also a ratio value. This value represents a mean SI value.

NOTE: 1Becker et al. (1999) state that sustainability is not a static zero-one situation i.e. sustainability or lack of sustainability. Thus, there will be a grey area of partial sustainability.

CHAPTER 7

INDICATORS FOR THE THREE COMPONENTS OF COMMUNITY CAPITAL

A neighborhood is a dynamic unit within which the quantity and quality of the three stocks of community capital are in flux over various time scales, as are the individual components, subcomponents, and variables that comprise each form of capital. Forces endogenous to the neighborhood influence the conditions and resources of the three system(s) in a neighborhood. However, to a significant degree external stochastic and deterministic forces also influence the conditions and resources of the three system(s) in a neighborhood. Focus here is on measuring the current state of system conditions within the neighborhood, where the primary focus is on the state of the community capital as a result of the impacts on it. Any measure at single points in time provides only a snapshot of their current state and no insight into the rate or direction of change.

In this chapter, I have compiled indicator pools for the components and subcomponents, based on variables that can be used to measure the sustainability of the relevant components and subcomponents of each capital stock. In this chapter, I analyze each capital stock separately. Section 7.1 explains the process I followed to select indicators based on a set of evaluation criteria and puts forward the indicator evaluation criteria. It also lists the sources that I consulted in the process of developing the components, subcomponents, and indicators for each capital stock. Section 7.2 operationalizes the indicator evaluation criteria and discusses how I have tested the indicators against it. Sections 7.3 through 7.5 present the indicators for each component and subcomponent of the three community capital stocks: environmental, economic, and social capital. For each indicator, I have described forces that act on the variable it represents, whether those forces are exogenous and/or endogenous to neighborhoods, and the extent to which those forces can be influenced by local action, i.e. by residents of the neighborhood.

7.1 Components, Sub-components, and Indicators

The Sustainability Index (S.I.) is set up in a hierarchy of capitals, components, sub-components, indicators, and variables. The entire process of creating the

49 measurement instrument has been time consuming. Regardless, working within the time and resource constraints of this thesis work, I have been able to operationalize a limited number of indicators.

I followed a stepwise procedure to set up the framework of the S.I. I first took the three capitals i.e. the environmental, economic, and social capital, and based on a review of the literature, I broke each capital down into components. The environmental capital was broken down into ambient air quality, ambient surface water quality, ambient ground water quality, and soil contamination. I decided to exclude natural resources, ecosystem services, and micro and macroclimate from the environmental capital. This is because although residential neighborhoods may benefit from one or more environmental resources, either directly or indirectly, it is not reasonable to measure resource use since environmental resources are part of global natural capital and the index does not attempt to measure the impact of the neighborhood on global sustainability. Its assessment is limited to neighborhood viability. Also, it is not feasible to conceptualize the integrity of residential neighborhood ecosystems in a meaningful way. The only relevant ecosystem services are (1) micro-climate regulation as a function of vegetative cover (in addition to the heat island effects of heat-absorbing surfaces = manmade capital), (2) storm water flow regulation as a function of vegetative cover (in addition to the amount of impervious surface = manmade capital), (3) erosion control and sediment retention as a function of vegetative cover, (4) recreation and aesthetic values as a function of biological diversity. However, there are no defensible ways of measuring these services. It is not possible to define a standard for local temperature that qualifies as a safe minimum standard for microclimate regulation. On the other hand, extremes and thresholds are important and can be defined. Vulnerability to extremes is a function of the ability of habitable structures to counter health threats to residents.

Vulnerability to the forces of natural hazard can pose significant risks to the long- term viability of neighborhoods. Vulnerability to natural hazards is a function of how and where habitable structures and public facilities and infrastructure are built. This is therefore measured as part of economic capital.

The economic capital was broken down into quality of housing stock, infrastructure capacity, and infrastructure connection. The social capital was broken down into human and social and spiritual stock. Refer to table 7.1, which is a summary of the components and sub-components of the three capital stocks with lists of the sources I consulted.

The components were further broken down into sub-components and then variables. I then attempted to determine, again based on a literature review, what forces influence these variables, the nature of the forces, whether endogenous or exogenous, and whether they impact the health, safety, and welfare of residents of a neighborhood. If I determined that the literature records that the health, safety, and welfare of residents is affected, then I tried to identify within the literature the indicators

50 that best measure the state of the variable. The indicators I selected were then subjected to seven indicator evaluation criteria. Indicators were assigned scores from 1 to 3 on each of the seven criteria, and only those indicators with an arithmetic average of 2 or more qualified to be incorporated into the index. The next step was then to determine from the literature existing safe minimum standards and quality of life/level of service standards for all indicators. In instances where such standards do not exist, I tried to determine analogues to safe minimum or quality of life standards, again based on a review of the literature. The standards were then incorporated into the index as minimum sustainability standards. The next step was to work out a methodology that should be followed for data collection, and the need for value imputation in instances of data limitations.

Table 7.1: List of Sources Consulted

ENVIRONMENTAL CAPITAL Components: Ambient Air Quality, Ambient Surface Water Quality, Ambient Ground Water Quality& Soil Contamination.

Sources Consulted: Brown et. al (1994), Burton et. al (1978), Cartwright (2000), Criterion Planners FSCN INDEX (2000), Hart (1999), Hawthorn (2000), Heinz Center Report (2000), Iqbal (1983), USEPA (1989, 2003), Meadows (1998), Munsinghe et. al (2001), Pearce & Warford (1993), Solecki et. al (20033), Stenier (2000), Wackernagel & Rees (1977), World Bank Institute (2000), World Economic Forum (2001, 2002), World Health Organization (1997). ECONOMIC CAPITAL Components: Quality of Housing: Subcomponents: Overcrowding, Intergenerational Value, Vulnerability to Natural Hazards, Temperature Settings. Infrastructure Capacity: Subcomponents: Sewage System, Parks and Recreational Facilities, Transit Headway, Storm Water Drainage, Water Pressure for Firefighting. Infrastructure Connection: Emergency Response Time, Access within Neighborhood.

Sources Consulted: American Water Works Association (2003), Andrews (2000), Baer & Williamson (1988), Barton (2000), Boyd (2001), Building Research Association of New Zealand (2003), Bureau of Justice Assistance (1997), Brown (1994), Cartwright (2000), Chuang (2001), Criterion Planners FSCN INDEX (2000), Edward & Wright (2000), Godschalk & Parker (1974), Goward et al. (1985), Hamilton 1994), Hart (1999), Hawthorn (2000), Lynch (1981, 1984), USEPA (1989, 2003), Meadows (1998), Munsinghe et. al (2001), Myers et al. (1962), National Crime Prevention Council (2002), National Fire Protection Agency (2003), National Institute of Water and Atmosphere (2003), BEES - National Institute of Standardization and Technology (2002), Pearce & Warford (1993), Pitkin & Richman (2001), Providence Water supply Board (1996), Public Health Association (1948), South Central Texas Regional Water Planning Group (2002), Steiner (2000), State of Florida Department of Transportation (2002), Wackernagel & Rees (1996), Weiwel et al. (1993), World Bank Institute (2000), World Economic Forum (2001, 2002), World Health Organization (1997). SOCIAL CAPITAL Components: Human Stock: Subcomponents: Health, Education, Skills. Cultural and Spiritual Stock: Resident-Resident Connections, Resident-Community Connections, Community- Institutional Connections.

Sources Consulted: Ajzen & Fishbein (1980), Brown et. al (1994), Brody (1991), Cartwright (2000), Checkoway (1995), Choldin 1985), Chaskin & Brown (1996), Coleman (1988), Converse (1964), Connerly (1985), Criterion Planners FSCN INDEX (2000), Doob (1996), Fan (1988), Florin & walker (1989), Gans (1961), Guest & Lee (1983), Hart (1999), Hawthorn (2000), Lee (1990), Iyengar et. al (1982), Meadows (1998), Munsinghe et. al (2001), Pearce & warford (1993), Rubin (1998), Taub et. al (1977), Wackernagel & Rees (1977), World Bank Institute (2000), World Economic Forum (2001, 2002), World Health Organization (1997), Zaller (1990, 1992).

51 Nevertheless, the index developed is limited in its comprehensiveness since I could include only a select set of subcomponents and indicators of each capital. This is because of conceptual and practical difficulties in defining minimum sustainability standards or analogues to minimum sustainability standards for subcomponents and indicators of each capital, especially the social capital.

7.2 Indicator Evaluation Criteria

The validity of the Sustainability Index (S.I.) is contingent on the quality of the indicators. Hollander (2002, p. 4) lists nine criteria defined by the works of Atkisson et al. (1997), Maclaren (1996), and Mitchell et al. (1995) of which seven have been adopted in this thesis to evaluate the indicators.

7.2.1 Relevance

Indicator is pertinent, appropriate, and applicable to the neighborhood (Hollander, 2002).

A neighborhood sustainability indicator measures the sustainability of a variable of a component of community capital. It measures the state, process, or input/output of an activity, behavior, or condition and hence determines the sustainability of a variable. An indicator, whose data does not provide sufficient or meaningful information about the sustainability of the variable to be measured, is not relevant to the neighborhood in question.

7.2.2 Validity

An indicator must constitute a correct operational measure for the variable, must be based on a sound causal relationship, and must properly define the domain to which the findings can be generalized (Yin, 1989), such that the indicator approximates the concept under consideration (Babbie, 1998).

There are four distinct forms of validity discussed in the social science literature that can be applied to indicators: (1) Content , (2) Internal, (3) External, and (4) criterion related validity.

7.2.2.1 Content validity

An indicator exhibits content validity if it establishes correct operational measures for the concepts being studied. Thus, for each of the three components, it is important to first establish the phenomena that are being studied and then demonstrate that the indicators selected are in fact correct measures of the phenomena. Yin (1994) states that three tactics can be employed to increase content validity. The first is the use of

52 multiple sources of evidence, in a manner encouraging convergent lines of inquiry. The second is to establish a logical chain of evidence. The third is to have the indicators reviewed by key persons. Either of these could be adopted to establish the content validity of the sustainability indicator.

7.2.2.2 Internal validity

An indicator exhibits internal validity if it can be shown to be based on a valid causal relationship, whereby certain conditions are shown to lead to other conditions, as distinguished from spurious relationships. In circumstances where a causal relationship cannot be directly established, an inferential relationship may be established. In the case of an inferential relationship, consideration of all rival explanations and possibilities, and establishment of convergent evidence is proof in support of internal validity. The function of an indicator is to serve as a measure. An indicator that is based on a valid causal relationship shows internal validity. Ways of addressing internal validity are pattern-matching, explanation-building and time-series analysis (Yin, 1989). Any one of these could be adopted to establish the internal validity of a sustainability indicator.

7.2.2.3 External validity

External validity involves establishing the domain to which a study’s findings can be generalized. An indicator of neighborhood sustainability will exhibit external validity if similar states of the phenomenon of concern yield similar values for the indicator independent of the neighborhood within which the phenomenon is measured.

7.2.2.4 Criterion-related validity

Criterion-related validity is a measure of the strength of association between an indicator of neighborhood sustainability and the phenomenon being represented by the indicator. The Pearson correlation r may be used to describe the strength of linear association between two quantitative variables (Agresti & Finlay, 1986).

7.2.3 Consistency and Reliability

Yin (1989) states that the theory here is that if a later investigator followed exactly the same procedures to operationalize an indicator, as described by an earlier investigator, and conducted the same study all over again, the latter investigator should arrive at the same findings and conclusions. One pre-requisite for this is the need to document all the procedures followed in the earlier case. In many cases, case study researchers have provided poor documentation.

I will not test indicators on this criterion since (1) it is not within the time frame imposed by a master’s thesis to investigate whether the procedures followed by each later investigator to operationalize the indicator were exactly the same as the previous

53 investigator, and (2) not all researchers have documented all the procedures they followed. So, even if such an exercise were to be undertaken, the results would be handicapped in producing complete overviews.

7.2.4 Measurability

An indicator exhibits measurability if data can be obtained for the neighborhood (Hollander, 2002), i.e. if it is possible to measure the indicator at the neighborhood scale. This refers to both the availability and the possible availability of data.

7.2.5 Clarity

An indicator exhibits clarity if it is unambiguous, uncontested, and clear (Hollander, 2002). The person(s) interpreting the indicators must not disagree on what the indicator is measuring. For example, an indicator like the energy efficiency of a community, which is a synthetic indicator for environmental capital, should not be interpreted by others to be actually a synthetic indicator of economic or built capital.

7.2.6 Comprehensiveness

An indicator exhibits comprehensiveness if it reduces the need for several indicators by representing several facets of the variable (Hollander, 2002). An indicator is comprehensive if it is synthetic, i.e. it eliminates the necessity for several indicators by replacing them with a single one that captures the essence of multiple indicators. For example, a synthetic indicator like “percent of products which are durable, repairable, or readily recyclable or compostable” as opposed to a traditional indicator “tons of solid waste generated” is a more effective indicator, which measures the conservative and cyclical use of materials.

7.2.7 Cost Effectiveness

An indicator exhibits cost effectiveness if use of the indicator is not prohibitively expensive (Hollander, 2002). It should be possible to directly measure the indicator or obtain data for it with the limited resources and time of the researcher, community, or planning body undertaking the evaluation.

7.2.8 Attractiveness to Media

Hollander (2002) says that an indicator should be acceptable to the majority (Hollander, 2002). This criterion will not be applicable to evaluating indicators. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, this is not a meaningful criterion. The media are not trained in the science of constructing and evaluating indicators to test for validity. Thus, they are not qualified to make informed and sound decisions regarding the validity of any indicator. They might reject an indicator which scores satisfactorily on other criteria simply because it is not attractive. On the other hand, an indicator that may not score

54 satisfactorily on other criteria may seem attractive. Secondly, if an indicator is subject to all the other eight criteria, this criterion becomes redundant. Attractiveness is not a feature, which influences the measurement (outcome) of the indicator. All the other criteria may influence the measurement (bias the outcome, give wrong results, etc.). However, attractive or not is independent of the result.

7.2.9 Comparability

An indicator should be general enough so that communities can be compared (Hollander, 2002) and so that the indicator can be applied to most communities. Though different neighborhood settings may require different indicators, the indicator should not be so unique that it can be applied to only one neighborhood. For example, an indicator like percent tree canopy cover is not comparable since it would vary with the local rainfall regime and soil.

7.3 Indicator Evaluation and Selection

The indicators that are tabulated later in this chapter in sections 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6 have been tested against the indicator evaluation criteria. I have followed a value- focused approach (Keeney, 1992) in undertaking such an evaluation.

7.3.1 Indicator Selection

Each indicator was selected because (1) at the neighborhood level, it can be shown to be central to the measurement of the partial sustainability of the subcomponent of a component of community capital and (2) relevant literature supports the indicator in terms of its validity, reliability, etc. criteria. Therefore, only those indicators are tabulated that are pertinent to neighborhoods. Further, only those indicators are presented that also exhibit medium to high criterion-related validity. Indicators that were reviewed and found to exhibit low criterion-related validity are not discussed or tabulated. Tables presented in Appendix II assess the indicators against the other six evaluation criteria based on the method described in section 7.3.3.

7.3.2 Presentation and Interpretation of Indicators

The objective of the evaluation framework as discussed in the previous section is to ascertain that indicators selected satisfy certain objectives as represented by each criterion. Keeney (1992, p. 23) states that “the general principle of thinking about values is to discover the reasoning for each objective and how it relates to other objectives.” To make a decision in a consistent manner, I have adopted the strategic objectives approach. Keeney (p.275) states “strategic objectives, if clearly and unambiguously stated can be of considerable help in ensuring consistency across decisions.” Keeney further states that the degree to which an objective is achieved is

55 measured by an attribute. For important objectives, for which it is difficult to come up with natural attributes, a set of constructed attributes can be developed. Constructed attributes are developed specifically for a given decision context. Constructed attributes involve the “description of several distinct levels of impact that directly indicate the degree to which the associated objective is achieved. It is essential that the descriptions of those impact levels be unambiguous to all individuals concerned about a given decision” (p. 100).

In the context of the decision making at hand, the six objectives in the indicator evaluation criteria have to be met satisfactorily for an indicator to be included in the index. In the following section, I have therefore provided reasoning for each objective and applied a constructed attribute to it.

Each criterion is measured on a three-point scale. To each of the criteria for an indicator, a value of 1 or 3 is assigned for low or high and a value of 2 for not known.

The overall assessment of indicators is based on the arithmetic mean of these three scores; any indicator that has a score between 2 and 3 is assumed to exhibit medium to high performance on the evaluation.

7.3.3 Conditions Applied to Operationalize the Indicator Evaluation Criteria

1. Validity: (high = 3, medium = 2, low = 1) The tables of indicators in Appendix II display the criterion-related validity of the indicators expressed in terms of high or medium correlation that exists between the indicator and pollution or public health, welfare, and safety. This is substantiated by studies conducted by other researchers. Discussions on the variables (sections 7.4, 7.5, and 7.6) quote multiple sources, in a manner that encourages converging lines of inquiry (content validity), discuss whether the relation can be generalized (external validity) (yes = 3, no = 1), and whether the causal relationship that exists between the indicators and components or sustainability phenomena are direct or inferential (internal validity) (yes = 3, not known = 2, no = 1).

2. Measurability: To test the indicator against this criterion, I have determined whether data for this indicator have been collected at the neighborhood level (yes = 3) or if the data collected at a regional or national scale are applicable at the neighborhood level (yes = 3). If not, then one of the three strategies for dealing with missing variables will be utilized, namely primary data collection, data imputation from models or data imputation from census data to create a range, as described previously in Chapter 6, section 6.7 (primary = 3, modeling = 2, and range = 1).

3. Clarity: To test the indicator against this criterion, works/studies of other researchers and/or authors that contest the indicator, should be recorded and if there are such studies, then weight given to these studies should be determined, in light of other studies that support the indicator. I have included only those indicators that have

56 none or only weak contestations. Weak contestation is defined as contests by less than 1% of the authors. Of all the indicators and related literature I reviewed, there were only isolated instances of contestations. One of the reasons for this may be that literature on sustainability indicators is relatively new, and not much critical work has been published regarding indicators. Most of the literature attempts to define sustainability indicators and applications only. Thus, none = 3 and weak = 2.

4. Comprehensiveness: The best way to measure the comprehensiveness of an indicator is by determining if the inclusion of this indicator eliminates the need to include other indicators (yes = 3, no = 1, not known = 2).

5. Cost effectiveness: This criterion can be assessed only for indicators for which data already exists. For indicators where it is possible to collect the required data within the limited time and resources of the researcher, community, or planning body undertaking the evaluation scoring is 3. Not possible = 1.

6. Comparability: I have tried to apply this criterion by determining the types of neighborhoods to which the indicator under consideration cannot be applied. There are different land use categories and physiographic province in which neighborhoods can be located. Differences in land use patterns and/or physiography might affect the comparability of some indicators applied to different communities.

To hypothesize, let us assume that there are x physiographic provinces and y land use patterns. Hence, there are x * y = xy types of locations where neighborhoods may exist. Thus, a ratio of the number of neighborhood locations where an indicator may not be applicable to xy will give an idea of how comparable the indicator is. Therefore, in theory, the following values can be assigned: generalization for all = 3, for none = 1, and not known = 2. However, as I was not able to determine the value of xy, I assigned a value of 2 to all indicators.

7.4 Components and Subcomponents of Environmental Capital

Forces endogenous to the neighborhood as well as external stochastic and deterministic forces affect environmental capital in a neighborhood. The environmental capital comprises the following components: ambient air quality, ambient surface water quality, ambient ground water quality, soil contamination, and ambient noise levels. All the components are critical at the neighborhood scale with reference to sustainability of the neighborhood in terms of its long-term viability. As has been discussed earlier, the quality and quantity of environmental capital can affect the quantity and quality of social capital. For example, increase in particulates in the air poses a health hazard for human beings. Similarly, noise levels above human comfort threshold levels can cause hearing loss and soil contamination poses a health hazard for human beings.

57 A neighborhood can be part of one or more ecosystems. Human uses of the ecosystem at the neighborhood scale include extraction of food, air, water, fiber, recreation, etc. These uses can result in a disruption of the ecosystem and introduce pollutants that have the potential for adverse effects on public health and safety in a given neighborhood. Therefore, an assessment of the state of the ecosystem(s) within which a neighborhood is located is essential to assess its long-term viability.

The focus of assessment is on outdoor ambient environmental quality. The indicators are to be based on safe minimum criteria or standards for human health or environmental quality promulgated by the federal and/or state government. Where state standards are appropriate, I have used those from Florida.

Human activities can significantly alter natural climate or pollute air, surface water, ground water, and soil. Human activity also can generate noise levels that are above human comfort levels. These comprise the five subcomponents of neighborhood environmental capital. Such an assessment of the neighborhood’s environmental capital includes an assessment of the following subcomponents.

7.4.1 Ambient Air Quality

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has defined national ambient air quality standards as the maximum levels of selected pollutants, with an adequate margin of safety, that are acceptable to safeguard public health and welfare. There are two categories of ambient air quality standards that are applicable to pollutants – primary air quality standards and secondary air quality standards. Secondary air quality standards are the more stringent of the two. However, secondary ambient air quality standards, though more stringent, are not health-based standards but welfare based and therefore will not be applied. Therefore, primary standards will be adopted to assess for pollutants based on federal standards prescribed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (40 CFR, part 50), see Appendix I, table A-1. Proposed indicator is Type A; variable: concentration of pollutant.

EPA has promulgated ambient air quality standards for six criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide (CO); lead (Pb); nitrogen dioxide (NO2); ozone (O3); particulate matter (PM10 and PM25); and sulphur dioxide (SO2). CO is an asphyxiant. It is specifically created as a result of incomplete combustion of fossil fuels, like oil, gas, coal etc. Therefore, neighborhoods near a highway may be most susceptible. Sources are both exogenous and endogenous to the neighborhood. Lead is a metabolic poison. Soil from dense urban areas, lead based paints, soil especially from smelter areas are primary sources of lead contamination. Therefore, urban areas are most susceptible.

Nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide are common respiratory irritants, and therefore can irritate the lungs and lower resistance to respiratory infection. Nitrogen oxides are an important precursor to the formation of ground level ozone and acid rain. Particulates are respiratory fibrotic agents. The sources of nitrogen dioxide, sulphur

58 dioxide, and particulates are – transportation sources and stationary combustion sources (USEPA, 2002; Blumenthal, 1985) that can be both endogenous and exogenous to the neighborhood.

Local initiatives to reduce air pollution may include reporting possible suspect sources of pollution and adopting non-polluting practices like regular checkups on motor vehicles, and regulating combustion sources, if any. Local governments can seek to reduce air pollution from transportation sources by reducing traffic through travel demand management programs intended to increase public transit use, ride sharing, walking, bicycling, and telecommuting, tough environmental impact assessments for local zoning changes and development approval that generate air pollution due to transportation or stationary combustion sources.

7.4.2 Ambient Surface Water Quality

Surface water bodies are comprised of freshwater bodies - rivers, lakes, streams, and ponds, as well as estuaries and near shore marine water bodies. The basis for identifying ambient water quality standards that will serve as neighborhood indicators is difficult. This is because the parameters for ambient water quality are defined by federal legislation (Clean Water Act), but the standards are set by the states based on best-use classifications for different categories of water bodies. There are no minimum federal ambient water quality standards, but guidance is issued and the federal government has oversight and the ability to enforce rules. The relevant standards, therefore, depend on the state in which a neighborhood is located and the water use classification of the water body.

I have based the index standards for water quality on Florida standards which are defined for 5 classes (Chapter 62-302.530 Florida Administrative Code): I – potable water supply; II – shellfish propagation or harvesting; III – recreation, propagation and maintenance of a healthy, well-balanced population of fish and wildlife [subdivided into (a) predominantly fresh waters and (b) predominantly marine waters]; IV – agricultural water supplies; and V – navigation, utility, and industrial use. Therefore, the standards will differ for different neighborhoods depending on the classes of surface waters that lie within their boundaries and the state in which the neighborhood is located.

Of relevance to a generic index, of the five classes, only Class III standards are relevant to the objective of assessing neighborhood environmental capital. These will be applicable where a neighborhood is situated immediately on the shores of a marine water body or a river bank or a lake, pond etc. Class I standards are not relevant unless a neighborhood obtains its drinking water supply from a surface water body that lies within the neighborhood itself. Class II standards do not apply to a residential neighborhood. Class IV standards are not relevant unless agricultural land uses are included within the neighborhood and surface waters used for irrigating agricultural land in the neighborhood also are located within the neighborhood. Class V standards do not apply to a residential neighborhood. Therefore, an assessment of the surface water

59 quality for a given neighborhood should be undertaken primarily against class III standards.

Section 62 – 302.530 of the Florida Administrative Code (see Appendix A, table A-2) lists criteria for surface water quality. The water body in question will be evaluated against each applicable parameter. All parameters are Type A indicators, except: (1) Alkalinity, DO, and transparency are type B indicators. (2) pH is a type C indicator.

Variable: concentration of pollutant. The geometric mean of all the individual indicators will give the subcomponent value for ambient surface water quality. The geometric mean of all the water bodies in the neighborhood will give the component value for ambient surface water quality for the component. This is because all the water bodies within a neighborhood would collectively reflect the water quality as well as aesthetic quality of the water bodies. In a situation where a neighborhood does not include a water body within its boundaries, the subcomponent will be assigned a value of 1 that will count towards the S.I. value calculation. This is because, as stated earlier in section 6.5, the danger to exposure to contaminated water and hence the possibility of negative impact on the health, welfare and safety of residents is assumed to be zero.

Water clarity, dissolved oxygen, oxygen-demanding substances, and nutrients when not in compliance with the standards reflect the presence of or potential for excessive algal or aquatic weed growth. This reduces the aesthetic value of the water body for the residents of the neighborhood. The presence of excessive levels of coliform bacteria indicates that there may be potential threats to public health. Pollutants may pose health hazards, as they may be allergens, like detergents, pesticides and herbicides; metabolic poisons like fluoride, heavy metals; or mutagens or carcinogens like radioactive substances (USEPA, 2002; Blumenthal, 1985). Thus, forces both endogenous and exogenous to the neighborhood impact ambient surface water quality.

Local initiatives to reduce surface water pollution may include reporting possible suspect sources of pollution, agreeing to non-polluting practices like preventing urban, chemical etc. runoff to surface water bodies, and initiating regular community efforts to cleanup of water bodies.

7.4.3 Ambient Ground Water Quality

Ambient ground water quality in a neighborhood is relevant where residents of a neighborhood rely on local ground water for drinking water drawn from private wells. If the neighborhood receives drinking water from a central source, the quality of that water will be covered under the infrastructure component of economic capital. EPA has set maximum contaminant levels for ground water that is used for public drinking water supplies. Pollutants include microorganisms, inorganic chemicals, organic chemicals, and radionuclides (see Appendix I, table A-3). Health effects and sources of each contaminant are included in table A-3. Effects of chemicals and heavy metals have

60 been discussed in previous section. Therefore, in this section, only the relevant standards are provided.

Sources can be either endogenous or exogenous to the neighborhood. Sources of organic chemicals are agricultural run off containing fertilizers, wastes from livestock, dairy, poultry accidents, or inadequate precaution in handling fertilizers near well sites.

The sources of microorganism contaminants are defectively or improperly designed or installed septic tanks, sewage sludge land application, undetected sewage system leakage, and improperly maintained and enclosed bioremediation sites that are the major sources for pathogens in ground water.

If the neighborhood does not rely on local ground water for drinking water drawn from private wells or no contamination exists in ground water if the residents draw water from the well, then the subcomponent will be assigned a value of 1 that will count towards the S.I. value calculation. This is because, as stated earlier in section 6.5, the danger from exposure to contaminated soil and hence the possibility of negative impact on the health, welfare and safety of residents is assumed to be zero.

All indicators are type A; variable: concentration of pollutant.

Local initiatives to reduce ground water pollution may include reporting possible suspect sources of pollution, agreeing to non-polluting practices like preventing fertilizer, live stock etc. runoff into well sites, exercising precaution while handling chemicals near well sites, and initiating regular community efforts to cleanups around aquifer recharge areas.

7.4.4 Soil Contamination

Sources of soil contamination are leakage of wastewater from factories, commercial facilities, and septic tanks. These sources can be either endogenous or exogenous to the neighborhood. Soil pollution is closely related to ground water pollution. Exposure to polluted soil can cause skin diseases and long-term health issues for human beings. Toxic substances in soil may dissolve to contaminate ground water or be carried by runoff into surface water. Dust from contaminated soil may also be a source of air pollution.

Soil contamination is relevant only where such pollution may have occurred, i.e. “brownfields” where industrial activity resulted in soil contamination with hazardous wastes/substances, or where atmospheric deposition has resulted in elevated levels of toxic pollutants such as mercury.

The Federal Comprehensive Environmental Remediation and Compensation Liability Act (CERCLA) or Superfund is designed to address sites with hazardous substances. Hazardous substances are defined, by reference to substances listed or

61 designated under other environmental statutes, in CERCLA section 101(14). CERCLA hazardous substances are also listed by EPA in 40 CFR. Part 302. CERCLA also details the procedures and standards that must be followed in remediating these sites, and also contains enforcement provisions. Section 121 of CERCLA sets forth the statuary requirements for cleanup standards. However, these standards can only be enforced in CERCLA designated sites, and not all neighborhoods. Therefore, for the purpose of defining minimum sustainability standards for the S.I., the EPA list of hazardous substances and the CERCLA standards for cleanup that relate to soil contamination can be used to evaluate neighborhoods for soil contamination.

A given neighborhood therefore should first be checked to establish if known or suspected contamination is likely to be present. For the neighborhood under consideration, if soil contamination exists, assuming data availability on the contaminants, the cleanup standards can be applied to the S.I. The indicator type is A. If more than one contaminant is present, then the geometric mean of the contaminants will be used. If no contamination exists, then the subcomponent will be assigned a value of 1 that will count towards the S.I. value calculation. This is because, as stated earlier in section 6.5, the danger from exposure to contaminated soil and hence the possibility of negative impact on the health, welfare and safety of residents is assumed to be zero.

Local initiatives to reduce soil pollution may include reporting possible suspect spills or sources of pollution and exercising caution while handling hazardous chemicals to prevent spills.

7.4.5 Ambient Noise Levels

Noise above human comfort thresholds can cause discomfort to medical conditions damage to the ear and hearing loss and/or negative impacts on psychological well-being. In a given neighborhood, there can be two sources of noise pollution: noise from industrial plants, factories, airports, heavy traffic including rail and non-rail modes, etc. exogenous to the neighborhood or endogenous forces like traffic within neighborhoods. Neighborhoods are connected to arterial or collector roads of necessity, and if these roads move large volumes of traffic, this can be a source of noise pollution, especially if the neighborhood is located near a large intersection. Noise pollution from rail modes is relevant only if the neighborhood is located near railway tracks.

The Federal Highway Administration noise regulations apply only to projects where a state transportation department has requested federal funding for participation in the improvements. However, the Federal Highway Administration noise standards can be applied to the index for evaluation purposes since the standards are based on human health and safety. Noise levels are measured in hourly weighted sound level in decibels (dBA) for a given category type of land use. Standards are provided in Appendix A, Table A-5.

62 Noise pollution from industrial plants, factories etc. are relevant only where neighborhoods are in the vicinity of the source. However, there are no enforceable ambient noise standards that apply to residential areas/neighborhoods. For noise to legally constitute a nuisance, the character, volume, frequency, duration, time, and locality play important roles (Sullivan, 2003). Nevertheless, ambient noise levels, adopted from Federal Highway Administration noise regulations, can be applied to the S.I.

Noise pollution from aircraft noise is relevant only where neighborhoods are in the vicinity of airports. The Federal aviation Administration Advisory Circular 91-36C, Visual Flight Rules (VFR) Flight near noise sensitive areas identifies 2,000 feel AGL as the minimum recommended altitude for overflights of noise sensitive areas when aircrafts are not landing or taking off from an airport.

Noise sensitive areas include residential areas. Pursuant to Part 150, the FAA encourages local jurisdictions with responsibility for land use planning and zoning to reduce and prevent noise sensitive land uses to develop at DNL 65 dB and above zone near an airport. Therefore, noise levels in a residential neighborhood in proximity to an airport should be less than DNL 65 dB at the minimum.

Proposed indicator: Type A; variable: hourly weighted sound level in decibels (dBA) for a given category type. Values equal to or lower than standards are sustainable. Higher values are not sustainable.

Local initiatives to reduce noise pollution may include reporting the source of noise to either stop or regulate the character, volume, frequency, duration and time of the noise pollution. Local government may establish zoning ordinances or other control measures to preclude new development that may be a source of noise pollution, adjacent to residential neighborhoods

Table 7.2: Components, subcomponents, and indicators of environmental capital

Components Subcomponents Relevant Indicators Evaluation Relevant Standards score

• Ambient air quality

• Criteria pollutants Type A: Concentration of 2.833 National Ambient pollutant Air Quality Standards

63 Table 7.2: Continued

Components Subcomponents Relevant Indicators Evaluation Relevant Standards score

• Ambient surface 2.833 Section 62 – water quality Type A: Concentration of 302.530 FAC lists pollutant the criteria for surface water Type A: Level of water quality. characteristic

Type B: Level of turbidity, alkalinity, and DO

Type C: Level of pH • Ambient ground Type A: Concentration of 2.833 National Primary water quality pollutant Drinking Water Regulations • Soil contamination Type A: Concentration of 2.833 Site Specific pollutant Relevant Standards

• Ambient noise Type A: Noise levels in 2.833 Federal Highway levels decibels (hourly weighted) Administration / for a given category type FAA noise of land use. regulations

7.5 Components and Subcomponents of Economic Capital

The economic capital primarily comprises built up and landscaped spaces, services, and transportation networks. Both the built up space and landscaped space are comprised of distinct elements. Services are comprised of water systems, sewer systems, storm water management systems, electric and gas utilities, etc. Transportation networks have distinct patterns. Existing land use defines and controls the arrangement of the elements and movement of people and masses in a neighborhood. Buildings and structures comprise the built up space. Buildings could be residential, commercial, industrial, etc. Buildings in residential neighborhoods comprise dwelling units, which may be single-family detached units, semi-detached units, multifamily units, etc., public buildings like community centers, churches, schools, etc., and few commercial units. Other structures may be stadiums, pergolas, etc. Soft landscape elements comprise open spaces like parks, lawns, plants, shrub cover, tree cover, fountains, moving water, etc. Hard landscape elements comprise streetlights, benches, paving, bus stops, rails, signage, statues, etc. Transportation networks comprise roads, waterways, and airways.

64 The built infrastructure of a given community should exhibit inherent sustainability in terms of construction as well as function to ensure longevity of the manmade capital and higher quality of life for its residents. An enduring economic capital makes the neighborhood more sustainable in terms of long-term viability. A well-connected neighborhood provides better access, contributes to higher psychological health of the residents, encourages pedestrians, as well as reduces the risks of pedestrian injury. The following sections examine each of the following facets of sustainability of economic capital: neighborhood location, quality of housing stock, infrastructure capacity in terms of level of service, and infrastructure connection (intra neighborhood).

7.5.1 Quality of Housing Stock

Housing constitutes the central component of manmade capital in a residential neighborhood. Edwards & Wright (2000, p. 12) state that

“No society is balanced and in harmony with nature unless housing is sustainable. Housing, as against individual houses, is central to the perceptions of quality of life; attractive homes in well managed estates are as important as education and job security to urban satisfaction. Professional institutes have a duty to serve society in the provision decent housing.” This means housing that is desirable, well maintained, free of crime and of low energy design. Edwards & Wright (p. 20) characterize sustainable housing as that which is “a long term robust, yet flexible resource.”

Quality of the housing stock is therefore relevant to long-term residential neighborhood viability. Chiefly, forces that are endogenous to a neighborhood affect the quality of housing stock. Myers, Baer, & Choi (1962) state that indicators for housing conditions are from two broad categories: (1) physical and economic characteristics of the housing stock such as structure types, size of units (number of rooms or bedrooms), age of structures, adequacy of plumbing, presence of physical defects, and cost (rent level or value) and (2) characteristics that measure a household’s fit to their housing units including level of crowding (persons per room) and the level of affordability (percentage of household income spent on the rent or mortgage). I have defined economic capital to exclude financial stock i.e. money, adopting Hart’s (1999) argument that financial stock is only a way to value and transfer all the different things within each of the three capitals – environmental, economic, and social capital. Therefore, measures like cost of housing and level of affordability of housing will be excluded from the S.I. Similarly, measures like structure types (Myers et.al, 1962) and low energy design (Edwards & Wright, 2000) would not be relevant to the S.I. since the impact of the neighborhood outside the neighborhood boundary i.e. on regional/global sustainability is not being evaluated.

“Decent housing” therefore would be housing, which has good living conditions, has good intergenerational value, is in a crime free neighborhood, and is in good physical state. This section therefore discusses each of the following sub-components:

65 overcrowding, property safety, intergenerational value, housing condition, compliance with fire codes, compliance with plumbing codes, and vulnerability to natural hazards.

7.5.1.1. Overcrowding

Meyers, Baer, & Choi (1996) state residential overcrowding is a normative judgment of the degree of “crowding” that is acceptable to policy making organizations. They state that crowding is defined as number of people per room (PPR) and that the conventional standard applied by local and federal governments in 1940 was 2.00 PPR,1.50 PPR in 1950, and 1.00 PPR by 1960. Another measure of crowding developed in 1960 is households per unit, however, there is no scientific literature for choosing one measure of crowding over the other.

Meyers et al. (1996) quote Fisher (1959) who states that assumptions about national income distributions, assessments of the nation's housing quality, and prospects for the future are the basis for defining the standards for crowding. Therefore, crowding is influenced both by forces exogenous and endogenous to a neighborhood. Based on that, Meyers and Rickman assert that overcrowding may not be a valid indicator of housing needs but only of service needs like schools, trash collection, and parking provision in neighborhoods and communities, since the assumptions defining overcrowding are no longer relevant in current times. Nevertheless, WHO (2002) states that overcrowding in homes increases the potential for unhygienic conditions and stress due to limited personal space. Thus, overcrowding affects public health as well as welfare.

Pitkins & Rickman (2001) state that researchers use the unproven standard of 1.00 PPR. Thus, a crowding standard can be applied as one measure of the sustainability of the housing stock in a neighborhood. To measure this, the following procedure could be adopted:

1. Calculate overcrowding status for every DU. A ratio of number of persons per dwelling unit to the number of rooms per dwelling unit is computed. If this ratio is less than or equal to one, there is no overcrowding. However, if this value is less than one, then the dwelling unit is overcrowded. i.e. Overcrowding (DU) = no. of persons in DU / no. of rooms in DU Let the number of DU’s in a neighborhood that are thus overcrowded be x1 Let the total number of DU in the neighborhood be X. Therefore, variable is DU’s overcrowded. Proposed indicator: Type A: Number of overcrowded DU’s in the neighborhood.

2. To calculate the percentage of DU in a given neighborhood that are overcrowded, divide x1 by X. Sn = 1 – number of overcrowded DU’s / Total DU’s in neighborhood

It is assumed that sustainability is Sn = 1.

Local initiatives to address overcrowding may include efforts to either invest in extension of the dwelling unit to adequately provide for the residence of its inhabitants or secure appropriate housing within or outside of the neighborhood. The 1937 Housing Act empowers local government to establish Local Housing Authority (LHA) that can build and operate low-rent public housing projects, so that housing is more affordable and overcrowding is reduced.

7.5.1.2. Property safety

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has set up standard definitions of crime as part of their national Uniform Crime Reporting program. These definitions are used by all law enforcement agencies across the nation to ensure uniformity and comparability of crime data. The FBI crime definitions are categorized as part I and part II and include definitions of crime against property: burglary, arson, and vandalism. Property safety is influenced both by forces exogenous and endogenous to a neighborhood. One method to quantify the threat to each dwelling unit from each of the three defined crime types is to determine the ratio of the annual incidence of each crime type to the total number of DU’s in the given neighborhood i.e. incidence count of vandalism in a given neighborhood to the total number of DU’s in the neighborhood, incidence count of burglary in a given neighborhood to the total number of DU’s in the neighborhood, and incidence count of arson in a given neighborhood to the total number of DU’s in the neighborhood. A geometric mean of each will give the subcomponent value. Thus,

Sn = 1 – geometric mean [(incidence count of burglary/total no. of DU’s), (incidence count of vandalism/total no. of DU’s), (incidence count of arson/total no. of DU’s), etc.]

The assumption here is that zero count for each crime is sustainable.

Local initiatives to prevent crimes against property may include efforts to work in collaboration with the neighborhood police and/or security officials and/or set up of other security measures.

7.5.1.3. Intergenerational value

Intergenerational value is an exogenously defined quality of life standard. Edwards & Wright (2000) state that intergenerational asset value is one-way to approach measurement of housing condition. For an asset to exhibit intergenerational value, it should have longevity such that it is available in habitable condition to future generations. An objective measure of what constitutes durable housing is then required. A disinvested property is one where the property owner is in tax arrears and is a relevant measure of diminution in the intergenerational value of properties in the neighborhood. This is because a measure of disinvested properties is relevant to the sustainability of the neighborhood as it impacts the welfare of residents that are tax

67 delinquent property owners since authors like Pitkin & Richman (2001) state that tax delinquent properties may be prone to foreclosure. They state that unscrupulous predatory subprime lenders typically target tax delinquent neighborhoods because they signal that homeowners may be susceptible to a predatory loan. They also state that although subprime lending undoubtedly may have a positive impact of giving residents with low credit worthiness or residents of neighborhoods under-served by banks or other traditional money lending organizations access to credit that may help preserve homeownership in neighborhoods by giving owners a reprieve in the face of a financial crisis, it may will force homeowners to pay higher interest rates and excessive fees, money that could have gone to maintain their properties. As a result, homeowners in such communities may face an unfair level of debt-burden that may influence their ability to build assets and deprive them of the resources needed to maintain their properties. In some cases the burden may be too great and the owner may end up losing their home through foreclosure. Pitkin and Richman also state that several studies by authors like Gruenstein & Herbert (2000), HUD (2000b), and NTIC (1999) have looked descriptively at relationships between subprime lending and foreclosures. Thus, forces both endogenous and exogenous to the neighborhood influence intergenerational value.

For a given neighborhood, the intergenerational value for its housing stock is low for higher number of disinvested properties. Here, the variable to be measured is number of property owners in tax arrears. The proposed indicator: Type A; variable: number of property owners in tax arrears in a given neighborhood (xn). The assumption here is that sustainable state is when no property owner is in tax arrears i.e. xn = 0 and Sn = 1.

Sn = 1 – (No. of property owners in tax arrears / total no. of property owners in neighborhood)

Local initiatives to reduce tax delinquency within the neighborhood may include efforts by the neighborhood association/individuals to procure funds from banks and/or other traditional sources of loans. Local initiatives also include the residents agreeing to invest in the maintenance of their property.

7.5.1.4. Housing condition

Housing is an exogenously defined SMS and QOL standard. Forces both endogenous and exogenous impact housing condition. Housing in a neighborhood may be in a state of disrepair or degeneration such that it is condemned as uninhabitable by appropriate authorities on inspection. Uninhabitable housing is non-durable and impacts resident welfare, and hence a relevant measure of sustainability. The higher the number of livable houses in a given neighborhood, the higher the viability of its stock. The variable here being measured is the number of houses designated as uninhabitable. Proposed indicator: Type A; variable: number of houses designated as uninhabitable in

68 a given neighborhood (xn). The assumption is that sustainable state is when no house in a neighborhood is condemned as uninhabitable i.e. xn = 0.

Sn = Housing standard = 1 – (no. of DU's condemned as uninhabitable / total Du's in a neighborhood

Local initiatives to reduce the number of uninhabitable houses in a neighborhood may include the Local Housing Authority (LHA) assisting owners of condemned houses by providing them an opportunity to live in low rent well maintained public housing, efforts by residents living in rented units to ensure that landlords/apartment managers provide adequate maintenance services. Local initiatives also include the residents who own the property agreeing to invest in the maintenance of their property.

7.5.1.5. Compliance with fire codes

Fire codes are exogenously defined safe minimum standards that dwelling units should be in compliance with to (1) reduce the probability of fire hazard and (2) reduce the risks of injury and damage from fire to resident health and property. Therefore a measure of DU’s not in compliance with building fire codes is relevant to neighborhood sustainability. The higher the number of DU’s in compliance in a given neighborhood, the higher the viability of its stock. The variable here being measured is the number of houses not in compliance with fire codes. Proposed indicator: Type A; variable: number of houses not in compliance with fire codes in a given neighborhood (xn). The assumption is that sustainable state is when no house in a neighborhood is not in compliance with fire codes i.e. xn = 0.

Sn = housing standard = 1 – (No. of DU's not in compliance / Total Du's in a neighborhood)

Local initiatives to reduce the number of dwellings units not in compliance with fire codes in a neighborhood may include the local government exercising its regulatory powers to enforce adherence to fire protection standards by developers, efforts by residents living in rented units to ensure that landlords/apartment managers ensure that the dwellings units are up to the required standards. Local initiatives also include the residents who own the property agreeing to keep property in compliance with the standards. . 7.5.1.6. Compliance with plumbing codes

Plumbing codes are exogenously defined quality of life standards that dwelling units should be in compliance with to ensure resident welfare. Therefore a measure of DU’s not in compliance with building plumbing codes is relevant to neighborhood sustainability. The higher the number of DU’s in compliance in a given neighborhood, the higher the viability of its stock. The variable here being measured is the number of houses not in compliance with plumbing codes. Proposed indicator: Type A; variable:

69 number of houses not in compliance with fire codes in a given neighborhood (xn). The assumption is that sustainable state is when no house in a neighborhood is not in compliance with plumbing codes, i.e. xn = 0.

Sn = housing standard = 1 – (no. of DU's not in compliance / total Du's in a neighborhood)

Local initiatives to reduce the number of dwellings units not in compliance with plumbing codes in a neighborhood may include the local government exercising its regulatory powers to enforce adherence to plumbing codes by developers, efforts by residents living in rented units to ensure that landlords/apartment managers ensure that the dwellings units are up to the required standards. Local initiatives also include the residents who own the property agreeing to keep property in compliance with the standards. Local Housing Authorities (LHA) may be approached to provide for low rent public housing.

7.5.1.7. Vulnerability to natural hazards

Vulnerability to natural hazards is a variable related to housing condition. It could be approached from the perspective of exogenously defined building and design wind and flood elevation standards. Both categories of standards are exogenously defined safe minimum standards that dwelling units should be in compliance with to reduce the risks of injury and damage from strong wind and flooding to resident health and property in a neighborhood. A set of wind standards and flood elevation standards contained in the local building code (eg. Tallahassee construction codes are included in the Tallahassee Comprehensive Plan, refer Appendix I, Table A-6) should be compared to the standards to which the actual housing inventory was constructed. Proposed indicator: Type D; variable: number of DU’s in compliance with wind standards for a given neighborhood and number of DU’s in compliance with flood standards for a given neighborhood. A geometric mean of the two indicators should be taken since both standards in many cases overlap, as both are related to construction design of the structure.

Sn = square root of (number of DU’s in compliance with wind standards * number of DU’s in compliance with flood standards) / total DU’s for a given neighborhood

In instances where the local building code does not include wind standards:

Sn = number of DU’s in compliance with flood standards / total DU’s for a given neighborhood

Local initiatives to reduce the number of dwellings units not in compliance with wind and flood codes in a neighborhood may include the local government exercising its regulatory powers to enforce adherence to flood and wind standards by developers, efforts by residents living in rented units to ensure that landlords/apartment managers

70 ensure that the dwellings units are upto the required standards. Local initiatives also include the residents who own the property agreeing to keep property in compliance with the standards. Local Housing Authorities (LHA) may be approached to provide for low rent public housing.

7.5.1.8. Exposure to weather extremes

Exogenously defined local standards would serve as a determinant to define temperature extremes i.e. extreme heat and extreme cold. Houses or dwelling units equipped to deal with extremes in terms of heating and cooling would protect the health and welfare of the residents. Thus, a count of the DU’s with heating / cooling as needed on weather requirements to the total no. of DU’s would provide a measure of the percentage of DU’s equipped to deal with potential exposure for residents. Thus, the variable here is no. of DU’s with heating / cooling, indicator : Type B.

Sn = number of DU’s with provision for heating or cooling / total DU’s for a given neighborhood

Local initiatives to reduce the number of dwellings units without provisions for dealing with weather extremes in a neighborhood may include the local government exercising its regulatory powers to provide incentives/subsidies to developers to create housing with adequate provision for dealing with weather extremes, the Local Housing Authorities (LHA) providing adequately provisioned low rent public housing, efforts by residents living in rented units to ensure that landlords/apartment managers ensure that the dwellings units are upto the required standards. Local initiatives also include the residents who own the property agreeing to make adequate provisions.

7.5.2 Infrastructure Capacity

The quality of public services provided is an important factor that determines the quality of a place. The definition of ‘level of service’ is set forth in section 9J-5.003(62) Florida Administrative Code: “ ‘Level of service’ means an indicator of the extent or degree of service provided by, or proposed to be provided by, a facility based on and related to the operational characteristics of the facility. Level of service shall indicate the capacity per unit of demand for each public facility.” Level of service standards (LOS) are exogenously defined local standard for each public facility located within the city/county for which the local government has authority to issue development orders or development permits. The standards are established for ensuring that adequate facility capacity is provided and will be provided for future development in a city. For example, level of service standards for the Tallahassee, Florida, sewage system are defined in the Tallahassee-Leon County Comprehensive Plan as 100 gal/capita/day.

Level of service standards are generally defined for roads, water supply, sewage system, solid waste, parks and recreation, public transit, drainage, mass transit and in many instances, public schools. However, it may not be relevant to measure the LOS

71 for neighborhood roads since they are not intended to move traffic volume but serve as access providers of movement within the neighborhood. Solid waste disposal is not relevant at the neighborhood scale. Also, mass transit is not a neighborhood phenomenon. Thus, these components are not incorporated in the S.I. For other services, it may be reasonable to assess the LOS provided as opposed to required. A city that has better existing LOS for public transit, parks and recreation, schools provides higher quality of life to the residents of a neighborhood who live in the particular city. The variable under consideration here is LOS. A geometric mean of all the indicators will provide the subcomponent sustainability value. This section therefore discusses each of the following sub-components: water supply, sewage system, parks and recreation, public transit, drainage.

7.5.2.1 Water supply

In case of water supply, both the quantity and quality of water is of relevance to sustainability. Exogenously defined quality of life standards are applicable to water supply quantity and safe minimum standards apply to the quality of water supply. However, in the United States, there will be few neighborhoods that are supplied less water than LOS mandates. Therefore, it is not relevant to assess this aspect of water supply. The quality of water supply is regulated by the Federal Safe Drinking Water Act, under which EPA defines National Primary Drinking Water Regulations that specify for each contaminant in finished water a maximum contaminant level (MCL) or required treatment technique, based on adverse effects on health. Section 1445 of the Safe Drinking Water Act mandates monthly reporting, generally due 10 days after the month’s test and record retention. Public notice of violation of a NPDWR is required. Proposed indicator: Type A; variable: no. of violation notices annually.

Sn = no. of test parameters for which violation notices are issued / total no. of parameters tested annually.

Local initiatives may be in the form of active review of the monthly reports from service providers, by residents and/or neighborhood associations, to record frequency of violations, based on which a notice to the service providers be issued with the possibility of legal action if a future improvement in services is not effected.

7.5.2.2 Sewage system

There may be one of three public sewage disposal alternatives available to a given neighborhood: pump station, pressure head, separate treatment facility. Pump station efficiency is based on pumping capacity, where sewage is pumped to the sewage treatment plant. In case of a gravity design pressure head system, the efficiency of the system is based on the pipe diameter and flow gradient of the system resulting in sewage flow measured in gallons per day. In all three alternatives, the service offered will be compared to the LOS required. Proposed indicator: Type B. The variable here would be sewage disposal in gallons per day.

Sn = Annual sewage disposal in gallons per day per capita (for the neighborhood) / Comprehensive plan LOS.

Local initiatives may include reporting instances of leakages or dysfunctions of the sewage line/pump to local authority/package plant and ensuring that adequate service is provided to meet the needs of the neighborhood. The local government can enforce regulatory their powers to create incentives for developers to provide adequate sewage disposal for neighborhoods.

7.5.2.3 Parks & recreation

Access to parks is an exogenously defined local standards contained in the Comprehensive Plan. For example, the LOS for parks in the Tallahassee Comprehensive Plan is 2 acres per 1,000 population in the urban service area, to be located within city limits so as to equitably serve the urban service area population. Access to other forms of recreation like theater, etc. is not measured here since provision of public transit to neighborhood residents is measured as part of the public transit subcomponent. Therefore, the indicator here is Type B, variable: acres per thousand population.

Sn = acres per thousand population./ Comprehensive plan LOS.

Local initiatives may include residents/neighborhood associations approaching policy makers with requirements of improvements in park acreage.

7.5.2.4 Storm water drainage

Standards for storm water drainage are exogenously defined locally to handle capacity that is related to the recurrence frequency of storms i.e. 100-year storm, 25- year storm etc. For example, the Tallahassee Comprehensive Plan lays down requirements for storm water management facilities adequate to provide levels of service with regard to flood control for a 100-year critical storm, 25-year or less critical storm event, 10-year or less critical storm event, and 5-year or less critical storm event. For each storm event, an assessment of the existing LOS compared to required for all criteria will be done separately, and a geometric mean of them would be taken. A geometric mean for each of obtained values for each storm event category will be taken for the subcomponent value. Indicator type: A, variable: compliance with codes.

Sn = geometric mean [product of each storm event category evaluation score]

Local initiatives may include residents/neighborhood associations approaching policy makers with requirements for improving neighborhood conditions to better meet storm water standards as well as residents living in rented units to ensure that landlords/apartment managers ensure that property is upto the required standards.

73 Local initiatives also include the residents who own the property agreeing to make adequate provisions.

7.5.3 Infrastructure Connection

Quality of life is affected profoundly by our access level to basic amenities and facilities. These are access to emergency health care, work, school, daily grocery, recreation, and entertainment (for e.g. beach, theatre, etc.). Better access ensures higher quality of life. Relative standards can be determined for each of the above variables, to assess the neighborhood.

7.5.3.1 Emergency response time

Access to emergency health care can be measured by the Emergency Response Time (ERT) for a given neighborhood. The standards are exogenously defined; National Fire Protection Agency lists the proposed standards for ERT for fire suppression and medical services. (Appendix I, table 8). The variable being measured here is ERT. An arithmetic mean for the two parameters can be obtained, given available data. Proposed indicator: Type A.

Local initiatives may include residents/neighborhood associations approaching policy makers with requirements for improving emergency response time to the neighborhood.

7.5.3.2 Public transit

The distance to public transport is a measure of the access of the neighborhood to outside neighborhood facilities and amenities. The assumption here is that in a given neighborhood, there will be at least one household without a car at some point in time. Thus, for sustainability, there should be optimal access to public transit in a given neighborhood the reasoning being that in the event that a resident has no car, they have means of access. Thompson (1977, p. 20) states that empirical studies show that “convenient” means a transit stop within a 1,300 foot walk of where people live and where they are going. He further states that services should be so designed that 70 – 80 % of population is within a 1,300 foot walk of transit stop and that experience has shown (p. 25) that a regular 30 – minute headway is the optimum headway for a transit service in lower density suburban areas.

Proposed indicator: Type A. The variables here are mean distance to transit stop from dwelling units in a neighborhood in feet and headway in minutes. The intent here is to measure the distance from the residence to transit stop and the headway at that point as well as the distance from the transit stop at the end of journey to destination like grocery store/theatre the headway at that point for return journey.

74 Sn1 = fourth root [{(mean distance to transit stop in feet / 1,300) * (Headway in minutes / 30)} * {(distance from transit stop to destination /1300) * (Headway in minutes / 30)}] Where Sn1, Sn2, Sn3, etc. is calculated for each of the following destinations: a mall, grocery store that stocks fresh produce, entertainment like theatre. Sn = Geometric mean [Sn1, Sn2, Sn3, etc.]

Local initiatives may include residents/neighborhood associations approaching policy makers with requirements of improvements in public transit service including more accessible mode stops, well served routes, reasonable service frequency, and reduced transfers.

7.5.3.3 Access within neighborhood

A direct measure of this would be to see if the neighborhood is pedestrian friendly. Thompson & Miles (1999) state that the maximum percentage of accidents in a neighborhood are pedestrian. Proper pedestrian safe sidewalks on both sides of the roads ensure higher pedestrian safety (personal consultation with Dr. Ivonne Audirac, 2003). It also makes the neighborhood mode pedestrian, thus encouraging people to come out of their homes more. The variable considered here is length of sidewalks. The length of the sidewalks will be compared with twice the length of the roads in a given neighborhood. Proposed indicator: Type B. The higher the ratio of the length of the sidewalks to twice the road length in a given neighborhood, the more pedestrian friendly the neighborhood.

Local initiatives may include residents approaching neighborhood associations/apartment managers with requirements for improving neighborhood sidewalk services.

Table 7.3: Components, subcomponents, and indicators of economic capital

Components Subcomponents Relevant Indicator type and Evaluatio Relevant Standards variable n score

Quality of Housing • Overcrowding Type A: Number of DU’s in 2.833 Number of DU’s in Stock crowded conditions neighborhood

• Property safety Type A: Number of vacant 2.833 Number of DU’s in DU’s neighborhood

• Intergeneration Type A: Number of property 2.833 Number of property al value owners in tax arrears owners in ihbh d • Housing Type A: Number of 2.833 Number of DU’s in condition condemned DU’s neighborhood

• Compliance Type A: Number of DU’s in 2.833 Number of DU’s in with fire codes compliance neighborhood 75 Table 7.3: Continued.

Components Subcomponents Relevant Indicator type and Evaluatio Relevant Standards variable n score

• Compliance Type A: Number of DU’s in 2.833 Number of DU’s in with plumbing compliance neighborhood • Vulnerability to Type A: Number of DU’s in 2.833 Number of DU’s in natural hazards compliance with wind and/or neighborhood flood standards • Exposure to Type A: Number of DU’s 2.833 Number of DU’s in weather with provision for extremes neighborhood extremes Infrastructure • Water supply Type A: No. of annual 2.833 Annual mean Capacity violations

• Sewage Type B: Existing LOS for 2.833 LOS standards system sewage disposal from the local comprehensive plan • Storm water Type A: Compliance with 2.833 Comprehensive drainage standards Plan Standards

• Parks & Type B: Acres per 1000 2.833 Comprehensive recreattion population Plan Standards Infrastructure • EMT Type A: ERT for a given 3.00 Proposed NFPA Connection neighborhood Standards 1710 and 1720. National fire protection agency.

• Public transit Type A: Distance to transit 2.667 1,300 ft and 30 stop minutes Type A: Transit headway (Thompson, 1977) • Access within • Type B: Length of sidewalks 2.833 Twice the total road neighborhood length

7.6 Components and Subcomponents Of Social Capital

Social capital is a very poorly defined term in the social sciences. There is no definite definition on what it encompasses and how its parameters are established. The term “social capital” has generally been used, in many instances interchangeably, by authors to describe what I have defined to be either the human capital (Putman, 1993) or the cultural and spiritual capital (Coleman, 1988; 1990). Based on Maureen Hart and the World Bank Institute formulation, I have defined social sustainability to comprise human capital and cultural and spiritual capital. The human capital further comprises three subcomponents: a) physical and mental health and safety b) education, and c) skill and abilities of a community. The cultural and spiritual capital comprises the 76 resource pool of connections – connections between the residents of a community, and between the residents and the formal and/or informal institutions of a community.

However, it is not possible at this time, to define defensible standards that can be based either on safe minimum criteria or quality of life criteria that can be argued to be minimum sustainability standards, for most of the sub-components of the social capital. In the following section, I have, as far as possible, tried to identify sources that could potentially be referenced for probable minimum sustainability standards or argue for an assumption for sustainability standard. However, for most sub-components, it is possible to operationalize them only once further research by scholars, planning bodies, etc. has provided the basis for defensible sustainability standards. Therefore, the social capital of the S.I. cannot be operationalized.

In this chapter I consequently only look at the different components of the social capital and discuss how to measure their partial sustainability. Human and cultural and spiritual capital are indicative of the community health. Higher human and cultural and spiritual capital are resultant of greater and easier access to amenities. Higher human capital as well as cultural and spiritual capital will result in higher propensity towards responsible behavior and healthy lifestyle, and hence higher sustainability, since responsible behavior results in a more sustainable world.

7.5.1 Human Capital

The human capital is defined to comprise these subcomponents: a) Health b) Safety c) Education d) Skills and abilities

As discussed in chapter 2, the quality and quantity of social capital (such as knowledge and labor skills) and environmental capital (such as raw materials and environmental services) available to a community determine the inputs to the production of economic capital. Therefore, a higher quality of human capital would reflect a healthier social capital. An educated, illness free, skilled population is a sustainable population, a healthy and viable population. In the sections below, direct measures of the sub-components are listed. Direct measures of these three components abound in literature. However, defining standards for the subcomponents is a difficult task.

7.5.1.1 Health

Forces both endogenous and exogenous to the neighborhood impact the health of residents. Diseases may be genetic or contracted, for example, diabetes can be passed from generation to generation as opposed to rabies, which can only be contracted. A direct count of the number of people ailing with specific chronic or terminal diseases in a given neighborhood would provide a measure of sustainability. There are

77 no authoritative standards that define which specific diseases would constitute a comprehensive list of chronic or terminal diseases, and thus should be counted. Since inclusion or exclusion would impact S.I. values, it is not possible at this time to operationalize this subcomponent.

Indicators are incidences of specific diseases (Hawthorn, 2000; Meadows, 1998; Hart, 1995), e.g. intestinal disease, etc. Proposed indicator: Type A of all these.

Also, Sn = number of people with specific illness (e.g. intestinal disease)/total population

A geometric mean of the above values would provide a measure of this subcomponent. The assumption here is that sustainability is when no resident is suffering from any chronic or terminal disease.

Local initiatives may include residents ensuring that each household member has adequate health insurance coverage, agreeing to annual medical exams, educate younger children to good hygiene and healthy living practices, and ensuring that household members suffering from illnesses/diseases have proper medical care.

7.5.1.2 Safety

As discussed earlier in section 7.5.1.2, FBI crime definitions are categorized as part I and part II. These include definitions of crimes against individuals: criminal homicide, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, etc. Thus, forces exogenous and endogenous impact safety. The method discussed in section 7.5.1.2 could be employed here too to quantify the threat to each individual from each of the defined crime types. The ratio of the annual total incidences of each crime type to the total relevant population in the given neighborhood, i.e. incidence count of homicide in a given neighborhood to the total population, incidence count of rape in a given neighborhood to the total female population, incidence count of robbery in a given neighborhood to the total population, etc. This should also include ratios of the number of vehicular accident related injuries that occur within the neighborhood, like vehicular crashes, vehicle bicycle crashes, and vehicle pedestrian crashes to total population in a neighborhood. A geometric mean of each will give the subcomponent value. Thus,

Sn = 1 – Geometric mean [(incidence count of homicide/total population), (incidence count of rape/total female population), (incidence count of robbery/total population), etc.]

The assumption here too is that a zero count for each crime is sustainable.

Local initiatives to prevent crimes against persons may include efforts to work in collaboration with the neighborhood police and/or security officials and/or set up of other

78 security measures. Initiatives to prevent accidents and injuries may include efforts to make the road safer, and monitoring for speeding vehicles.

7.5.1.3 Education

A common indicator as a measure of this is educational attainment of the population (Meadow, 2000; Hart, 1995; US Census, 2000). US Census measures this indicator at two levels: percentage of population over the age of 25 who are high school graduates or higher, and percentage of population over the age of 25 with bachelors degree or higher. Both endogenous and exogenous forces impact education. An individual’s desire for training and knowledge a well as the opportunities to gain it have a direct bearing on the level of education of an individual. It would seem that a population with high school or higher level of education would constitute a sustainable population. Therefore, proposed indicator: Type B.

Sn = number of people with high school or higher education / total population of neighborhood over age 25.

The assumption here is that a neighborhood with all residents above 25 with at least a high school diploma contributes to a sustainable social capital. However, literature does not support any defensible minimum sustainability standards of either safe minimum or normative quality of life standards. It is therefore not possible to operationalize this indicator and therefore the subcomponent.

Local initiatives to improve educational attainment include residents agreeing to complete at least high school education.

7.5.1.4 Skills

The skills and abilities of an individual present the range of opportunities for employment. Therefore, unemployment is a popular indicator (Hawthorn, 2000; Hart, 1995; Meadows, 1998) that is an inverse measure of this subcomponent. Unemployment is defined as the number of people who are of working age deducted for frictional unemployment. Frictional unemployment is defined as the number of people who are migrating, women choosing not to work, etc. The variable here is number of people unemployed. Proposed indicator: Type A.

Sn = 1 – number of unemployed people / total working population

Local initiatives to improve skills include residents/neighborhood associations encourage skill building. It also includes approaching/influencing policy makers with requirements for more opportunities for residents to improve/enhance their skill set.

79 7.5.2 Cultural And Spiritual Capital

The cultural and spiritual stock of a community determines the mental health of a community, how its members perceive their neighborhood, and the consequences of their actions on their neighborhood and thus influences how they use their social capital and environmental capital to produce economic capital and what actions they take to minimize those impacts (such as awareness about the harmful effects of effluent rich in nutrients entering environmental resources such as lakes, rivers, etc. has resulted in various point source control programs, as well as initiation and implementation of stringent effluent treatment procedures.) However, it is not possible at this time, to define defensible standards that can be based either on safe minimum criteria or quality of life criteria that can be argued to be minimum sustainability standards, for all of the sub-components of the cultural and spiritual component. I have therefore discussed below, based on a review of existing literature regarding sustainability on the individual sub-components of the cultural and spiritual component, only possible variables and indicators for each sub-component, and a suggestion on what could be one way of operationalizing the indicator and thus, the sub-component.

Coleman (1988) in his seminal work on social capital (that I define as the cultural and spiritual capital) defined it in terms of obligations and expectations, information channels, and social norms. He states that all social relations and social structure facilitate some form of social capital. He further states that some kinds of social structures are especially important in facilitating some forms of social capital. Social capital occurs within the family as well as in the community outside the family.

Krishna (2000) suggests considering measuring social capital (that I define as the cultural and spiritual capital) along two distinct but related dimensions – (1)institutional capital with respect to structural elements – roles, rules, procedures, and organizations that facilitate mutually beneficial collective action, and (2) relational capital which refers to the values, attitudes, norms, and beliefs that predispose individuals towards co-operation towards others. He quotes Schneider (1995) and others who show that (p. 91) “the design of the institutions delivering local public goods can influence level of social capital………government policies can and do affect the level of social capital.”

I define cultural and spiritual capital to therefore comprise the following kinds of stocks: 1. Resident - resident connections Where resident-resident connections comprise Krishna’s relational capital, and Coleman’s obligations and expectations.

2. Resident - community connections Where resident-community connections comprise Krishna’s relational capital, and Coleman’s information channels.

80 3. Community - institutional connections Where community-institutional connections comprise Krishna’s institutional capital, and Coleman’s social norms.

Each resident - resident connection (as is the resident - community connection and institutional connection) slowly builds up the cultural and spiritual capital. As I have previously quoted the World Bank Institute (2000) report observation in chapter 2, this capital comprised of connections, is difficult to operationalize and measure because connections are difficult to identify and quantify. Therefore, in the following section, I have suggested possible variables and indicators, but not minimum sustainability standards.

7.5.2.1 Resident-resident connections

At a micro level, socially aware behavior is exhibited by individuals. Socially responsible behavior is manifest at the individual level by a person’s actions. A responsible individual at home will show pride in his neighborhood and surroundings, will pollute less, be a responsible parent/child/human, etc. At a resident-resident level, this lifestyle is propagated through the process of diffusion. Connections between and through people are built over time and create an intangible capital that can be called the cultural and spiritual capital. This capital is nurtured and grows every time people congregate or meet for a common social occasion, outing, celebration, or cause. Thus, forces both endogenous and exogenous to the neighborhood impact resident-resident connections. This component is relevant to the long term viability of a neighborhood but is difficult to measure. At a neighborhood level, residents also build up this capital every time they meet for some purpose directed towards the betterment of their neighborhood. Neighborhood association meetings therefore are a good measure of this component (Warren, 1972; Hunter, 1979; Wellman, 1979)

Therefore, the variable here is households participating in neighborhood association meetings. Indicator type: Type B.

7.5.2.2 Resident - community and institutional connections

Yin (1999) states that the cultural explanation of behavioral model assumes that people’s attitudes towards more specific and concrete objects are largely determined or constrained by their predominant or central values. The rational choice model explains attitudes due to people’s perceived self-interests, usually economic or material interests related to such objects. Values dictate the individual state of mind, whether the mind is open to knowledge or it sticks to pre-learned knowledge. Prior knowledge may be based on socially accepted sources or may be intuitive (Doob, 1995). An individual’s attributes interact with the societal conditions within which the individual lives in. Societal conditions may be augmented by the presence of external support in the form of community organizational infrastructure. This would result in behavior that may or may not be socially responsible. Thus, forces both endogenous and exogenous to the

81 neighborhood impact resident-community connections. However, it is difficult to measure cultural and spiritual capital based on these models.

Yin (1999) quotes Ajzen & Fishben (1980), Converse (1964), Fan (1988), Lazarsfeld et al. (1944), and Zaller (1990, 1992) stating that mass belief and public opinion research demonstrates that leaders exert a significant amount of influence on publics and publics often rely on their leaders for general political attitudes as well as their attitudes towards specific issues and related policy preferences. The concept of opinion leadership, first proposed by Paul Lazarfeld and his colleagues in 1944 is a hypothesized process of two step transfer of information, where information reaches elites from mass media, and then to the general public from elites. Yin quotes the works of Brody (1991), Fan (1988), Lyengar & Kinder (1987), Lyengar et al. (1982), Page et al. (1987), and Patterson (1980) and states that media have substantial direct influence on public opinion and that the media not only reinforce and activate existing opinion, but also create new opinion.

At a neighborhood level, mass media influence can be equated with the broadcasting of neighborhood programs intended to benefit the neighborhood (and may or may not reduce economic costs). The voluntary natures of such programs slot them in the nature of mass media. Connerly (1985, p. 541) states that the “neighborhoods role as a community is multidimensional, and that some people will specialize in one form of neighborhood participation or the other.” He claims that the number of people using the neighborhood as a community has been underestimated by researchers like Wellman and Leighton. The relevant indicator here is therefore the number of households participating in some neighborhood level programs (Connerly, 1985) like recycling, etc. Proposed indicator: Type B.

Elite influence can be equated with the influence exerted by churches, non- governmental organizations, etc. in a neighborhood. Churches and other organizations carry importance in condoning and patronizing certain behavior, activity, or program, thus, making them more acceptable and desirable at face value, and in some cases, more beneficial for the neighborhood. Such organizations represent an informal word of authority as well as trust that people entrust in such organizations, and therefore follow where they lead (Hunter, 1979; Krishna, 2000). The relevant variable here is the total number of organizations active within the neighborhood. The more the number of organizations that actively work for the betterment of the neighborhood and its residents, the higher the social sustainability, since higher cultural and spiritual capital is created. Proposed indicator: Type E.

82 Table 7.4: Components, subcomponents, and indicators of social capital

Subcomponents Relevant Indicator type and variable Evaluation Relevant Standards score

• Health Type A: population suffering from 2.500 Cannot be defined at this time specific illness

• Safety Type A: incidence count of crime 2.833 Cannot be defined at this time

• Education Type A: Education attainment 2.333 Cannot be defined at this time

• Skills Type B: Unemployment rate 2.333 Cannot be defined at this time

• Resident- Type B: Attendance in 2.500 Cannot be defined at this time resident neighborhood meetings ti • Resident- Type B: participation in 2.500 Cannot be defined at this time community neighborhood programs ti • Institutional Type B: Presence of institutions in 2.833 Cannot be defined at this time connection a neighborhood actively involved in neighborhood betterment

7.6 Conclusion

All three systems are broken down into components and analyzed, further broken down into subcomponents, where variables driving each subcomponent are tabulated. Such an exercise has established an implicit cause and effect relationship between the various components, subcomponents, and variables. However, inherent is also the knowledge that to measure this complexity would require oversimplification of processes and behavior such that they can be measured. Intangible components and variables are inherently related to tangible components and a change in either results in a proportional change in the other. Focus has to be on the tangible components while operationalizing the components, since only the tangible components can be the focus of planning programs. Effects on tangible phenomena drive planning programs. It is through them that planning programs will be administered and monitored.

A separate assessment of trends of the index parameters - individual indicators, subcomponents, and components of the index will indicate the trends in the sustainability of the residential neighborhood.

CHAPTER 8

CONCLUSION

Sustainability, as has been the norm, continues to be a controversial and much- debated concept. Sustainability and sustainable development are a prominent area of research in the planning profession too. In this thesis, I have attempted to research sustainability at the neighborhood scale, forces that influence it, and its measurement. The interest among planners to address sustainability when involved with neighborhood scale planning directed my interest in undertaking this work. I have therefore specifically addressed two research questions in this thesis work, the first being, is it useful and meaningful to measure the sustainability of residential neighborhoods in terms of their long-term viability? If it is, the second question then is whether it is also feasible to design an instrument for measuring neighborhood sustainability that can be used to inform neighborhood-scale planning and decision-making?

Grounding the research in existing literature, and orienting work within the time and resource constraints of a graduate thesis, this report is a compilation of the results of my efforts toward answering the two research questions. In the following section, 8.1 is a brief summary of the thesis work and 8.2 is a discussion on additional work on index construction and calibration that is required to improve the utility of the tool to planners.

8.1 Index and its Limitations

The first step was to address the first research question, namely, is it useful and meaningful to measure the sustainability of residential neighborhoods in terms of their long-term viability? A preliminary review of planning literature regarding sustainability at the neighborhood scale supports reasoning that efforts to measure neighborhood sustainability provide insight and knowledge to planners about neighborhood conditions. The true value of this knowledge is in a better understanding of the issues faced by neighborhoods and influencing policy decisions/programs that are more sensitive and responsive to the needs of neighborhoods. It is consequently both meaningful and useful to measure the sustainability of a neighborhood.

84 Attempting to address the second research question has been a more difficult task. My approach was first to define sustainability as is relevant to the neighborhood scale. In this definition, the concept of sustainability is operationalized as the state of community capital stocks within the neighborhood. The second step was to set up the unit of analysis for the instrument of measurement and to set up a framework of objectives that an instrument developed with the intent to measure neighborhood sustainability should meet. These objectives address structural robustness and functional validity and reliability of the instrument. Based on these objectives, the developed instrument is in the form of an index called the Sustainability Index (S.I.). The S.I. is designed to assess the state of community capital at one point in time. By conducting assessments at various points in time it may be possible to assess trends in individual indicators as well as the subcomponents, components, and individual stocks of community capital. The principal value of the index therefore derives from its potential use as a heuristic device rather than as a policy-making analytic tool – it may have heuristic value to planners by helping them gain insight and knowledge about neighborhood conditions and by permitting comparisons across neighborhoods and over time.

The S.I. provides a cumulative quantitative value of the sustainability status of a neighborhood. This value is to be calculated based on a quantitative assessment of the community capital of the neighborhood, where the social, environmental, and economic capital comprise the community capital of the neighborhood. The S.I. value is therefore an aggregation of the individual assessment values of the three capitals, employs two methods of aggregation - the arithmetic and the geometric mean, and is based on a framework of minimum sustainability standards drawn from safe minimum and normative quality of life standards. It therefore measures how close a neighborhood is to achieving those standards. It is assumed that the closer the neighborhood is to those standards, the more sustainable it is. Numerous challenges to operationalizing and measuring the complexity of sustainability, for the index to be useful as a policy-making tool resulted in caveats to the descriptive power of the index, each of which are discussed below:

1. The concept of sustainability is operationalized as the state of community capital stocks within the neighborhood as opposed to a synthetic measure of sustainability.

2. The neighborhoods are treated as semi-open systems. This useful simplification is necessitated by knowledge limitations. However, it neglects the potential for feedback between neighborhood conditions and those of other areas, which may ultimately impinge on neighborhood sustainability.

3. The neighborhoods are defined only as residential communities and do not include neighborhoods with mixed land uses. This simplification also, though useful, limits the scope of application and thereby comparisons among different neighborhoods.

4. Taking a heuristic/pragmatic approach to defining neighborhood boundaries results in neighborhood definitions that are most suitable for successful program implementation. However, this may result in difficulty in comparison among neighborhood conditions.

5. Application of existing safe minimum standards and exogenously and endogenously defined normative standards as the basis for assessing sustainability, in the absence of the knowledge required to define absolute sustainability thresholds for all three types of community capital may not provide a realistic assessment of the neighborhood conditions as I have assumed them to do. In the absence of both safe minimum standards and normative standards, the conceptual and practical difficulties in defining analogues to safe minimum standards for all indicators, especially those developed for the subcomponents of social capital, may further compound this error.

6. The likely need for value imputation due to data limitations may also result in S.I. values that do not provide a reasonably useful or realistic value range for the neighborhood.

8.2 Additional Research

Given time and resource limitations, I have been able to define only a limited set of subcomponents and indicators, especially the subcomponents and indicators of the social capital. Therefore, additional work is required to fully operationalize the S.I. as has been conceptualized in this thesis work. One of the main focuses of work would be to more fully identify appropriate indicators. New research may well facilitate the (1) operationalization of many indicators of the social capital and (2) incorporation of other sub-components in the S.I. It is also important to calibrate the index through field-testing i.e. application of the S.I. to residential neighborhoods to test the S.I. for sensitivity and test the S.I. against some aspects of the validity criterion as set forward in Section 6.1.3. The S.I. could be calibrated by applying the S.I. to a neighborhood exhibiting features of new urbanism and smart growth. Given the definition of a sustainable neighborhood, a neighborhood with new urbanistic features is likely to yield higher sustainability index values. A different result may point towards error(s) in index construction that may need to be addressed. A declining neighborhood characterized by conditions inversing higher sustainability values should be selected to test the sensitivity of the sustainability index. It can be anticipated that low sustainability index value, on the index scale, will be obtained. Unreasonable index values will again point towards index construction error(s) that may need to be addressed. Data from field testing could be used to refine the structure of the index in terms of additions to and/or excisions of its indicators, thereby improving the utility of the index as a tool.

86 It is my conclusions therefore that while it is feasible to construct an instrument for measuring sustainability, it is through additional research work outside of the graduate thesis that such an instrument can successfully be constructed. Although my intent was to develop a policy making analytic tool that quantitatively measures neighborhood sustainability, I have only been able to develop an instrument of measurement that may be useful to planners chiefly as a heuristic tool rather than a policy making analytic tool.

APPENDIX A

Table A - 1: National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

POLLUTANT STANDARD STANDARD VALUE * TYPE

Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8-hour Average 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) Primary 1-hour Average 35 ppm (40 mg/m3) Primary

Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) Annual Arithmetic Mean 0.053 ppm (100 µg/m3) Primary & Secondary

Ozone (O3) 1-hour Average 0.12 ppm (235 µg/m3) Primary & Secondary 8-hour Average 0.08 ppm (157 µg/m3) Primary & Secondary

Lead (Pb) Quarterly Average 1.5 µg/m3 Primary & Secondary

Particulate (PM 10) Particles with diameters of 10 micrometers or less Annual Arithmetic Mean 50 µg/m3 Primary & Secondary 24-hour Average 150 µg/m3 Primary & Secondary

Particulate (PM 2.5) Particles with diameters of 2.5 micrometers or less Annual Arithmetic Mean 15 µg/m3 Primary & Secondary 24-hour Average 65 µg/m3 Primary & Secondary

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) Annual Arithmetic Mean 0.030 ppm (80 µg/m3) Primary 24-hour Average 0.14 ppm (365 µg/m3) Primary 3-hour Average 0.50 ppm (1300 µg/m3) Secondary

Parenthetical value is an approximately equivalent concentration. Source: U.S.E.P.A. (2003) 88 Table A - 2: National Ambient Surface Water Quality Standards.

89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97

Source: U.S.E.P.A. (2003)

98 Table A - 3: National Ambient Ground Water Standards.

National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs or primary standards) are legally enforceable standards that apply to public water systems. Primary standards protect public health by limiting the levels of contaminants in drinking water. Microorganisms

1 MCL or Sources of MCLG 1 Potential Health Effects from Contaminant TT Contaminant in (mg/L)2 Ingestion of Water (mg/L)2 Drinking Water Cryptosporidium zero TT 3 Gastrointestinal illness (e.g., Human and fecal animal diarrhea, vomiting, cramps) waste Giardia lamblia zero TT3 Gastrointestinal illness (e.g., Human and animal fecal diarrhea, vomiting, cramps) waste Heterotrophic plate n/a TT3 HPC has no health effects; it is an HPC measures a range count analytic method used to measure of bacteria that are the variety of bacteria that are naturally present in the common in water. The lower the environment concentration of bacteria in drinking water, the better maintained the water system is. Legionella zero TT3 Legionnaire's Disease, a type of Found naturally in water; pneumonia multiplies in heating systems Total Coliforms zero 5.0%4 Not a health threat in itself; it is Coliforms are naturally (including fecal used to indicate whether other present in the coliform and E. potentially harmful bacteria may be environment; as well as Coli) present5 feces; fecal coliforms and E. coli only come from human and animal fecal waste. Turbidity n/a TT3 Turbidity is a measure of the Soil runoff cloudiness of water. It is used to indicate water quality and filtration effectiveness (e.g., whether disease-causing organisms are present). Higher turbidity levels are often associated with higher levels of disease-causing microorganisms such as viruses, parasites and some bacteria. These organisms can cause symptoms such as nausea, cramps, diarrhea, and associated headaches. Viruses (enteric) zero TT3 Gastrointestinal illness (e.g., Human and animal fecal diarrhea, vomiting, cramps) waste

99 Inorganic Chemicals

MCLG1 MCL or TT1 Potential Health Effects from Sources of Contaminant in Contaminant (mg/L)2 (mg/L)2 Ingestion of Water Drinking Water Antimony 0.006 0.006 Increase in blood cholesterol; Discharge from petroleum decrease in blood sugar refineries; fire retardants; ceramics; electronics; solder Arsenic 07 0.010 Skin damage or problems with Erosion of natural deposits; as of circulatory systems, and may runoff from orchards, runoff 01/23/06 have increased risk of getting from glass & cancer electronicsproduction wastes Asbestos 7 7 MFL Increased risk of developing Decay of asbestos cement in (fiber >10 million benign intestinal polyps water mains; erosion of micrometers) fibers natural deposits per liter Barium 2 2 Increase in blood pressure Discharge of drilling wastes; discharge from metal refineries; erosion of natural deposits Beryllium 0.004 0.004 Intestinal lesions Discharge from metal refineries and coal-burning factories; discharge from electrical, aerospace, and defense industries Cadmium 0.005 0.005 Kidney damage Corrosion of galvanized pipes; erosion of natural deposits; discharge from metal refineries; runoff from waste batteries and paints Chromium (total) 0.1 0.1 Allergic dermatitis Discharge from steel and pulp mills; erosion of natural deposits Copper 1.3 TT8; Short term exposure: Corrosion of household Action Gastrointestinal distress plumbing systems; erosion of Level=1.3 natural deposits Long term exposure: Liver or kidney damage

People with Wilson's Disease should consult their personal doctor if the amount of copper in their water exceeds the action level Cyanide (as free 0.2 0.2 Nerve damage or thyroid Discharge from steel/metal cyanide) problems factories; discharge from plastic and fertilizer factories Fluoride 4.0 4.0 Bone disease (pain and Water additive which tenderness of the bones); promotes strong teeth; erosion 100 Children may get mottled teeth of natural deposits; discharge from fertilizer and aluminum factories Lead zero TT8; Infants and children: Delays in Corrosion of household Action physical or mental plumbing systems; erosion of Level=0.015 development; children could natural deposits show slight deficits in attention span and learning abilities

Adults: Kidney problems; high blood pressure Mercury 0.002 0.002 Kidney damage Erosion of natural deposits; (inorganic) discharge from refineries and factories; runoff from landfills and croplands Nitrate 10 10 Infants below the age of six Runoff from fertilizer use; (measured as months who drink water leaching from septic tanks, Nitrogen) containing nitrate in excess of sewage; erosion of natural the MCL could become deposits seriously ill and, if untreated, may die. Symptoms include shortness of breath and blue- baby syndrome. Nitrite (measured 1 1 Infants below the age of six Runoff from fertilizer use; as Nitrogen) months who drink water leaching from septic tanks, containing nitrite in excess of sewage; erosion of natural the MCL could become deposits seriously ill and, if untreated, may die. Symptoms include shortness of breath and blue- baby syndrome. Selenium 0.05 0.05 Hair or fingernail loss; Discharge from petroleum numbness in fingers or toes; refineries; erosion of natural circulatory problems deposits; discharge from mines Thallium 0.0005 0.002 Hair loss; changes in blood; Leaching from ore-processing kidney, intestine, or liver sites; discharge from problems electronics, glass, and drug factories

Organic Chemicals

1 MCL or Sources of MCLG 1 Potential Health Effects from Contaminant 2 TT Contaminant in (mg/L) 2 Ingestion of Water (mg/L) Drinking Water Acrylamide zero TT9 Nervous system or blood Added to water problems; increased risk of during cancer sewage/wastewater treatment 101 Alachlor zero 0.002 Eye, liver, kidney or spleen Runoff from herbicide problems; anemia; increased used on row crops risk of cancer Atrazine 0.003 0.003 Cardiovascular system or Runoff from herbicide reproductive problems used on row crops Benzene zero 0.005 Anemia; decrease in blood Discharge from platelets; increased risk of factories; leaching cancer from gas storage tanks and landfills Benzo(a)pyrene (PAHs) zero 0.0002 Reproductive difficulties; Leaching from linings increased risk of cancer of water storage tanks and distribution lines Carbofuran 0.04 0.04 Problems with blood, nervous Leaching of soil system, or reproductive fumigant used on rice system and alfalfa Carbon zero 0.005 Liver problems; increased risk Discharge from tetrachloride of cancer chemical plants and other industrial activities Chlordane zero 0.002 Liver or nervous system Residue of banned problems; increased risk of termiticide cancer Chlorobenzene 0.1 0.1 Liver or kidney problems Discharge from chemical and agricultural chemical factories 2,4-D 0.07 0.07 Kidney, liver, or adrenal gland Runoff from herbicide problems used on row crops Dalapon 0.2 0.2 Minor kidney changes Runoff from herbicide used on rights of way 1,2-Dibromo-3- zero 0.0002 Reproductive difficulties; Runoff/leaching from chloropropane (DBCP) increased risk of cancer soil fumigant used on soybeans, cotton, pineapples, and orchards o-Dichlorobenzene 0.6 0.6 Liver, kidney, or circulatory Discharge from system problems industrial chemical factories p-Dichlorobenzene 0.075 0.075 Anemia; liver, kidney or spleen Discharge from damage; changes in blood industrial chemical factories 1,2-Dichloroethane zero 0.005 Increased risk of cancer Discharge from industrial chemical factories 1,1-Dichloroethylene 0.007 0.007 Liver problems Discharge from industrial chemical 102 factories cis-1,2-Dichloroethylene 0.07 0.07 Liver problems Discharge from industrial chemical factories trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene 0.1 0.1 Liver problems Discharge from industrial chemical factories Dichloromethane zero 0.005 Liver problems; increased risk Discharge from drug of cancer and chemical factories 1,2-Dichloropropane zero 0.005 Increased risk of cancer Discharge from industrial chemical factories Di(2-ethylhexyl) adipate 0.4 0.4 Weight loss, liver problems, or Discharge from possible reproductive chemical factories difficulties. Di(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate zero 0.006 Reproductive difficulties; liver Discharge from problems; increased risk of rubber and chemical cancer factories Dinoseb 0.007 0.007 Reproductive difficulties Runoff from herbicide used on soybeans and vegetables Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) zero 0.00000003 Reproductive difficulties; Emissions from waste increased risk of cancer incineration and other combustion; discharge from chemical factories Diquat 0.02 0.02 Cataracts Runoff from herbicide use Endothall 0.1 0.1 Stomach and intestinal Runoff from herbicide problems use Endrin 0.002 0.002 Liver problems Residue of banned insecticide Epichlorohydrin zero TT9 Increased cancer risk, and Discharge from over a long period of time, industrial chemical stomach problems factories; an impurity of some water treatment chemicals Ethylbenzene 0.7 0.7 Liver or kidneys problems Discharge from petroleum refineries Ethylene dibromide zero 0.00005 Problems with liver, stomach, Discharge from reproductive system, or petroleum refineries kidneys; increased risk of cancer Glyphosate 0.7 0.7 Kidney problems; reproductive Runoff from herbicide difficulties use

103 Heptachlor zero 0.0004 Liver damage; increased risk Residue of banned of cancer termiticide Heptachlor epoxide zero 0.0002 Liver damage; increased risk Breakdown of of cancer heptachlor Hexachlorobenzene zero 0.001 Liver or kidney problems; Discharge from metal reproductive difficulties; refineries and increased risk of cancer agricultural chemical factories Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 0.05 0.05 Kidney or stomach problems Discharge from chemical factories Lindane 0.0002 0.0002 Liver or kidney problems Runoff/leaching from insecticide used on cattle, lumber, gardens Methoxychlor 0.04 0.04 Reproductive difficulties Runoff/leaching from insecticide used on fruits, vegetables, alfalfa, livestock Oxamyl (Vydate) 0.2 0.2 Slight nervous system effects Runoff/leaching from insecticide used on apples, potatoes, and tomatoes Polychlorinated zero 0.0005 Skin changes; thymus gland Runoff from landfills; biphenyls (PCBs) problems; immune discharge of waste deficiencies; reproductive or chemicals nervous system difficulties; increased risk of cancer Pentachlorophenol zero 0.001 Liver or kidney problems; Discharge from wood increased cancer risk preserving factories Picloram 0.5 0.5 Liver problems Herbicide runoff Simazine 0.004 0.004 Problems with blood Herbicide runoff Styrene 0.1 0.1 Liver, kidney, or circulatory Discharge from system problems rubber and plastic factories; leaching from landfills Tetrachloroethylene zero 0.005 Liver problems; increased risk Discharge from of cancer factories and dry cleaners Toluene 1 1 Nervous system, kidney, or Discharge from liver problems petroleum factories Toxaphene zero 0.003 Kidney, liver, or thyroid Runoff/leaching from problems; increased risk of insecticide used on cancer cotton and cattle 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) 0.05 0.05 Liver problems Residue of banned herbicide 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 0.07 0.07 Changes in adrenal glands Discharge from textile 104 finishing factories 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.20 0.2 Liver, nervous system, or Discharge from metal circulatory problems degreasing sites and other factories 1,1,2-Trichloroethane 0.003 0.005 Liver, kidney, or immune Discharge from system problems industrial chemical factories Trichloroethylene zero 0.005 Liver problems; increased risk Discharge from metal of cancer degreasing sites and other factories Vinyl chloride zero 0.002 Increased risk of cancer Leaching from PVC pipes; discharge from plastic factories Xylenes (total) 10 10 Nervous system damage Discharge from petroleum factories; discharge from chemical factories

Radionuclides

1 MCL or Sources of MCLG 1 Potential Health Effects from Contaminant TT Contaminant in (mg/L)2 Ingestion of Water (mg/L)2 Drinking Water Alpha particles none7 15 Increased risk of cancer Erosion of natural ------picocuries deposits of certain zero per Liter minerals that are (pCi/L) radioactive and may emit a form of radiation known as alpha radiation Beta particles and none7 4 Increased risk of cancer Decay of natural and photon emitters ------millirems man-made deposits of zero per year certain minerals that are radioactive and may emit forms of radiation known as photons and beta radiation Radium 226 and none7 5 pCi/L Increased risk of cancer Erosion of natural Radium 228 ------deposits (combined) zero Uranium zero 30 ug/L Increased risk of cancer, kidney Erosion of natural as of toxicity deposits 12/08/03

Source: U.S.E.P.A. (2003)

105 Table A - 4: Noise Abatement Criteria.

[Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level--decibels (dBA)\1\]

------Description of activity Activity Category Leq(h) L10(h) category ------A...... 57 (Exterior)...... 60 (Exterior)...... Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose. B...... 67 (Exterior)...... 70 (Exterior)...... Picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sports areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals. C...... 72 (Exterior)...... 75 (Exterior)...... Developed lands, properties, or activities not included in Categories A or B above. D...... Undeveloped lands. E...... 52 (Interior)...... 55 (Interior)...... Residences, motels, hotels, public meeting rooms, schools, churches, libraries, hospitals, and auditoriums. ------\1\Either L10(h) or Leq(h) (but not both) may be used on a project.

Source: Federal Highway Administration noise regulations

106

Table A - 5: Construction Codes Enforced by the City of Tallahassee.

Florida Building Code, Building (FBC-B) 2001 Edition Florida Building Code, Mechanical (FBC-M) 2001 Edition Florida Building Code, Fuel Gas (FBC-FG) 2001 Edition Florida Building Code, Plumbing (FBC-P) 2001 Edition Florida Fire Prevention Code (FFPC) 1999 Edition (w/one local utility-related amendment) National Electrical Code (NEC) 2001 Edition Energy Efficiency Contained within the FBC-B: Chapter 13 Florida Accessibility Code Contained within the FBC-B: Chapter 11, Part A Fair Housing Section that pertains to apartments/ Contained within the FBC-B: Chapter 11, Part B multi-family

Source: City of Tallahassee Growth Management Department (2003).

Table A - 6: Emergency Response Time Proposed Standards for National Fire Protection Agency.

The response time objectives for fire suppression, EMS response, and other operations are: · Turnout time: one minute · Arrival of first engine company at a fire: 4 minutes · Deployment of a full first alarm assignment at a fire: 8 minutes · Arrival of EMS first responder: 4 minutes · Arrival of advanced life support unit at an EMS incident: 8 minutes

Source: National Fire Protection Agency (2003).

107

APPENDIX B

Table B - 1: Environmental Capital.

109 Table B - 2: Economic Capital.

110 Table B - 3: Social Capital.

111

REFERENCES

Agresti, A., & Finlay, B. (1986). Statistical methods for the social sciences. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

American Water Works Association. (2003). Stats on taps. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.awwa.org/Advocacy/pressroom/STATS.cfm

Andrews, J. C. (2000). Analyzing quality of place. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://radburn.rutgers.edu/andrews/projects/qop/qopreport.pdf

Norris, T., & Atkisson et al. (1997). Community indicators handbook. Seattle: Redefining Progress.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding Attitudes and Predicting Human Behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Babbie, E. (1998). The practice of social research. CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Baer, W. C., & Williamson, C. B. (1988). The filtering of households and housing units. Journal of planning literature, 3 (2), 127-139.

Banerjee, B., & Baer, B. (1984). Beyond the neighborhood unit. New York, NY: Plenum Press.

Barton, H. (2000). Sustainable communities. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.

Barton, H., Davies, G., & Guise, R. (1995). Sustainable settlements – A guide for planners, designers, and developers. Luton: University of the West England and Local Government Management Board.

Beatley, T., & Manning, K. (1977). The ecology of place: Planning for environment, economy and community. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Becker, E., & Jahn, T. (1999). Sustainability and the social sciences. New York, NY: Zed Books Ltd. 112

Boyd, D. R. (2001). Canada vs. the OECD: An environmental comparison. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.environmentalindicators.com/htdocs/about.htm

Blumenthal, D.S. (1985). Introduction to Environmental Health. NY: Springer Publishing Company.

Building Research Association of New Zealand. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.branz.org.nz/main.php

Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA). (1997). Crime Prevention and Community Policing: A Vital Partnership. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/166819.txt

Brown, L. R., Kane, H., & Roodman, D. M. (1994). In L. Starke (Ed.) Vital signs 1994: The trends that are shaping our future. New York: Norton.

Brody, R. (1991). Assessing presidential character: The media, elite opinion, and public support. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Burton, I., Kates, R. W., & White, G. F. (1978). The Environment as Hazard. New York: Oxford University Press. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.oas.org/usde/publications/Unit/oea54e/ch05.htm#1. how natural are natural hazards

Canter, L. (1977). Environmental impact assessment. New York: Mc Graw Hill

Carson, R. (1962). Silent spring. USA: Mariner Books. (Reprint edition 2002).

Cartwright, L. (2000). Selecting local sustainable development indicators: Does consensus exist in their choice and purpose? Planning Practice and Research, 15(1/2), 65-78.

Checkoway, B. (1995). Six strategies of community change. Community development journal, 30 (1), 2-20.

Chaskin, R.J. (1998). Defining neighborhoods. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from www.planning.org/casey/pdf/chaskin.pdf

Chaskin, R., & Brown, P. (1996). Theories of neighborhood change. In R. Stone (Ed.), Core issues in comprehensive community building initiatives. Chicago, Illinois: Chapel Hall Center for Children at The University of Chicago.

Choldin, H.M. (1985). Cities and suburbs. New York: Mc-Graw-Hill Book Company.

113

Chuang, Y. (2001). Neighborhood influences on adolescent cigarette and alcohol use. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Coleman, J.S. (1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(sup), S95-S120.

Connerly, C. E. The community question: An extension of Wellman and Leighton. Urban affairs quarterly, 20(4), 537-556.

Corbett, J., & Corbett M. (2000). Designing sustainable communities: Learning from village homes. Washington D.C.: Island Press.

Combs, S.M. (1984). From the neighborhoods: A sourcebook on information and skills needed by community organizations in Chicago. Chicago: Chicago Catholic Charities.

Converse, P. E. (1964). The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics. In D.E. Apter (Ed.) Ideology and Discontent. London: Free Press of Glencoe.

Cox, D. N. (2000). Developing a framework for understanding university-community partnerships. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.huduser.org/periodicals/cityscpe/vol5num1/cox.pdf

Criterion Planners & Engineers Inc., Portland. (2000). FSCN INDEX. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.crit.com/index/

Daly, H. (1996). Beyond growth. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Doob, L.W. (1995). Sustainers and sustainability. Connecticut, Westport: Praeger Publishers.

Dahir, J. (1950). Communities for better living. New York: Harper and Brothers.

Downs, R.M., & Stea, D. (1973). Cognitive maps and spatial behavior: Process and products. Image and environment, 73(1), 8-26.

Downs, A. (1981). Neighborhoods and urban development. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.

Edwards, & Wright. (2000). Sustainable housing, principles and practice. London: E & FN SPON.

114

Elrich, P. (1986). The machinery of nature. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Fan, David P. (1988). Predictions of public opinion from the mass media. New York: Greenwood Press.

Fortes, M.D. (2002). Environmental carrying capacity: Concept and practice. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/biome/marine/seasia/wrkspdocs/ENVIRO.DOC

Fisher, R. A. (1935). The design of experiments. London: Oliver and Boyd.

Florin, P., & Walker, J. (Eds.). (1989). Nurturing the grass roots: neighborhood volunteers, organizations, and American cities. New York: The Citizens Committee for New York City, Inc.

Gans, H. J. (1961). Planning and social life: Friendship and neighbor relationships in suburban communities. Journal of the American institute of planners, 27(1), 134–40.

Galster, G. C. (1986). What is neighborhood? An externality-space approach. International journal of urban and regional research, 10(1), 243-63.

Godschalk, D. R., & Parker, F. H. (1974). Carrying capacity: A basis for coastal planning? North Carolina: Department of City and Regional Planning, University of North Carolina.

Gould, P., & White, R. (1974). Mental maps. Middlesex, England: Penguin Books.

Goward, S.N., Cruickshanks, G.D., & Hope, A.S. (1985) Observed relation between thermal emission and reflected spectral radiance of a complex vegetated landscape. Remote sensing of the environment, 18(1), 137–146.

Gruenstein, D., & Herbert, C. E. (2000). Analyzing trends in subprime originations and foreclosures: A case study of the Atlanta metro area. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.nw.org/network/strategies/campaign/predatory/abt.pdf

Guest, A. M., & Lee, B. A. (1983). Consensus on locality names within the metropolis. Sociology and social research, 67 (4), 375–391.

Hamilton, K. (1994). Green adjustments to GDP. Resources Policy, 20(3), 155-68.

Hardin, G. (1968). Tragedy of the commons. Science, 162 (1), 1243-1248.

115 Harris, J.M., & Goodwin, N. R. (2001). Volume introduction. In J.M. Harris & N. R. Goodwin (Eds.) A survey of sustainable development. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Harris, J.M., Wise, T. A., Gallagher, K. P., & Goodwin, N. R. (2001). In J.M. Harris & N. R. Goodwin (Eds.) A survey of sustainable development. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Hart, M. (1999). Guide to sustainable community indicators. North Andover, MA: Hart Environmental Data.

Hawthorn, G. (2000). Newham sustainability indicators 2000 - Baseline sustainability report april 2000: Newham's key environmental, social and economic indicators, their inter-relationships and trends. London: London Borough of Newham.

Heniz Center Report. (2000). The state of the nation’s ecosystems. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.heinzctr.org/ecosystems/intro/index.shtml

Hollander, J.B. (2002). Measuring community: using sustainability indicators in Devens, Massachusetts. AICP: Planning Press.

Holmberg, J. (Ed.). (1992). Making development sustainable: redefining institutions, policy, and economics. Washington D.C.: Island Press.

HUD. (2000b). Unequal burden in Los Angles: Income and racial disparities in Subprime lending. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from: http://www.huduser.org/publications/pdf/baltimore.pdf.

Hunter, A. (1974). Symbolic communities: The persistence and changes of Chicago’s local communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

International Institute for Sustainable Development. (2002). Sustainable development timeline. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2002/sd_timeline2002.pdf

Iqbal, M. (1983). An Introduction to Solar Radiation. Toronto, New York : Academic Press.

Issacs, R. (1949). The neighborhood concept in theory and application. Land economics, 25(1), 73-81.

Iyengar, S., & Kinder, D. (1987). News that matters. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

116 Iyengar, S, Peters,M, & Kinder. (1982). Experimental demonstrations of the 'not-so- minimal' consequences of television news programs. American political science review, 76(4), 848-58.

Keeney, R. (1992). Value focused thinking: A path to creative decisionmaking. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.

Keller, S. (1968). The urban neighborhood: A sociological perspective. New York: Random House.

Keating, W. D., & Smith, J. (1996). Neighborhoods in transition. In W. D. Keating, N. Krumholtz, & P. Star (Eds.) Revitalizing urban neighborhoods. Laurence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press.

Krishna, A. (2000). Creating and harnessing social capital. In P. Dasgupta (Ed.) Social Capital: A multifaceted perspective. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Kuper, L. (1970). Neighbor on the hearth. In H. M. Proshansky, W. H. Ittleson, & L. G. Rivlin (Eds.) Environmental psychology: man and his psychological setting. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1944). The people's choice. New York: Duell, Sloan, and Pierce.

Lee, B.A., & Campbell, K. E. (1990). Common grounds? Urban neighborhoods as survey respondents see them. Proceedings of the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association 2000. Washington, DC.

Lipietz, A. (1995). Enclosing the global commons: Global environmental negotiations in a north-south conflict approach. The north, the south, and the environment. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Lynch, K. (1960). Image of the city. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Technology Press – Harvard University Press.

Lynch, K., & Hack, G. (1984). Site Planning. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.

Lynch, K. (1981). A theory of good city form. Massachusetts: MIT Press, Cambridge.

Maclaren, V. (1996). Urban sustainability reporting. Journal of the American planning association, 62 (2), 184-203.

117

Meadows, D. (1998). Indicators and information systems for sustainable development. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://sustainer.org/pubs/Indicator&Information.pdf

Mitchell, G., May, A. D., & McDonald, A.T. (1995). PICABUE: A methodological framework for the development of indicators of sustainable development. International journal of sustainable development and world ecology, 2 (2), 104-123.

Munasinghe, M., Sunkel, O., & Miguel, C. (2001). The sustainability of long-term growth. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.

Mumford, L. (1961). The city in history. New York: MJF Books.

Myers, D.; Baer, W. C., & Choi, S. (1996). The changing problem of overcrowded housing. Journal of the American planning association, 62(Winter), 66-84

National Crime Prevention Council (NCPC). (2002). Crime prevention and community policing. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.sonic.net/~dennett/watch/crimeprevention.htm# http://www.ncpc.org/5pol1dc.htm http://www.ncpc.org

National Fire Protection Agency. (2003). Proposed NFPA Standards 1710 AND 1720. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.nlc.org/nlc_org/site/policy_legislation/nfpa_proposed_standards/index.cfm

National Institute of Water and Atmosphere. Residential Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Calculator. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.niwa.co.nz/ncces/co2calc/

National Institute of Standardization and Technology. (2002). BEES 3.0. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.bfrl.nist.gov/oae/software/bees.html

National Training and Information Center (NTIC). (1999). Preying on neighborhoods: Subprime mortgage lending and Chicagoland foreclosures. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.ntic-us.org/preying/preying.html

Neumayer, E. (1999). Weak versus strong sustainability. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc.

Pahl, R. E. (1970). Patterns of urban life. London: Longmans, Green and Co.

118 Page, B., Shapiro, R., & Dempsey, G. R. (1987). Television news and changes in Americans' policy preferences. American political science review, 81(1), 23-44.

Patterson, T. (1980). The mass media election. New York: Praeger.

Pearce, D., Barbier, E., & Markandya, A. (1990). Sustainable development: Economics and environment in the third world. Aldershot, Hants, England : E. Elgar Pub. Co.

Pearce, D. W., & Warford, J.J. (1993). The concepts of sustainable development. World without end: Economics, environment, and sustainable development. Oxford University Press.

Perry, C. (1929). A plan for New York and its environs, Vol 7. New York: New York Regional Planning Association.

Pielke, R. A., & Avissar, R. (1990). Influence of landscape structure on local and regional climate. Landscape ecology, 4 (2/3), 133-155.

Pitkin, B. & Richman, N. (2001). Subprime lending and neighborhood conditions in the city of Los Angeles. Proceedings from the 2001 ACSP Conference. Los Angles, CA: UCLA Advanced Policy Institute.

Providence Water Supply Board. (1996). STS - Java - Domestic Water Consumption Calculator. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.provwater.com/conscalc.htm

Public Health Association. (1948). Planning the neighborhood. Chicago: Public Administration Service. (Reprint edition 1960).

Putnam, R. (1993). The prosperous community: social capital and public life. The American prospect, 13. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://epn.org/prospect/13/13putn.html.

Reed, D. (Ed.). (1997). Structural adjustment, the environment and sustainable development. London: Earthscan Publications.

Rees, W. (1995). Achieving sustainability: reform or transformation? Journal of planning literature,9 (4), 343-361.

Rohe, W. M., & Gates, L.B. (1985). Planning with neighborhoods. North Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press.

Rubin, V. (1998). The roles of universities in community-building initiatives. Journal of planning education and research, 17 (4), 302–311.

119 Sailor, D.J. (1998) Simulations of annual degree day impacts of urban vegetative augmentation. Atmospheric environment, 32 (1), 43-52.

Schnieder, D. C. (1994). Quantitative ecology: spatial and temporal scaling. NY: Academic Press.

Schnieder, R.R. (1995). Government and the economy on the Amazon frontier. World Bank Environment Paper no. 11, World Bank, Washington, D.C..

Solecki, W.D., Rosenzweig, C., Pope, G., Parshal, L., & Wiencke, M. (2003). The current and future urban heat island effect and potential mitigation strategies in the greater Newark, New Jersey region. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.city.toronto.on.ca/cleanairpartnership/pdf/finalpaper_solecki.pdf

Solow, A.A., Ham, C.E., & Donnelly, E.O. (1969). The concept of neighborhood unit: Its emergence and influence on residential environment planning and development. Final report on planning, designing and managing the residential environment: Stage one. Los Angles: Graduate program of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Southern California.

South Central Texas Regional Water Planning Group. (2002). SCTRWPG Domestic Water Calculator. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.watershedexperience.com

Stenier, F. (2000). The living landscape. NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.

State of Florida department of Transportation (FDOT). (2002). Manual for uniform minimum standards, for design, construction, maintenance for streets and highways. Publisher: Author

Suttles, G. D. (1972). The social construction of communities. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Sullivan, T. F. P. (Ed.) (2003). Environmental law handbook: seventh edition. Rockville, Maryland: ABC Consulting, Government Institutes.

Taub, R.P., Surgeon, G., Lindholm, S., Otti, P. B., & Bridges, A. (1977). Urban voluntary associations, locality based and externally induced. American journal of sociology, 83(2), 425-442.

Taub, R.P., Taylor, D. G., & Dunham, J. D. (1982). Safe and secure neighborhoods: Territoriality, solidarity, and the reduction of crime. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center.

120 Thompson, G. L. (1977). Planning considerations for alternative transit route structures. Journal of the American institutes of planners, 43(1997), 158-168.

Thompson, G. L., & Miles, R. (1999). Planners and pedestrian safety: Lessons from Orlando. Journal of planning education and research, 18(3), 211-220.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Educational attainment. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/educ-attn.html

USEPA. (1989) The Potential Effects of Global Climate Change on the United States. Chapter 9- Water resources Chapter 10 – Electricity demand Chapter 11 – Air quality Chapter 12 – Human health Chapter 13 – Urban infrastructure Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://yosemite.epa.gov/oar/globalwarming.nsf/UniqueKeyLookup/RAMR5CKPM5/$File/ effects_8-13.pdf

USEPA (2003). Common Chemicals Found at Superfund Sites. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.epa.gov/superfund/resources/chemicals.htm

Wackernagel, M., & Rees, W. (1996). Our ecological footprint: Reducing human impact on earth. Canada: New Society Publisher.

Warren. R.B., & Warren, D.I. (1977). The neighborhood organizers handbook. Notre Dame Ind.: University of Notre Dam Press.

Webber, M.M., & Webber, C.C. (1967). Culture, territoriality, and the elastic mile. Taming megapolis, Vol 1. New York: Anchor Books.

Webster’s dictionary of English usage. (1989). Springfield, Mass.: Merriam – Webster.

Wellman, B. 1979. The community question: The intimate networks of east Yorkers. American journal of sociology, 84(5), 1201-31.

Wiewel, W., Teitz, M., & Giloth R. (1993). The economic development of neighborhoods and localities. In R. B. Bingham, & R. Mier (Eds.) Theories of local economic development: Perspectives across the disciplines. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications.

121 Wise, T.A. (2001). Overview essay on global perspectives: The north/south imbalance. In J.M. Harris & N. R. Goodwin (Eds.) A survey of sustainable development. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

World Bank Institute. (2000). Economic development and environmental sustainability. Washington, D.C.: World Bank.

World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. New York: Oxford University Press.

World Economic Forum. (2001). Environmental sustainability index. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu\

World Economic Forum. (2002). Environmental sustainability index. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu\

World Health Organization. (1997). Health and environment in sustainable development. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.who.int/environmental_information/Information_resources/htmdocs/execsum .htm

World Health Organization. (2002). Healthy villages: A guide for communities and community health workers. Retrieved November 13, 2003, from http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/Documents/Healthyvil/HVtoc.htm

Yin, R.K. (1994). Case study research: Design and methods. London: Sage Publications.

Yin, J. (199). Elite opinion and media diffusion: Exploring environmental attitudes. The Harvard International Journal of Press Politics 4.3 (1999) 62-86. Retrieved January 24, 2003, from http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/harvard_international_journal_of_press_politics/v004/4.3yin .html

Zaller, J. R. (1990). Political awareness, elite opinion leadership, and the mass survey response. Social cognition, 8(1), 125-53.

Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

122

BIOGRAPHIC SKETCH

Rupa Sharma was born on March 25th 1977, in Ranchi, India. Her undergraduate degree is in Architecture and with the completion of this thesis, she will complete her M.S. in Planning. She is an Architect with license for independent practice in India.

Through her formative years, she has lived in 11 towns and cities, studied in 18 schools, and traveled widely in India with her father Lt. Col. Rajiv Sharma, mother Nandita Sharma, and brother Rahul Sharma, bringing out her interest in people, cultures, and settlements. She completed grade 10th from St. Ann’s Higher Secondary School, Roorkee, where she developed an interest in architecture and planning. Completing grade 12th from Delhi Public school, Ranchi, she went on to her undergraduate studies in Architecture from Birla Institute of Technology, Ranchi. She worked every summer in architectural firms as an intern. This gave her the exposure to the professional world of architecture. Completing her undergraduate studies, she practiced independently for a year in Aurangabad, where her main achievement was the design and construction of a 24 duplex complex in Aurangabad. In the fall of 2001, she joined Florida State University for graduate studies in planning. She worked the year 2001-02 under Dr. Ivonne Audirac as a research assistant. She worked with Florida Geological Survey as a research assistant through the summer of 2002 and was a recipient of the university fellowship for the year 2002-03 that enabled her to devote time to her thesis.

123