Publisher’s version / Version de l'éditeur:
Vous avez des questions? Nous pouvons vous aider. Pour communiquer directement avec un auteur, consultez la
première page de la revue dans laquelle son article a été publié afin de trouver ses coordonnées. Si vous n’arrivez pas à les repérer, communiquez avec nous à PublicationsArchive-ArchivesPublications@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca.
Questions? Contact the NRC Publications Archive team at
PublicationsArchive-ArchivesPublications@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca. If you wish to email the authors directly, please see the first page of the publication for their contact information.
https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/droits
L’accès à ce site Web et l’utilisation de son contenu sont assujettis aux conditions présentées dans le site LISEZ CES CONDITIONS ATTENTIVEMENT AVANT D’UTILISER CE SITE WEB.
Bibliography (National Research Council of Canada. Division Of Building Research); no. BIBL-32, 1966-04-01
READ THESE TERMS AND CONDITIONS CAREFULLY BEFORE USING THIS WEBSITE.
https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/copyright
NRC Publications Archive Record / Notice des Archives des publications du CNRC :
https://nrc-publications.canada.ca/eng/view/object/?id=f9132094-25cc-480a-8ccc-4b6104b5c458 https://publications-cnrc.canada.ca/fra/voir/objet/?id=f9132094-25cc-480a-8ccc-4b6104b5c458
NRC Publications Archive
Archives des publications du CNRC
For the publisher’s version, please access the DOI link below./ Pour consulter la version de l’éditeur, utilisez le lien DOI ci-dessous.
https://doi.org/10.4224/40001594
Access and use of this website and the material on it are subject to the Terms and Conditions set forth at
Privacy as a factor in residential buildings and site development: an
annotated bibliography
--.,
..-...
- l..v.l-
l,,...-.,,-
lrl,,,,,l,,.-
-.,.,,-
-
YIIIIVI.
V x I I L-
U U I I T I I . U Y ~.
v e ~ r ~ r q-
O C Y C *.
D O O ~ O D O ~ O.
o r rbrick
.
b u i l d i n g b u l k h e a d.
b u n g o l o w.
caisson.
causeway.
ceiling.
cellar.
cement ceramic chimney.
cloy.
concrreove
.
efflorarcenp a r a p e t
.
p a r t i t i o n.
pediment.
p i e r p i g m e n t.
p i t c h.
p l a n.
plaster.
p l u m b i n g.
p l y w o o d.
p r e f a b r i c a t e d.
quoins.
raffreinforced r reveal
.
roof. sand.
sheathing.
specification.
stress vermiculite.
wallboard.
w e o t h e r i n g.
w i n d o w.
wire.
woPFUVACY AS A FACTOR IN RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
I AND SITE DEVELOPMENT
-
-
AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHYAlan Hedley, School of A r c h i t e c t u r e ,
University of B r i t i s h Columbia T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
Page
P r e f a c e ANkLYiL23 2 F o r e w o r d 4 Introduction 6S t r u c t u r e and Evaluation of the L i t e r a t u r e 8
1)
Definitions of P r i v a c y 11Annotated Bibliography
P a r t I P r i v a c y by P l a n and Design
11
p a r t 11 Noise and Annoyance 2 2P a r t
III
I n t e r p e r s o n a l Relations: The City and the Suburb 2 9A. The City 3 4
B. The Suburb 38
C. Housing P r o j e c t s 4 3
1
P a r t IV P r i v a c y and the Law 48I]
p a r tv
P r i v a c y a s Viewed by P o p u l a r Housing Magazines 5 2P a r t VI T h e S u r v e y a s a R e s e a r c h Tool in Housing 5V
P a r t VII Miscellaneous 6 i
DIVISION OF BUILDING RESEARCH NATIONAL RESEARCH CO OTTAWA, C A N A D A Copies of .horter articlor iirtcd in this Bibliography may be obtained. in penerol, through the photocopying service of the N ~ t i o n a i Research Council. Rates for this service are - 8 follows: $1.50 for e photoprint of any article of not more fhon 7 pagas. An odditianal $1.50
i s neccrtarv for each mddlti~noi 7 P U B ~ S a ftaction thereof. A disroul w i i i ba oliowed ir, ths libraries of Canadian universities. Requests for
photoprint$ should be addree.ed to the Notional Rsssqrrh Council, Onow., Canada.
Coupons or. ir8u.d by the Council veluad at 5. 25, and 50 cent' These rvn be used In payment for thn rerrica well or rash
($tamps .re not acceptable/, money ar&r ar <hequa (payabie ch Par in Ottawa crsdit Nalional Rerearch Council). Coupons can be ursd for the purchase of e l l N ~ t ~ o n a l Research Council nubiirst~ons
PREFACE
The Division of Building ~ e s e a r c h ' o f t h e National R e s e a r c h
Council of Canada i s pleased to publish t h i s Bibliography on P r i v a c y . A study of P r i v a c y c o m p r i s e s one p a r t of the r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t on s i t e planning c u r r e n t l y being c a r r i e d out a t t h e University of B r i t i s h
Columbia. The author i s Alan Hedley, who conducted t h e r e s e a r c h
u n d e r the direction of P r o f e s s o r H. P. Oberlander, Head, Community
a n d Regional Planning, and P r o f e s s o r W. G e r s o n , School of A r c h i -
t e c t u r e , University of B r i t i s h Columbia.
Other publications resulting f r o m t h i s project have included
NRC 6442 "Annotated Bibliography
-
P e r f o r m a n c e Standards for Spaceand Site Planning f o r Residential Development" and NRC 7992
"Limitations t o the Volume and Dimensions of Buildings Imposed by Building Codes and Zoning By-laws that Apply in the Vancouver A r e a . " The v a r i o u s studies of f i r e , sound, light and privacy included in t h i s p r o j e c t a s f a c t o r s t h a t d e t e r m i n e the spacing of r e s i d e n t i a l buildings a r e being u s e d a s a b a s i s f o r the p r e p a r a t i o n of a m a s t e r r e p o r t on P e r f o r m a n c e Standards f o r Space and Site Planning f o r Residential Development.
T h i s r e s e a r c h project was initiated with the e n t h u s i a s t i c participation of t h e l a t e P r o f e s s o r F r e d L a s s e r r e , then D i r e c t o r of the School of A r c h i t e c t u r e , and h a s been c a r r i e d f o r w a r d with the full
support of t h e p r e s e n t D i r e c t o r , P r o f e s s o r Henry E l d e r .
Ottawa R.F. Legget
The themes of living a r e love, sociability, privacy, self expression, comfortand belonging and they will
suffuse a good house
-
the house is only a receptacleto receive them.
Robert Woods Kennedy
P r i v a c y
-
o r the Right to Be Let Alone-
i s perhapsthe most personal of all legal principles. It i s also one of the newest, since only the m o r e sophisticated of societies have the interest and the ability to n u r - t u r e that subtle and most personal possession of
man, his dignity. Privacy, like most of our i m -
portant legal landmarks, i s a minority concept. The very word connotes a n e c e s s a r y alienation or d i s - tance that i s a t the core of a l l our civil liberties.
M o r r i s L. E r n s t
FOREWORD
It h a s been r e p o r t e d by C e n t r a l Mortgage and Housing Corporation that d u r i n g 1963 n e a r l y 150,000 housing units w e r e built a c r o s s Canada; t h i s activity r e p r e s e n t e d a total of 1 . 7 billion d o l l a r s of p r i v a t e and public investment. P e r h a p s the m o s t significant development d u r i n g
1962 and 1963 w a s the evident shift f r o m a heavy r e l i a n c e on single f a m i l y house construction t o multiple and a p a r t m e n t house buildings.
The rapidly r i s i n g total amount of construction and the shift f r o m single
f a m i l y dwellings t o a p a r t m e n t h o u s e s s e e m t o be a reflection of t h e r i s i n g tempo of urbanization that i s likely t o r e s u l t in 80 p e r cent of a l l Canadians living i n c i t i e s by I 980.
The growing volume and change in composition of r e c e n t housing have m a d e r e s e a r c h in the a r r a n g e m e n t and s i t e development of the single and group u n i t s of s t r a t e g i c i m p o r t a n c e . F o r a l m o s t five y e a r s t h e Division of Building R e s e a r c h h a s g e n e r o u s l y supported a continuing
s e r i e s of studies in the field of space and s i t e planning f o r r e s i d e n t i a l development a t the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. The f i r s t r e s u l t of t h e s e studies was a Bibliography on the g e n e r a l n a t u r e of P e r f o r m a n c e S t a n d a r d s f o r Buildings and Site Planning and available e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e i r municipal a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . T h i s Bibliography was published in August 1961 and i s now followed b y another annotated Bibliography on a s e l e c t e d a s p e c t of space and site planning, n a m e l y " P r i v a c y . 'I In the introduction t o the initial Bibliography the stage was s e t f o r a continuing investigation.
"The m a i n purpose of the p r e s e n t r e s e a r c h p r o j e c t i s t o d e m o n s t r a t e that adequate space around and between buildings f o r functional and a e s t h e t i c p u r p o s e s can be achieved with g r e a t e r flexibility and without f u r t h e r r e s t r i c t i n g the individual's w i s h e s in siting and
building h i s house on t h e u s u a l single f a m i l y lot. Such flexible s t a n d a r d s a r e usually r e f e r r e d t o a s p e r f o r m a n c e s t a n d a r d s since they m e a s u r e s p a c e between and around buildings in r e l a t i o n t o the v a r i e t y of functions that they a r e t o p e r f o r m and in r e l a t i o n t o the s i z e and dimension
of land and buildings in a given situation. ' I
1
Annotated Bibliography P e r f o r m a n c e S t a n d a r d s f o r Space and Site Planning f o r R e s i d e n t i a l Development. P r e p a r e d by H. P. Oberlander
and F. L a s s e r r e . National R e s e a r c h Council, Division of Building
In examining f i r e , light, and sound a s critical functions in formulating limits for performance standards, the nature of privacy and the impact of the "need for privacy" upon space between buildings became
increasingly significant.
A review of current l i t e r a t u r e on "Privacy" a s one aspect of siting and spacing of residential buildings seemed an essential f i r s t step and was intended to f o r m the basis for a fuller understanding of the non-measurable aspects of the housing environment. "Privacy" subsumes a number of
these considerations and a careful examination of a cross-section of
current l i t e r a t u r e , summarized in the Annotated Bibliography contained in the following pages, will indicate further a r e a s of study and r e s e a r c h s o a s to achieve a more satisfying standard in placing buildings and
arranging them in the urban landscape. As Canadian housing construction i n c r e a s e s in quantity and in diversity of f o r m i t will be of growing
importance to dicover ways and means to approach not only an optimum use of land but fullest human satisfaction in the use of space between buildings.
INTRODUCTION
The p r o b l e m s involved in housing a r e steadily i n c r e a s i n g in number and complexity. No longer a r e p l a n n e r s m e r e l y concerned with s h e l t e r , they a r e now involved i n concepts of housing that s e e k t o fulfil two, often conflicting, a i m s : optimum u s e of land and provision of b a s i c s e c u r i t y and amenity. In the c a s e of s e c u r i t y , consultation of any municipal zoning bylaw will show that promotion of public health and w e l f a r e , prevention of f i r e , and s e c u r i n g of adequate light a r e among the m o s t prominent f e a t u r e s . But what about the a m e n i t i e s ? H e r e we e n t e r a m o r e loosely defined and vague a r e a . What people need of t h e i r environment can be f a i r l y well
d e t e r m i n e d , but what do they expect and d e s i r e of t h e i r r e s i d e n t i a l s u r r o u n d i n g s ?
It i s the purpose of this r e p o r t to take just one of t h e s e
expectations
- -
p r i v a c y- -
and place i t in i t s p e r s p e c t i v e in the v a r i e d value s t r u c t u r e s of u r b a n and suburban man. As a f i r s t s t e p in t h i s investigation a thorough s e a r c h was made of the l i t e r a t u r e . The r e s u l t s of this study a r e p r e s e n t e d in t h i s bibliography.P e o p l e live i n community with o t h e r s by choice. But i n c r e a s e s in population and i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n n e c e s s i t a t e i t . Confronted with t h i s , p r o b l e m s of planning and organization i m m e d i a t e l y a r i s e . L e t u s f o r a moment look a t the r o l e of the u r b a n planner a s he a t t e m p t s t o b r i n g o r d e r to the c o m m u n i t i e s i n which we live. What r a n g e s of choice a r e open t o h i m ?
Almost i m m e d i a t e l y he will attempt t o l i s t and s a t i s f y the n e e d s of h i s population. He knows that f i r e i s a t h r e a t t o community living, e s p e c i a l l y i f buildings a r e s i t e d too c l o s e together. Buildings need s e p a r a t i o n t o p r e v e n t the s p r e a d of f i r e , but how much s e p a r a t i o n i s r e q u i r e d ? Studies have shown t h a t i t depends on a number of f a c t o r s a s s o c i a t e d with the openings in the building f a ~ a d e .
Hence the planner develops a s t a n d a r d f o r the prevention of e x c e s s i v e f i r e h a z a r d b a s e d upon the p e r f o r m a n c e of e a c h building. He a t t a i n s h i s joint purpose: optimum u s e of the land and provision of b a s i c s e c u r i t y . The l i s t of n e e d s i s soon exhausted and the c o r r e -
sponding a t t e m p t s m a d e t o s a t i s f y t h e m . However, the planner i s only beginning. Not only does he have to provide a "safe" r e s i d e n c e , but
also, and here i s our concern, a "livable" residential environment. What does this entail?
This part of the planner's job i s by f a r the more difficult.
In any one of the so-called livability features
- -
privacy, aestheticappearance, outdoor space, and view
- -
the problems of measurementand evaluation become increasingly complex. The planner i s no
longer solely concerned with physical factors. He i s no longer working f r o m a survival standard. F a r more intricate and almost a s d r a s t i c a s f i r e a r e the problems of livability and there i s no single answer a s t h e r e i s in the case of fire. Standards must be based on the expec- tations and evaluations of residents rather than the physical properties of their dwelling units.
The planner, in order to establish a livable environment, must f i r s t ascertain what this i s . There i s only one way. He must go
directly to the people and ask them. Through use of a social survey, he i s better equipped to provide the various basic amenities desired and expected. Thus he becomes concerned, a s we all must, with questions of value. What do people living in a community d e s i r e of t h e i r neighbours? How close do they want to live to others? Do different stages of family life require different living conditions? What do people like and dislike about their residential circumstances?
These questions bring us back to our topic
- -
privacy a s afactor of space and site planning for residential development. I s i t possible to establish performance standards for securing one's privacy? An evaluation of the l i t e r a t u r e on privacy in relation to residence seemed an essential f i r s t step in answering this question.
STRUCTUREANDEVALUATIONOF THE LITERATURE
T h e r e h a s been v e r y little work done on the value of p r i v a c y a s a f a c t o r of r e s i d e n t i a l livability. The t e r m "privacy" itself d e f i e s objective a n a l y s i s . Rather i t connotes feelings of satisfaction o r d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n relating t o the p e r s o n e x p r e s s i n g t h e s e feelings.
Objective m e a s u r e m e n t i s i m p o s s i b l e . It i s possible, however, t o c o n s t r u c t a n index of p r i v a c y b a s e d on the v a r i o u s components of t h i s t e r m . T h e r e a r e two g e n e r a l a s p e c t s : physical and social.
In P a r t I and, t o s o m e extent, P a r t 11, "privacy" i s viewed
a s a physical s p a t i a l a r r a n g e m e n t
-
the individual o r family physicallys e p a r a t e f r o m that which i t w i s h e s t o avoid. F o r example, P a r t I d e a l s with the physical siting of buildings, the construction of "buffer zones1', v a r i o u s floor plan a r r a n g e m e n t s , the a r c h i t e c t u r a l ( s p a t i a l ) c r e a t i o n of different h i e r a r c h i e s of activity, density c o n t r o l s , and open space. All t h e s e f a c t o r s d i r e c t l y affect the enjoyment of one's p r i v a c y . In s h o r t , the a u t h o r s s e e m concerned with d i s c o v e r i n g t h o s e a s p e c t s of the physical environment that p r o m o t e c e r t a i n
s o c i a l phenomena.
P a r t
II
d e a l s with a p a r t i c u l a r a s p e c t of the physical e n v i r o n - m e n t-
n o i s e , The f a c t o r s mentioned above a r e a l l d i s c u s s e d with specific r e f e r e n c e t o sound t r a n s m i s s i o n and insulation. T r a f f i c , one of t h e m o s t s e r i o u s s o u r c e s of community n o i s e , r e c e i v e s s p e c i a l andextended t r e a t m e n t . H e r e t h e r e a r e two a s p e c t s of sound
-
physicaland subjective. The physical p r o p e r t i e s of sound can be a c c u r a t e l y m e a s u r e d but t h e subjective p r o p e r t i e s cannot. The d e g r e e of n o i s e annoyance, then, depends upon the p a r t i c u l a r r e s p o n s e of the individual i n h i s s o c i a l setting. T h e r e f o r e noise and i t s annoyance effect on a community m u s t be e s t a b l i s h e d by s o c i a l s u r v e y s . A sampling of the m o s t i m p o r t a n t of t h e s e s u r v e y s will be found in t h i s section.
P a r t ILI is wholly concerned with the people living i n
community. I t i s a s s u m e d that c e r t a i n physical situations s e t the s t a g e f o r c e r t a i n s o c i a l phenomena, but i t i s the a c t o r s who d e t e r m i n e t h e Gina1 effect. T h i s section i s devoted p r i m a r i l y t o e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h
on how people, b e c a u s e of t h e i r s o c i a l c i r c u m s t a n c e s , r e a c t t o living i n a community. Broken into t h r e e subsections, the studies r e v e a l a p p a r e n t d i f f e r e n c e s in the s t y l e s of life that people lead and t h e i r r e l a t i o n s with neighbours b a s e d on the type of community i n which they live.
At f i r s t a comparative a n a l y s i s i s made of city and suburb. H e r e we find that, broadly speaking, we a r e dealing with two d i f f e r e n t kinds of people. In the c e n t r a l city, people a r e m o r e heterogeneous and independent. Single people and working couples predominate; c h i l d r e n a r e r e l a t i v e l y few. Ir. the s u b u r b s , however, "the family" is both encouraged and valued. Styles of life a r e c e n t r e d around t h e f a m i l y and c h i l d - r a i s i n g activities. S p a c i o u s n e s s , a safe and healthy environment f o r children, f r e s h a i r , away f r o m the city and t r a f f i c , and "privacy" a r e a l l p r i m e r e a s o n s why r e s i d e n t s of the s u b u r b s enjoy living w h e r e they a r e . In t h i s and the following two s u b s e c t i o n s , d i f f e r e n c e s a r e a l s o noted i n neighbour r e l a t i o n s . More of the
community a t m o s p h e r e p e r v a d e s suburbia l a r g e l y b e c a u s e i t s r e s i d e n t s have something i n common, i. e . c h i l d r e n .
Different kinds of people have different r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e i r r e s i d e n c e . How do u r b a n and suburban people value p r i v a c y ? The s t u d i e s do not p r e s e n t total a g r e e m e n t but t h e r e is an indicative t r e n d of c o n s e n s u s . Some of the s t u d i e s , owing t o the p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c - t e r i s t i c s of the populations investigated, p r e s e n t conflicting v i e w s . T h i s ,
1 however, m e r e l y points t o the fact that o t h e r v a r i a b l e s a r e r e l e v a n t t o
t h e a n a l y s i s of how people f e e l toward t h e i r r e s i d e n c e .
,
Subsection G b r i n g s together s t u d i e s conducted in housing
p r o j e c t s . The advisability of selecting a completely new s i t e f o r the p r o j e c t r a t h e r than rehabilitating the blighted a r e a is questioned. The concept of isolation i s introduced alongside privacy.
P a r t I V d e a l s with the l e g a l concept of privacy and i t s , a s y e t , slight r e l a t i o n t o housing. P a r t V i s devoted t o a r e p o r t of how t h e popular housing m a g a z i n e s view privacy. Neighbour r e l a t i o n s , fence building, siting of buildings, patio construction, and the whole question of outdoor space a r e given prolific t r e a t m e n t . F r o m the
quantity and intensity of t h e s e a r t i c l e s , we can with justification a s s u m e that the subject of r e s i d e n t i a l p r i v a c y i s c e r t a i n l y not l i m i t e d t o t h e a c a d e m i c o r t e c h n i c a l world.
A p a r t i a l selection of the s o c i a l s u r v e y technique a s used in housing r e s e a r c h follows i n o r d e r t o acquaint t h e r e a d e r with the c o m p l e x i t i e s involved. It is i m p o r t a n t t o know how t o e l i c i t the type of r e s p o n s e that i s d e s i r e d . And finally, two other bibliographic r e f e r e n c e s a r e i n s e r t e d on the m o r e g e n e r a l subjects of housing and p e r f o r m a n c e s t a n d a r d s .
The l i t e r a t u r e surveyed and t h e i t e m s s e l e c t e d indicate a wide-ranging i n t e r e s t i n the i m p a c t of p r i v a c y upon spatial o r g a n -
ization. It i s hoped t h a t t h i s annotated bibliography will encourage
a continuing r e s e a r c h p r o g r a m into a l l a s p e c t s of siting r e s i d e n t i a l buildings f o r optimum privacy.
DEFINITIONS O F PRIVACY T h e w o r d "privacy" h a s m a n y implications. In o r d e r t o c l a r i f y o u r u s e of t h e t e r m , the f i r s t s e c t i o n of t h i s bibliography w i l l d e a l with i t s meaning a s d e s c r i b e d by s o m e of t h e i n t e r e s t e d w r i t e r s . 1. P r i v a c y i s f r e e d o m f r o m s o c i a l contact a n d o b s e r v a t i o n when t h e s e a r e not d e s i r e d .
( P a u l Halmos. Solitude and P r i v a c y , Routledge a n d Kegan P a u l Limited, London, 1952, p. 1 0 2 . )
2. P r i v a c y i s a d e s i r e d d e g r e e of s e c l u s i o n not involving isolation f r o m society, t h e group o r t h e family. It m a y r e l a t e t o t h e opportunity of a n individual t o b e a l o n e at t i m e s when being a l o n e i s e s s e n t i a l .
( H e n r y P. F a i r c h i l d , D i c t i o n a r y of Sociology, Littlefied, A d a m s ; A m e s , Iowa, 1955.)
3. P r i v a c y
-
o r t h e Right t o B e Let Alone-
i s p e r h a p s t h e m o s t p e r s o n a l of a l l l e g a l p r i n c i p l e s .. . .
T h e v e r y w o r d connotes a n e c e s s a r y alienation between t h e individual and h i s society, an alienation o r d i s t a n c e t h a t is at t h e c o r e of a l l our c i v i l l i b e r t i e s .( M o r r i s L. E r n s t a n d Alan U. Schwartz. P r i v a c y : T h e
Right t o B e Let Alone. T h e MacMillan Company,
New York, 1962, p. 1 . )
4. P r i v a c y is t h e f r e e d o m t o b e by oneself[and] is a value.
(F. S t u a r t Chapin. "Some Housing F a c t o r s R e l a t e d t o
M e n t a l Hygiene.
"
J. of S o c i a l I s s u e s , Vol. 7, Nos. 1 and 2, 1951, p. 1 6 5 . )5. P r i v a c y i s that m a r v e l o u s compound of withdrawal, self
-
r e l i a n c e , solitude, quiet, contemplation, and concentration. (S. Chermayeff and C. Alexander. Community a n d
P r i v a c y . Doubleday and Company, Inc., G a r d e n C i t y , New York, 1963, p. 3 8 . )
6. P r i v a c y
i s
t h e n e e d. .
.
f o r s h e e r p h y s i c a l s e p a r a t i o n of a c t i v i t i e s [and] v a r i e s f r o m one t y p e of f a m i l y to a n o t h e r . (Hanan C. Selvin. "The I n t e r p l a y of S o c i a l R e s e a r c h and S o c i a l P o l i c y i n Housing."
J. of S o c i a l I s s u e s ,PART I
1, Alderson, Stanley. B r i t a i n in t h e Sixties: Housing. Penquin Books Ltd., 1962.
A l d e r s o n is concerned with a v e r y b r o a d subject involving
a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , policy, and t h e politics of housing. He does r e p o r t , however, on s o m e i n t e r e s t i n g s u r v e y s c o n -
ducted in B r i t a i n on what people want of housing. Of
p a r t i c u l a r i n t e r e s t i s h i s section, "Community S e n s e and P r i v a c y " (p. 54-60), w h e r e h e d i s c u s s e s v a r i o u s a r c h i -
t e c t u r a l s c h e m e s of spacing and siting buildings. In t h e
r e s u l t a n t s u r v e y s , i t was found that t h e s e p l a n s w e r e l a r g e l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e aloofness o r "mateyness" of t h e r e s i d e n t s .
2. A m e r i c a n PubLic Health Association, C o m m i t t e e on t h e Hygiene
of Housing. Planning and t h e Neighborhood, P u b l i c Administration S e r v i c e , Chicago, 1948.
T h i s pioneer work d i s c u s s e s r e s i d e n t i a l s i t e development
i n r e l a t i o n t o community and environmental health. P e r
-
f o r m a n c e s t a n d a r d s f o r health a r e proposed which r e l a t e d i r e c t l y t o methods of achieving r e s i d e n t i a l privacy. Density is a l s o discussed.
3. A m e r i c a n Society of Zoning Officials. F e n c e s . Planning
Advisory S e r v i c e , Information R e p o r t No. 113, T h e Society, Chicago, 1958.
T h i s s h o r t r e p o r t acknowledges t h e p r e s e n c e of fence r e s t r i c t i o n s in m o s t zoning bylaws and then p r o c e e d s t o d i s c u s s t h e advantages ( p r i v a c y , n o i s e control, and wind- breaking) and disadvantages (blockage of sunlight, a i r flow, and view) of r e s i d e n t i a l fencing.
4. B a u e r , Catherine. S o c i a l Questions in Housing and Community
Planning, J o u r n a l of S o c i a l I s s u e s , Vol. 7 , Nos. 1 and 2,
1951, p. 1-34.
l l . .
.
e v e r y a s p e c t of housing and city planning policy c o m e s downs o o n e r o r l a t e r , t o qualitative s o c i a l decisions, 'value judgments', about individual n e e d s and p r e f e r e n c e s , f a m i l y and community functions, group r e l a t i o n s and t h e whole p a t t e r n of civic life." (p.
6)
F r o m this starting point, the author attempts to determine what aspects of the physical environment promote certain
social phenomena. In clarifying the relationship between these two factors, she s e t s up the basis for informed and resonable qualitative social decisions.
5. Beyer, Glenn H. Housing: A Factual Analysis. The
MacMillan Company, New York, 1958.
A general treatment of various subjects on housing. Through
p. 164
-
178, however, Beyer does discuss differenthousehold activities that suggest varying degrees of privacy.
Also, on p. 287
-
291, he mentions various ways in whichr e s e a r c h can be done in housing.
6. Chapin, F. Stuart. Some Housing F a c t o r s Related to Mental
Hygiene. Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 7, Nos. 1 and 2,
1951, p. 164
-
171.Chapin identifies "privacy1' a s a factor related t o mental
hygiene and then attempts to establish housing factors, i. e . ,
floor space, circulation throughout house, which provide for privacy in the home.
Also, a brief discussion i s included on the m e r i t s of experimental design.
7. Chermayeff, S. and Alexander, C. Community and Privacy.
Doubleday and Company, Inc., Garden City, New York, 1963.
The authors a r e strong in their c r i t i c i s m of t h e modern attempt at suburbia. They present an analytical scheme of their own based on the "necessary" separation of various h i e r a r c h i e s of activity on t h e community-individual or
1. Urban -Public 2. Urban-Semi -Public 3. Group -Public 4. Group -Private 5. Family-Private
6.
Individual -PrivateThey then devise an architectural plan designed to keep
distinct all the "joints" between the hierarchies. Their
r e s u l t s include a very elaborate system of courtyards and buffer zones. P e r h a p s they have excluded from their minds other principles also relevant to the housing situation.
They conclude: "Vehicles and pedestrians need s t r i c t separation; neighboring houses need insulation against f i r e and noise and other external factors; and the skin of the dwelling needs to separate the inside from a hostile climate. B a r r i e r s , modulators, and similar devices, permanent or temporary, must be provided to s c r e e n living c r e a t u r e s , light, and sounds; to s e p a r a t e the
desirable from the undesirable. The appropriate separ
-
ating device works in the manner of a joint. In fact,
the most important lesson to be learned from our detailed analysis i s that each different joint h a s i t s own special
form. 'I (p. 203)
8. Clements (Mark) Research, Inc. What Women Want in Housing:
Housing Design and the American Family. A Study Conducted for the National Association of Home Builders and House and Garden Magazine, NAHB Journal of
Homebuilding, Washington, D. C., 1964.
This r e p o r t i s p r i m a r i l y concerned with what a panel of women in s i x different cities like and dislike about certain aspects of housing. Whereas the study i s concerned with the interior of the house, t h e r e i s a s m a l l section on "the
neighborhood". The following i s a short excerpt.
"The ideal neighborhood has curved s t r e e t s , l a r g e t r e e s , and a cared-for appearance. Each house i s sufficiently
"Several women stated that they p r e f e r r e d a house built around a n inner c o u r t y a r d and e n t i r e l y closed off f r o m t h e s t r e e t and t h e i r neighbors. All hoped t o b e a c o n s i d -
e r a b l e distance away f r o m t h e next -door neighbor..
.
.
"In Los Angeles, p r i v a c y was c o n s i d e r e d a s e r i o u s
problem. T h e cost of land had m a d e l a r g e l o t s p r o h i b i
-
tive, s o extra-high fences, walled-in patios, t r e e s and high s h r u b s w e r e considered n e c e s s i t i e s . They enjoyed outdoor living a t l e a s t s i x months a y e a r and r e q u i r e d maximum p r i v a c y for entertaining, swimming, and c a s u a l
d r e s s i n g habits. I s (p. 11
-
12)9. Izumi, K. P e r f o r m a n c e Standards for Residential Zoning
and Subdivision Controls. Royal A r c h i t e c t u r a l Institute
of Canada Journal, Vol. 30, December 1953, p. 347
-
364.T h e author p r o p o s e s that physical plan and design should be m o r e strongly r e l a t e d t o social need and expectation. Specifically, h e l i s t s four p e r f o r m a n c e - t y p e provisions r e l a t i n g t o t h e r e s i d e n t i a l lot. They involve:
1. density c o n t r o l s
2. floor a r e a r a t i o a s a n a l t e r n a t i v e t o yard r e q u i r e m e n t s
3. reduction of t h e usual 90 d e g r e e r e - e n t r a n t
angles for lot lines, and
4. flexible lot widths according t o local conditions.
10. Katz, R o b e r t D. Intensity of Development and Livability of
M u l t i - F a m i l y Housing P r o j e c t s . Technical Study TS. 7. 14,
F e d e r a l Housing Administration, Washington, D. C.
,
J a n u a r y 1963.
Katz f i r s t e s t a b l i s h e s s o m e "intensity factors" (density,
coverage, floor a r e a r a t i o , building type and s i z e , etc. )
which h e then a t t e m p t s t o r e l a t e t o h i s "livability f a c t o r s . " P r i v a c y i s in t h e l a t t e r group.
He concludes: " P r i v a c y and density a r e in d i r e c t c o n t r a s t : a s density i n c r e a s e s , p r i v a c y declines. T h e m o r e people on a given p a r c e l of land and t h e c l o s e r together they live, t h e l e s s p r i v a c y t h e r e i s for each family. I s (p. 36)
The author does not t r e a t his subject in depth. The r e p o r t i s m o r e of a pictorial survey of European and American housing projects.
11. Madge, Charles. Planning for People. Town Planning Review,
Vol. 21, 1950-51, p. 131
-
144.The author deals with the family in relation to i t s dwelling and the surrounding space. "Space," he breaks down into: indoor private space, outdoor private space, outdoor public space, and roads, footpaths, and garages.
He presents a plausible consideration. "In England, t h e r e h a s been a reaction from the overcrowded back-street where no one h a s any privacy at all and this reaction often takes the form of high hedges, lace curtains, and a strong
tendency to keep apart from neighbors..
.
.
On the other hand,i f essential privacies a r e guaranteed, it i s possible..
.
tocoax people out of their inturned phases and on to shared local spaces, a s t h e r e a r e fundamental human satisfactions in seeing neighbors and being seen by neighbors, provided
this can be done without social s t r a i n or self-consciousness.
"
12. Merton,
R.
K. Social Psychology of Housing. In Dennis, W.,
et al; (eds. ) Current Trends in Social ~ s ~ c h o l o ~ ~ ,
University of Pittsburgh P r e s s , 1951, p. 163
-
217.Merton f i r s t discusses the difficulties involved with people's ability t o project. In h i s housing study, he found that those people with enough privacy were apt to a s s u m e this a s
typical of a l l housing projects. Implicit in this discovery i s a warning to future r e s e a r c h e r s that people, in general, find little difficulty in jumping from the particular to the general.
Merton a l s o found a v e r y interesting relationship between patterns of association and architectural design. In the housing project some of the houses faced out on the s t r e e t while others looked in on an interior court. "Of the eighty- two friendships reported by informants with people whom the observer found to live in dwellings directly 'across the
7 4 p e r cent involve c a s e s i n which both t h e
-
informant and h i s f r i e n d live in s t r e e t - o r i e n t e d dwellings;22 p e r cent involve c a s e s i n which either t h e informant o r h i s friend live in s t r e e t - o r i e n t e d dwellings; and only
4 p e r cent of t h e s e friendships involve p a i r s in which neither m e m b e r l i v e s in s t r e e t - o r i e n t e d
dwellings.
"
(p. 207 -8)T h e r e s i d e n t s t h e m s e l v e s w e r e not a w a r e that t h e i r f r i e n d - s h i p s w e r e s o c l o s e l y controlled by the a r c h i t e c t u r a l design. Merton s t a t e s that t h i s "implies that social-psychological
r e s e a r c h in housing m u s t move beyond inventories of r e s i d e n t s ' complaints and fully verbalized behavior t o t h o s e f a c t o r s
in community s t r u c t u r e which a r e below their threshold of a w a r e n e s s . (p. 208
-9)
13. M u r r a y , J a m e s . A. T h e A r c h i t e c t u r e of Housing. T h e 1962
Canadian Housing Design Council L e c t u r e given a t t h e National G a l l e r y of Canada, Ottawa, November 29, 1962. P r i n t e d by t h e Canadian Housing Design Council, Ottawa. In t h i s l e c t u r e , M u r r a y d i s c u s s e s v a r i o u s types of housing and s o m e of t h e s o c i a l demands that a r e m a d e of them. "It m a y not b e a m i s s t o r e m i n d o u r s e l v e s of t h e p u r p o s e of housing. It s h e l t e r s t h e physiological functions of living, sleeping, eating, bathing; i t s h e l t e r s t h e c a r e and
education of children and t h e p r i v a t e and public domestic life of i t s occupants. It s e r v e s a s a haven t o individuals h a r d p r e s s e d by t h e group obligations and p r e s s u r e s of m o d e r n life. It i s a symbol and e x p r e s s i o n of i t s occupant i n p a r t i c u l a r and its t i m e s in geneal. As for a r c h i t e c t u r e , t h e f i r s t two p u r p o s e s a r e usually well taken c a r e of if only b e c a u s e t h e y can b e rationalized, but t h e l a s t two
p u r p o s e s
-
haven and symbol-
a r e for a r c h i t e c t u r e p o s s i b l y t h e m o s t potent, a s t h e y constitute t h e i r r a t i o n a l i t i e s . R o b e r t Woods Kennedy, a n A m e r i c a n a r c h i t e c t , h a s put t h e c e n t r a l i s s u e w e l l 'the t h e m e s of living a r e love, sociability, p r i v a c y , s e l f - e x p r e s s i o n , comfort and belonging and they will suffuse a good house-
t h e house i s only a r e c e p t a c l e t o r e c e i v e them'."14. R o o m s Without Ceilings: T e n Vancouver A r c h i t e c t s and Landscape A r c h i t e c t s T a k e a Second Look at Suburbia. A p r o j e c t sponsored by t h e B r i t i s h Columbia Lumber Manufacturer's Association, Vancouver, B. C.
In t h i s project, the a r c h i t e c t s p r e s e n t detailed drawings that extend the "living a r e a s " beyond t h e house and out into t h e garden. They a r e concerned with i l l - u s e d open
space, beauty, privacy. and r e s a l e value. Many of
t h e i r p l a n s for enjoyment of outdoor living a r e a s c o n t r a - vene existing zoning bylaws owing t o t h e r e s t r i c t i o n s on t h e height of f e n c e s and t h e location of c a r p o r t s in f r o n t yards. Following a r e s o m e c o m m e n t s by t h e a r c h i t e c t s t h e m s e l v e s .
"Of a l l the e l e m e n t s of a healthy f a m i l y environment, p r i v a c y i s t h e m o s t often overlooked."
(Woodruff W. Wood) "At t h e p a c e of our m o d e r n competitive society, e v e r y h o m e n e e d s t h e s p a c e f o r a n a r e a of r e t r e a t i s o l a t e d
f r o m other family activities.
"
(Clive L. J u s t i c e ) ( H a r r y Webb) "Certainly b e t t e r u s e of land i s the key t o the m a j o r i t y of t h e p r o b l e m s of suburban living. "
(William R. Rhone) "Land value i s a l r e a d y s o high in m o s t s u b u r b s that t o t a l
development of p r o p e r t y i s just about a m u s t i f a h o m e
owner i s going t o get h i s money's worth out of h i s investment. I'
(Stewart M. C a m e r o n ) ( H e r b e r t Wilson)
15. Royal A r c h i t e c t u r a l Institute of Canada. Zoning Study C o m m i t t e e :
F i r s t Statement, A p r i l 1963.
T h e c o m m i t t e e s e e k s t o e s t a b l i s h a f r a m e w o r k f o r p e r f o r
-
m a n c e s t a n d a r d s in r e s i d e n t i a l zoning based on density in r e l a t i o n t o dwelling type which r e s u l t s in a "minimum outdoor a r e a . I'T h e siting and spacing of buildings is of m a j o r c o n c e r n . Dependent upon what u s e s (living r o o m window, habitable r o o m window, o r blank wall) a r e m a d e of the w a l l s of adjacent buildings, varying s p a c e p r o v i s i o n s m u s t be m a d e for a i r circulation, light, and p r i v a c y (freedom f r o m n o i s e and being overlooked). T h r e e c h a r t s for t h e n e c e s s a r y "yard dimensions" a r e found on p. IX-XI.
16. Schoenauer, Norbert. S i t e and Scale. T h e Canadian A r c h i t e c t ,
Vol. 9, No. 1, J a n u a r y 1964, p. 35
-
39.T h e author d i s c u s s e s "ill-used open space. I S Owing t o t h e
prohibition of high f e n c e s (over 4 f e e t ) in m o s t existing
bylaws, potential u s e r s of t h e g a r d e n a r e a a r e robbed of a l l privacy, and " e s s e n t i a l ahd inherent p r e r e q u i s i t e of
gardens. * I (p. 39)
"It m u s t now b e evident that a r e a s o n a b l e evolution of design p r i n c i p l e s f o r our new r e s i d e n t i a l d i s t r i c t s i s handicapped by m a n y of t h e existing s t a n d a r d s and regulations. Rigid s t a n d a r d s govern our design when flexibility i s c a l l e d f o r t o m e e t t h e changing r e q u i r e m e n t s dictated by t h e new s c a l e of developments built f o r a s o c i e t y
which h a s adopted a new mobility. I S (p. 39)
17. Tokmakian, Harold. M e a s u r e m e n t and Analysis of R e s i d e n t i a l Density and Livability. C o r n e l l University, Unpublished M. R. P. t h e s i s , 1956.
T h e author's study t a k e s p l a c e in public housing p r o j e c t s i n New York. He a t t e m p t s t o r e l a t e a density index t o c e r t a i n livability f a c t o r s , including o f f - s t r e e t parking,outdoor
living s p a c e , play a r e a s , and privacy.
H e concludes: "In g e n e r a l , then, it can be s a i d that
d e n s i t y alone does not give a n e n t i r e l y adequate indication of livability. It c a n be c o n s i d e r e d a g e n e r a l f r a m e w o r k
18. Toll, Seymour I. Zoning f o r Amenities. Law and C o n t e m p o r a r y
P r o b l e m s , Vol. 20, No. 2, S p r i n g 1955, p. 266
-
279.T h e author i s concerned with population density control, p r o t e c t i o n of light, air, and p r i v a c y , and u s a b l e open s p a c e
as f a c t o r s that should b e c o n s i d e r e d in m o d e r n r e s i d e n t i a l zoning.
T o l l r e c o m m e n d s that floor a r e a r a t i o s b e substituted f o r y a r d setback regulations s o that each house can be s i t e d i n t h e b e s t way a s f a r a s t h e attainment of p r i v a c y and u s a b l e open s p a c e a r e concerned.
19. Whyte, William H. Jr. T h e Organization Man. Doubleday and
Company, Inc., G a r d e n City, N. Y . , 1956.
Sections of P a r t VII ("The New Suburbia: Organization Man a t Home") in t h i s c l a s s i c w o r k a r e of i n t e r e s t t o us. H e r e Whyte d i s c u s s e s t h e values of t h e organization m a n a s h e displays them i n h i s r e s i d e n c e .
In "The Web of Friendship" (p. 365
-
86), Whyte n o t e s howa r c h i t e c t u r a l design does affect neighborly r e l a t i o n s . However, in t h e next c h a p t e r ("The Outgoing Life"), h e
w o n d e r s a t the advisability of c r e a t i n g closely-knit, cohesive neighborhood u n i t s a s a r e s u l t of a r c h i t e c t u r a l plan.
PART I1
20. A m e r i c a n P u b l i c Health As sociation, C o n t r o l of Noise: S t a n d a r d s for Healthful Housing, Construction and Equipment of t h e Home. C o m m i t t e e on t h e Hygiene of Housing, P u b l i c
Administration S e r v i c e . Chap. 4, p. 3 3 .
The p u r p o s e s of n o i s e control, g e n e r a l a s p e c t s of t h e n o i s e problem, the establishment of r a t i o n a l c r i t e r i a and methods
of n o i s e c o n t r o l a r e discussed. S t a t i s t i c s and t a b l e s of n o i s e data a r e p r e s e n t e d in simplified form.
21. Apps, David C. T r a f f i c Noise Control. Noise Control, 1957, p. 34.
T h e author d i s c u s s e s t h e p r o b l e m of n o i s e s t a n d a r d s t h a t
m a y f a c e t h e t r u c k i n g i n d u s t r y a s a r e s u l t of public complaints u n l e s s b e t t e r muffling devices a r e maintained on l a r g e
t r a n s p o r t vehicles. S o m e s t a t i s t i c s r e l a t i n g t o the a g e of t r u c k s nationally and on t h e West C o a s t a r e included.
22. B i t t e r , C. and Van Weeren, P . , Sound Nuisance and Sound
Insulation In Blocks of Dwellings, I. R e p o r t No. 24, R e s e a r c h
Institute f o r P u b l i c Health Engineering, T. N. 0.
,
S e p t e m b e r1955, ( T h e Hague).
A n u m b e r of sound insulation m e a s u r e m e n t s w e r e m a d e in different kinds of dwellings and the data w e r e c o m p a r e d with t h e opinions of t h o s e living in the dwellings. T h e objective w a s t o evaluate t h e t r a n s m i s s i o n p e r f o r m a n c e of different building s y s t e m s and e s t a b l i s h a r e l a t i o n s h i p between sound insulation and sound nuisance, T h e r e s u l t s of the study a r e c o m p a r e d with B r i t i s h data g a t h e r e d in a s i m i l a r way.
23. Bolt, R. H. and Newman, R. B . , T h e P r o b l e m of Acoustics in
A p a r t m e n t Buildings. A r c h i t e c t u r a l F o r u m , J a n u a r y 1950, p. 120.
T h e p r o b l e m s of n o i s e annoyance i n a p a r t m e n t s i s d i s c u s s e d in g e n e r a l f o r m and suggestions a r e m a d e f o r the i m p r o v e - m e n t of c o n s t r u c t i o n i n r e l a t i o n t o sound t r a n s m i s s i o n .
24. Bonvallet, A. L. Levels and Spectra of T r a f f i c , Industrial and Residential Area Noise. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 23, No. 4, 1951, p. 435.
Beginning i n 1947 an extensive survey of noise was conducted in Chicago. The workers determined that, for p r a c t i c a l reasons, the most significant band for annoyance was the
400-800 cycle p e r second band. Levels recorded at that
band indicated that traffic predominated at nearly all points measured. The findings of this survey led later to the adoption of a performance standard for noise in Chicago.
25. B u r r i s , Howard T. An Approach for Quiet Neighborhood Planning.
Sound, September-October 1962, p. 7.
Field techniques for determining the extent of possible annoyance from industrial plant noises i s discussed.
26. Committee on the Problem of Noise, Noise, Final Report. London,
H. M. S. O., 1963.
This study i s generally r e f e r r e d to a s the Wilson Report. It i s an extensive inquiry into all aspects of noise, including noise in towns, noise in the country, the law relating to noise, noise i n industry, noise within buildings, noise from motor vehicles, a i r c r a f t noise, occupational exposure to high levels of noise, e t c . . The study also contains a highly instructive appendix that includes detailed s u m m a r i e s of attempts to value noise subjectively, the performance of windows in sound transmission, a bibliography covering r e f -
erences treating the effects of noise on people, a social survey in the vicinity of London airport, acceptable
intrusive noise levels in dwellings, model bylaws relating to noise in s t r e e t s and public places, etc..
Work related to subjective ratings for noise i s perhaps the most extensive published to date.
27. Embleton, T. F. W. and Thiessen, A. J. Train Noises and Use of Adjacent Land. Sound, Vol. 1, No. 1, January-
F e b r u a r y 1962, p. 10-16.
T r a i n noises a r e studied in relation t o sound p r e s s u r e levels, spectrum, make-up of vehicles and distance of
observer from the vehicles. Of importance i s the author's
attempt to a s s e s s train noise according to bylaw noise c r i t e r i a . A brief but instructive analysis of the effects of distance, buffers, walls, foliage and depressions on noise ].eve1 i s presented.
28. F. H. A. Recommendations For Impact Noise Isolation in
Multi-Family Dwellings. F. H. A. No. 750, Washington,
D. C., 1963.
A proposal i s made for the evaluation of impact noises and
a system for rating building constructions i s advanced. A
lengthy discussion of privacy and annoyance i s included
together with a comprehensive bibliography of 37 references. American experience i s compared with European impact noise standards.
29. General Radio Company. Handbook of Noise Measurement. FourthEdition, Massachusetts, 1962.
A practical manual presenting, in outline form, the
principles of community noise measurement. The principal m e r i t of this r e f e r e n c e i s the data and procedures presented for the operation of instruments designed for field use in measuring community sounds.
30. Goodfried, Lewis S. Effects of Noise on People: Noise Control in Buildings. Building Research Institute, New York,
1959, p. 10.
The direct and indirect effects of noise on people a r e outlined and the mechanics of the individualst attempts to adapt to i t a r e discussed. Tables show recommended noise c r i t e r i a for various types of rooms. Cost in relation to quality of noise control i s a l s o discussed.
31. Gray, P. G . , Cartwright, Ann, and P a r k i n , P.H. Noise in
T h r e e Groups of Flats. R e s e a r c h P a p e r No. 27, H. M. S. 0.
London, 1958.
T h e sound t r a n s m i s s i o n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of various buildings w e r e m e a s u r e d and t h e tenants of the buildings w e r e
questioned regarding the sound p e r f o r m a n c e of their apartments. The study recommended changes in the standard of construction for multi-family dwellings.
32. National P h y s i c a l Laboratory, Symposium No. 12, T h e Control
of Noise. H. M. S. O., London, 1962.
Twenty-five p a p e r s covering various a s p e c t s of sound, annoyance, noise, c l a s s e s of noise, industrial p r o b l e m s r e l a t e d t o sound, etc., a r e included. Of special importance a r e t h o s e concerned with community sounds and n o i s e s and their m e a s u r e m e n t and control. See, for example, p. 5, 41, 153, 243, 297, 311, 325, 333, 345, 359, 373.
33. Noise Abatement Bylaw No. 2531, City of Vancouver.
The anti-noise bylaw for the City of Vancouver is typical
of m o s t c i t i e s in that it provides some regulation and enforcement of a p a r t of "residential nuisance." Its r e a l effect, however, i s quite s m a l l in providing for one's
privacy. C a s e s cited b y the Vancouver City prosecutor,
Donald M. Stevens, i n a period of a year and a half (January
9, 1963
-
June 18, 1964) a r e a s follows:Number Nature of Complaint
2 3 Barking dogs
1 Rooster
7 Neighbors (radios, home
machinery, etc. ) 6 Construction and i n d u s t r i a l nc i s e 3 C o m m e r c i a l ( r e s t a u r a n t s , etc. ) 5
-
Miscellaneous 4534. T h e Noise P e r f o r m a n c e S t a n d a r d s of t h e Chicago Zoning Ordinance. Noise Control, 1957, p. 51.
"On May 27, 1957 t h e s o - c a l l e d comprehensive a m e n d m e n t t o t h e Chicago Zoning Ordinance was p a s s e d by t h e Chicago C i t y Council." T h e s t a n d a r d c o v e r s n o i s e and vibration in v a r i o u s d i s t r i c t s of t h e city and defines t h e p r o c e d u r e and equipment t o b e u s e d i n m e a s u r e m e n t s .
35. Northwood, T. D. Sound Insulation and t h e Apartmeht Dweller. J o u r n a l Acoustical Society of A m e r i c a , Vol. 36, No. 4, A p r i l 1964, p. 725-728.
T h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s between t h e sound t r a n s m i s s i o n p e r
-
f o r m a n c e of a p a r t m e n t constructions and n o i s e c r i t e r i a c u r v e s a r e discussed. C o m p a r i s o n s a r e m a d e of p o s s i b l e insulation s t a n d a r d s with s o m e existing in Europe.36. Sound Insulation Ratings and t h e New A. S. T. M. Sound
T r a n s m i s s i o n C l a s s . J o u r n a l A c o u s t i c a l Society of A m e r i c a , Vol. 34, No. 4, A p r i l 1962, p. 493-501.
"A s u r v e y is m a d e of p a s t and p r e s e n t s y s t e m s for r a t i n g t h e sound insulation value of building walls and f l o o r s .
It i s o b s e r v e d t h a t in m o s t c o u n t r i e s r a t i n g s b a s e d on a v e r a g e t r a n s m i s s i o n l o s s e s h a v e been r e p l a c e d b y s y s t e m s that
c o m p a r e t r a n s m i s s i o n l o s s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s with a s t a n d a r d
contour. E x p e r i e n c e indicates t h a t r a t i n g contours a r e
m o r e effective and efficient i n r e l a t i n g t r a n s m i s s i o n p e r
-
f o r m a n c e t o human sensitivity.37. O s t e r g a a r d , P a u l B. and Donley, Ray. Back-Ground Noise L e v e l s i n Suburban Communities. J o u r n a l Acoustical S o c i e t y of A m e r i c a , Vol. 36, No. 3, 1964, p. 409-413.
"Noise s u r v e y s h a v e been m a d e in a number of r e c e n t l y e s t - a b l i s h e d suburban communities, a s well a s i n well e s t a b l i s h e d c o m m u n i t i e s that a r e not p e n e t r a t e d by m a j o r e x p r e s s w a y s o r r a i l r o a d s . M e a s u r e m e n t s of background n o i s e l e v e l s
a r e p r e s e n t e d and c o m p a r e d with e a r l i e r published data. T h e findings indicate a change in mid-frequency band l e v e l s that should b e c o n s i d e r e d in developing zoning and n u i s a n c e c o n t r o l s t a t u t e s . "
38. P u r k i s , H. J. Transport Noise and Town Planning. Journal of
Sound Vibration, Vol. 1, No. 3, Academic P r e s s , London,
1964, p. 323.
The most recent London noise survey i s discussed and compared with previous surveys. Road traffic was found to predominate and caused most disturbance to people even when they were indoors. If the increasing r a t e of traffic i s to cause higher levels of noise and hence, m o r e annoyance to urban dwellers, then corrective town planning techniques must be developed.
39. Rosenblith, W. A., Stevens, K. N., and staff of Bolt, Beranek,
and Newman Inc., Handbook of Acoustic Noise Control
Volume I1 Noise and Man, Wright
-
Patterson Air F o r c eBase, Ohio, U.S. Air Force, 1953.
This report i s an exhaustive summary of physiological and psychological information concerned mainly with man's reaction to sound. Both laboratory and field experience a r e discussed. The central purpose of the study i s the development of a system of valuing for community noise based on noise c r i t e r i a curves suggested by the authors. An attempt i s made to define noise annoyance and much back- ground experience i s presented in support of the authors' system for valuing and prediction of community reaction to sounds. Chapter 18 i s of particular importance.
40. Wendt, Edward H. Techniques of Noise Control for Public
Utilities. Noise Control, September 1957, p. 37.
The author discusses techniques and procedures for the evaluation of noise particularly from t r a n s f o r m e r s and i l l u s t r a t e s relationships to possible annoyance.
PART 111
41. Anderson, Nels. The Urban Community. Henry Holt and Company, New York, 1959.
A text book treatment of the many aspects of living in community. Chapter 2, "The Nature of the Community" (p. 24-46), deals with the neighborhood and the social conditions that promote anonymity and impersonal
relations a s apart from the conditions that foster "direct simplicity" and p r i m a r y group relations.
42. Fava, Sylvia F. Contrasts in Neighboring: New York City
and a Suburban County. In Dobriner, William M. (ed. )
The Suburban
omm mu nit^,^.
P. Putnam's Sons, NewYork, 1958, p. 122-131.
In this empirical study, Fava "found that neighboring was associated with various factors of a 'settling d o w n ' p r o c e s s ; being or having been m a r r i e d , home-ownership, stability
of residence, ages between 30 and 65, etc." (p. 124)
Keeping these factors constant in the urban and suburban a r e a s , she discovered that t h e r e was significantly m o r e neighboring in the suburban community, and, what i s m o r e , that t h e r e was a higher percentage of people with t h e s e "settling down" c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s living in suburbia.
43. Goffman, Erving. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Doubleday and Company, Inc., Garden City, N. Y . , 1959. Goffman, using a dramaturgical analogy, illustrates the different "faces" people use when confronting others in various social situations.
All the world's a stage
. . .
and we separate the backstagefrom the front stage. We limit observation of the a c t o r s to t h e front stage s o that they might be permitted to change costume, l e a r n their lines, take a "break", change roles, and generally, to place themselves in seclusion. Backstage becomes a private realm which does not involve the p r e s s u r e and s t r a i n that occurs in interacting with a "strange"
44. G r e e r , Scott. The Emerging City: Myth and Reality. T h e F r e e P r e s s of Glencoe, New York, 1962.
45. T h e Social S t r u c t u r e and P o l i t i c a l P r o c e s s of
Suburbia. American Sociological Review, Vol. 25, August 1960, p. 514-26.
46. Urbanism Reconsidered: A Comparative Study
of Local A r e a s i n a Metropolis. A m e r i c a n Sociological Review, Vol. 21, F e b r u a r y 1956, p. 19-25.
T h e s e writings, a l l r e l a t e d in subject, culminate in t h e book by G r e e r . T h e author develops a method of viewing people in different types of r e s i d e n t i a l a r e a s . By
establishing a continum of "urbanism,
"
G r e e r finds t h a t"style of life" and t h e d e g r e e of "urbanism" c o r r e l a t e v e r y highly. Some of h i s conclusions a r e significant.
"The a v e r a g e u r b a n r e s i d e n t h a s s o m e informal neighboring
relationships, but they a r e not one of t h e m a i n s t a y s of his
life. He values highly t h e neighbor who i s a 'nice
p e r son and l e a v e s you alone'.
"
(The Erner ging City, p.90)
' I . .
.
t h e less u r b a n t h e neighborhood, t h e g r e a t e r t h einvolvement of i t s r e s i d e n t s in voluntary organizations and t h e g r e a t e r t h e i r concern for, and participation in,
neighborhood and local community. T h e l o c a l a r e a b e c o m e s
a social fact, a s well a s a geographical s i t e for activity. "
(Ibid., p. 93)
He concludes with a. c o m p a r a t i v e note: "Suburban r e s i d e n t s who have been a s k e d t o c o m p a r e their home with the c e n t r a l c i t y have emphasized t h e physical and s o c i a l f a c i l i t i e s
f o r c h i l d - r a i s i n g
-
and high on t h e r a n k o r d e r i s p r i v a t e s p a c e , i n s i d e and out,"
(Ibid., p. 110)G r e e r l a t e r p r o c e e d s , i n both t h e book and t h e a r t i c l e s , t o d e s c r i b e v a r i o u s s o c i a l types living in community. T h e s e c o n s i s t of: t h e m u l t i - l e v e l p a r t i c i p a t o r , t h e community a c t o r , t h e neighborhood a c t o r , t h e voyeur, and the i s o l a t e . He s u m s up h i s a r g u m e n t in t h e following fashion. "Thus t h e d e g r e e of interaction in spatially defined groups v a r i e s d i r e c t l y with t h e f a m i l i s m of t h e population, and c o n v e r s e l y
Halmos, Paul. Solitude and Privacy. Routledge and Kegan P a u l Limited, London, 1952.
Halmos begins very generally with a discussion of the historical evolution of social-cultural determinism and
i t s effects on individual-genetic development. Desociali-
zation i s the major effect. The author focuses h i s attention
"on that sector of our value-system which ennobles isolation and r a i s e s it t o the status of m o r e or l e s s desirable privacy."
(P. 91.)
In Chap. V I (p. 102-26), Halmos discusses "The Ideology
of Privacy and Reserve." He f i r s t establishes a continuum,
solitude (the lack of desired social contact) and privacy (freedom from social contact when not desired) being the two extreme points. He then proceeds "to t r a c e the
predominant elements of
. . .
extreme individualism and toshow that these elements in their totality constitute an
ideology of privacy and r e s e r v e in contemporary society. 'I
(p. 106)
One such element i s of particular interest t o us. "In our Western society, the basic pattern of living i s rigidly home-centered; the daily and nightly retirement into
solitude or the family c i r c l e shows up the only things which have remained really concrete and tangible to modern man: h i s freedom in privacy and his belonging to the family
circle. One lives one's life in the family and one h a s social contacts, makes social excursions, instead of the other way round, that i s , instead of living i n society and withdrawing from it occasionally according to one's
need. (p. 11 9)
This interesting study i s complete with empirical r e s e a r c h on attitudes to social contact and actual social participation, and their relationships to certain personality t r a i t s .
Mumford, Lewis, The City in History. Harcourt, B r a c e and World, Inc., New York, 1961.
A v e r y readable history of the growth of the metropolis.
m o r e tailored to our specific purposes. Mumford, discusses, among other things, neighborly association in the city and the suburb, the reasons for i t s absence in the former and i t s presence in the latter. T h e r e i s , however, no easy formula.
49. Stein, Maurice. The Eclipse of Community: An Interpretation
of American Studies. Princeton University P r e s s ,
Princeton, N. J . , 1960.
Stein analyses some of the most prominent of the community studies (Caste and C l a s s in a Southern Town, Communities, Middletown, Human Communities, Crestwood Heights,
The Exurbanites, The Organization Man, etc. ) with an
idea "to devise an approach to community studies which will discern similar p r o c e s s e s at work in different
contexts." (p. 4.) He supplies broad anthropological,
psychoanalytic, and sociological perspectives on the modern community.
50. Veblen, Thornstein. The Theory of the Leisure Class. London,
1924.
Veblen, in this c l a s s i c study of a particular aspect of Western society, i l l u s t r a t e s the sharp distinction made between the public and private realms. What i s seen, i. e., open to public scrutiny, i s given far m o r e consideration than the private life conducted behind closed doors.
' I . .
.
people habitually s c r e e n their private lives f r o mobservation. So f a r a s concerns that portion of their consumption that may without blame be c a r r i e d on in
secret, they withdraw from a l l contact from their neighbors. Hence the exclusiveness of people, a s r e g a r d s their
domestic life, in most industrially developed communities; and hence, by remoter derivation* the habit of privacy and r e s e r v e that i s s o l a r g e a feature in t h e code of proprieties of the better c l a s s e s in a l l cummunities." (p. 112)
PART I11
