ww—‘w

 

—
.—
——
—_
—
——
——
——
——
——
.—
——
——
——
—
—

140
516
THS

 

\

. ~. ws 1 on“ C t-f‘l-Détitf-J‘h‘fll‘fifdiuqhn

.
u
o
.
. n
. .
.
0 . .
a
a
o
.
~
0

 

 

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

MAY 1 0 2010

 

M1010

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/05 c:/CITa0/Dateoue.ind¢p.15

 

 

tn

kldLC 1” “at,“ ulv‘ t“)
.. ave thic- AL

 

SETTING THE STAGE:
PROMOTING NEIGHBORHOOD SENSE OF COMMUNITY THROUGH
TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN
By

Meg Therese Skelley

APlanB

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING - URBAN AFFAIRS

Department of Urban and Regional Planning
Urban Affairs Programs

1998

ABSTRACT
SETTING THE STAGE:
PROMOTING NEIGHBORHOOD SENSE OF COMMUNITY
THROUGH TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN
By:

Meg Therese Skelley

Since World War 11, there has been a decrease in sense of_ community throughout
America. Without connection to physical places, people lose their sense of community
that many residents of traditional neighborhoods still have. This is pfiartlydue tgfcity and
neighborhood design. Many different professions can play a part in rebuilding sense of
community, but urban planners have a special role and responsibility. Through
incorporating Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) standards into plarming, urban

planners can help develop stronger cities and neighborhoods. An extensive literature

_..—.—-.—/—"' -——~

 

._.

review and a limited study of Seaside, Florida will be used to investigate how TND can

\. / ‘‘‘‘
h..___. an...”

befiegy planners to impact the level of sense of co /unity

The factors of TND that promote sense of community include<town/neighborhood
design, architecture, town philosophy, civic landmarks that create identity, the street
hierarchy, the accessibility of community places and activities, and the existence of
informal gathering places. /Urban planners contribute to the development of the physical
environment people live, work and play in and to the overall sense of community through
their daily decision making. Therefore, Urban 'Planners have an obligation to recognize

the strengths of their communities and to find ways to promote sense of community

through betterIdesign, outreach, changes in policy, and participatory planning.\

. \

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ............................................................................................. 1
Methodology .......................................................................................... 5
Literature Review ..................................................................................... 8
What is "Sense of Community"? .......................................................... 9
Intersections of Sense of Community and Physical Design ........................... 12
Traditional Neighborhood Design and Sense of Community ........................ 25
Seaside, Florida ...................................................................................... 32
History ....................................................................................... 32
Physical Elements .......................................................................... 35
Why Should We Expect Seaside's Design to Create Sense of Community? ....... 37
Advantages and Disadvantages ........................................................... 48
Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................. 52
Creating Places that Matter through Traditional Neighborhood Design. . . . . . . . ....52
The Role of Urban Planners in Promoting Sense of Community ................... 53
Bibliography ......................................................................................... 57
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Seaside Real Estate Sales Activity ..................................................... 45
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Seaside, Florida - Town Map ........................................................... 36

Figure 2. Seaside, Florida - Urban Code and Zoning Code .................................... 51

Introduction

 

By now it’s settled into American myth. That wonderful town we grew up in,
even if we never really did. There’s Main Street, maybe a town square, and a
great old movie house. And after the movie we walked to the drugstore to see
all our fi'iends and enjoy the perfect milkshake. Neighbors lived just across
the way. Work was a stroll down the street. And everybody looked out for
each other. It’s an American dream. (ABC Nightline, 1998)

Since World War II, neighborhood design has set a poor stage for the
development of sense of community. More and more people are dissatisfied with where
they live, but do not know exactly why. (Kunstler, 1996) People no longer live in places
that have, what Terry Pindell called, the “ Cheers factor,” places where people know your
name and your face. (Pindell, in Beatley and Manning, 1997). People have become less
and less connected to their neighborhoods and more and more connected to their cars and
to their places of work. Our neighborhood landscapes, the “stages” where daily life takes
place, reflect this change through designs that promote television watching, homogeneity,
and seclusion rather than walking, diversity, and community:

There are many factors! that contributed to the loss of sense of community in
America. One factor is the changes in the planning and development of neighborhoods.
These changes in neighborhood patterns effect how the stage that neighborhood sense of
community is created upon is constructed. This change in neighborhood design has
played a role in the loss of sense of community throughout the United States.

Dunham (1986) suggests that the immediate geographic region people live in,
such as the neighborhood, is significant to the development of sense of community. The
areas that are close to home are where sense of community begins and grows. Sense of

community is a feeling that members have of belonging to a group and an importance and

faith that their needs will be met by their commitment to the group. (McMillan and
Chavis, 1986). Sense of community affects the. level of participation in voluntary
organizations, the effectiveness of service delivery, the quality of life of community
members, and residential satisfaction. Sense of community enables individuals and the
group to make changes and improvements in their quality of life. (Chavis &
Wandersman, 1990)

Sense of community allows people to address problems within their locality and
to make changes that improve the quality of life for residents, improve the quality of the
physical environment, enhance services, prevent crime, and improve social conditions
(Chavis & Wandersman, 1990). The opportunity exists to develop and to increase sense
of community (Glynn, 1981). Many different professions can play a part in promoting
sense of community, but urban planners have a special role and responsibility in
developing sense of community. “Urban planners perform site reviews, write ordinances
and building codes, and work \closely with residents, governmental officials and
developers.) These activities can lead to the creation of “good” communities that people
care about and where sense of community thrives.

Meaningful places are important to create connection and attachment between
residents and their community and to promote sense of community. “To foster a sense of
place, communities must nurture the built environment and settlement patterns that are
uplifting, inspirational, and memorable, and that engender a special feeling of attachment
and belonging” (Beatley and Manning, 1997)., There is a connection between physical

design and how people feel about where they live and how they feel about their

neighbors. Without the connection to the physical place, people lose their sense of
community that many residents of traditional neighborhoods still have.

When places are built using Traditional Neighborhood Design standards, people
often think they are :funreal,” or are an attempt to reproduce Disneyland’s Main Street
USA. John Norquist, the mayor of Milwaukee stated that, “Americans spend billions of
dollars going to Disneyland and Disneyworld to look at Main Street, that’s not the only
reason they go there, but they go there because they want to experience a sense of
community, like they are part of something.” (ABC Nightline, 1998) People have lost
touch and no longer feel part of their communities. They have forgotten that
Disneyland’s Main Street is based on very real places that were parts of vibrant
communities throughout America.

There is nothing terribly mysterious about the appeal of

[Disney’s] Main Street USA. It is a well-proportioned

street full of good relationships between its components, and

blessedly free of cars...There’s no pretense, however, that

they are anything but false fi'onts. (Kunstler, 1993)
Main Street USA. was built at the time when the places that inspired it were
disappearing. Main Street shops were being replaced by strip malls and Walmarts - the
current development pattern.

f Over and over again scholars, practitioners, and neighborhood residents are
reiterating that our neighborhood designs have lost something that is crucial to social and
civic life. The loss of public space where pedestrians can walk, neighbors can watch and
talk, and children can play, severely limits the connection people feel to where they live

and to others. People no longer know their neighbors or consider their neighbors as

fiiends. New neighborhoods erect fences and gates to keep out “undesirables” and for

safety. During the past 50 years, sense of community has decreased due in part to the
loss of traditional neighborhood design.

Urban planners can play a significant role in creating the physical stage that
people live their daily lives on and in doing so increase neighborhood sense of
community. Planners need to confront the illusion that our existing neighborhood
patterns are okay and convince their constituents and neighbors that there are better ways
to design neighborhoods and the sense of community people feel while visiting
Disneyland can be created anywhere. Through outreach, policy changes, and daily
decision making urban planners can promote sense of community through design. Urban
planners can affect the quality of life in neighborhoods and cities.

No one solution can miraculously resolve all of the urban problems that face
Americans at the close of the twentieth century. Planners need to refocus their efforts
from rubber stamping current policies to really discovering what is “good” about the
communities in which they live and work and to emphasize those positive characteristics.

Through incorporating TND into planning, urban planners can help construct the
stage for sense of community to be built on and can develop stronger neighborhoods and

cities as a result.

Methodology

 

An extensive literature review and a limited study of a real community will be

“‘w—Ov—p _ __fi
-.-—-

used to investigate how the Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) used in the

development of a community can impact the level of sense of community felt by its

if

.-..__—-

residents. This process will provide insights into the assumptions that planners,
architects, and designers who use TND have about building community through design
and what information the findings can offer revitalization projects and new

developments.

__ --1_

r... ‘M‘

One existing project that will Show some possible effects of TND on sense of
community is Seaside, Florida. Seaside utilized the principles of TND in an attempt to
create a sense of community among residents. Seaside is the product of numerous
architects and designers using an Urban Code and a Master Plan as guides. This case is

,1

unique because it was designed from undeveloped land using TND principles to guide the
Pf...

development and planning decisions fi'om the very beginning. The results of studying a
uniquely developed community can reveal factors that are relevant for redesign of
existing developments and the design of new developments in urban and suburban areas.
The complete reliance on TND for the development of Seaside can provide some
isolation of design differences among different types of developments in the community
and demonstrates what effect TND can have on sense of community.

The literature review of sense of community and M will be followed
by a specific look at Seaside. The investigation of TND will explore several aspects of

Seaside. First a brief history of the community will be described. This section will

explore the reason for the community's creation, who designed it and why, and how far

along the project is in development. The second section will describe the different

physical elements of the community through descriptions and a map. The third section

will examine the ten questions with the goal to examine why Seaside's physical design is

expected to promote sense of community. The final section will discuss advantages and

disadvantages of Seaside’s physical design.

To examine the effects of TND in Seaside ten questions will be used to explore

how TND can aid in promoting sense of community. The following questions will serve

\

. '1')

\, "x .
- \

as a guide to investigate how physical design can effect sense of community: ,.

1. How does the design promote neighboring and socializing?

2. Does design create a balance between public and private space?

3. Does the design seek to fulfill economic needs?

4. Are civic buildings placed as landmarks throughout the town and the
neighborhood?

5. Is there a mix of uses available to meet the needs of a diverse pOpulation?

6. Is there a mix of market rate and affordable housing to provide housing
opportunities for a diverse population?

7. Do the neighborhoods have “personalities’? Are their unique traits
emphasized as a source of pride?

8. Is the street hierarchy well designed? Does it promote pedestrian and non-
motorized transportation use as well as the use of the automobile?

9. Is the circulation system connective of several different destinations by

several modes of transportation?

10. What other factors play a role in promoting sense of commuting?

The answers to these questions will come fiom the extensive literature review and from

sources specific to and some originating from Seaside. From each of these questions

some generalizations will be drawn about how TND may affect sense of community in
Seaside and in new and existing urban and. suburban neighborhoods. These
generalizations will also provide insight for planners into neighborhood development
patterns and how practices and policies can be changed or modified to encourage or

discourage sense of cormnunity in neighborhoods and cities through TND.

Literature Review

 

A variety of literature exists attempting to define what a good community is and

A. A ___
n..r_-4*'_"‘T \ I, \— ‘-_‘__ _

“ii—_- m‘ -—-

looks like. Several terms are used to describe the intangible phenomenon known as

community. Many authors seek to define healthy communities. Others measure

."’f

x /-

collective efiicacy, social capital, or social fabric_._ This paper will address the concept of
sense of community. Whatever the term used by urban scholars, they are generally
examining the social and psychological effects of several factors that affect the quality of
life in communities of all sizes and compositions. Beyond the social and psychological
components of sense of community, the physical layout and design affect neighborhoods’
and cities’ quality of life. More and more scholars and practitioners are seeking to link
the way we plan our neighborhoods and cities to how connected residents feel about
where they live and how strong that connection is.

This literature review will first define sense of community and its relation to
creating good, healthy, and active communities. Then the connection between sense of
community and physical design will be examined. Finally, literature examining the

specific technique of traditional neighborhood design (TND) on sense of community will

be investigated. ‘ x

What is “Sense of Community”?

 

Somehow we must find a way to build communities that are based
on faith, hope, and tolerance, rather than on fear, hatred, and rigidity,
[and] we must learn to use sense of community as a tool for fostering
understanding and cooperation. (McMillan and Chavis, 1986)

Terms that authors and researchers use to define what makes a community “good”
include social fabric, social capital, collective efficacy, and sense of community. Each of
these terms has a slightly different slant on what the essential components of community
are. However, together they provide an interesting concept of what may be missing from
the communities we are planning and building today.

Social fabric has been defined as the existence of social order and the
environment in which social life occurs. (Short, 1986) The term describes how close the
social networks and organizations in a community are. A community with weak social
fabric is one with less cohesion and connection among residents, while a community with
strong social fabric has active participation and a feeling of connection among residents.
A strong social fabric characterized by trust, honest communication, and mutual support
allows a community of individuals to seek solutions to their problems through the
creation of a sense of community.

Sense of community enables a group of individuals to act for the benefit of the
entire group. McMillan and Chavis use two types of “community.” The first type is the

RR—
relationship between people and the second type is the more common geographical
concept. They include both types of community in their theory and definition of sense of
community. McMillan and Chavis (1986) define sense of community as “. . .a feeling that

members have of belonging, a feeling that members matter to one another and to the

group, and a shared faith that members’ needs will be met through their commitment to
be together.” Their definition includes four criteria: membership, influence, integration
and fulfilhnent of needs, and emotional connection. (McMillan and Chavis, 1986)

McMillan and Chavis have the reigning definition of sense of community within
the literature. Their 1986 article “Sense of Community: A Definition and Theory,”
reviews previous studies that attempt to measure and define neighborhood sense of
community. Over and over again there is a “...recurring emphasis on neighboring, length
of residency, planned or anticipated length of residency, home ownership, and
satisfaction with the community” (McMillan and Chavis, 1986). In order for sense of
community to exist, people must interact and feel happy about living in their community.

Collective efficacy is defined as “...social cohesion among neighbors combined
with their willingness to intervene on behalf of the common good” (Sampson,
Raudenbush, and Earls, 1997). In the study titled “Neighborhoods and Violent Crime: A
Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy,” Raudenbush, et.al, found that collective
efficacy is linked to a reduction in crime and violence. Collective efficacy includes a
shared vision among residents for their community and a willingness to work to achieve
that vision through intervention and participation.

Robert Putnam compares physical and human capital to social capital in “Bowling
Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital.” He defines social capital as “...features of
social organization such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination
and cooperation for mutual benefit.” (Putnam, .1995). Indicators of social capital include
civic participation and social connectedness. Social connections and social relations are

the foundation of social capital, according to the Social Capital Interest Group at

10

Michigan State University. Social relations are the attitudes the people develop toward
one another and the networks that develop as a result of their interactions. A network is
the connection of a group of people who feel sympathy and obligation towards one
another. Interactions among people foster trust and caring and a sense of responsibility to
the community.

All these terms attempt to define what the difference between a healthyand
vibrant* community is compared to one that lacks connection among residents. What is
common among the terms is a belief that what makes a community of people successful
is a network of individuals who work for the common good of their community through
interaction and connection. Strong social capital implies the presence of a vibrant social
infrastructure consisting of numerous formal and informal organization which are held
together by the social fabric of the community. Social networks link organizations and
individuals with each other and enable the community to function in a healthy way. For
the purposes of this research the term sense of community will be an encompassing term
to capture the feeling a community of individuals feels or lacks in their neighborhoods.

There is a role that the builtitenvironment plays in developing and promoting this
feeling of connectedness or belonging, this sense of community, that people feel.
Wave been the main activists in creating attention about design and its relation
to “good communities.” Groups such as the Congress for the New Urbanism and
architects such as Peter Calthorpe and Duany and Plater-Zyberk are at the forefiont of
creating laboratories where the hypothesis that a neighborhood’s physical form, and even

the form of an entire city, will affect the level _and feeling of community that residents

experience.

11

Intersections of Sense of Community and Physical Design

 

The physical scale in Greenpoint supports community. It’s built on a
scale, which is appropriate to the population. It is consistent and
contextual, and the architecture, because of the high rate of local,
small-scale property ownership, reflects the aesthetic preferences of
the people who live there. The community and the built environment
mutually reinforce one another. (Friedman, 1996)

Much of the sense of community literature focuses on the psychological and
. T ‘ H N

social aspects with little or no thought to the role of the physical environment. However,

FR.
“M / \--..—(' a

 

more and more authors acknowledge that physical design can play an important role in
setting the stage for promoting sense of community. The literature that describes the
intersections between design, sense of community and quality of life in urban and
suburban neighborhoods is an important topic for urban planners that often goes
unstudied.

Jane Jacobs, in her classic book WW5,
provides insight into what good design can do for a community and what bad design can
do to a community. Different elements of neighborhoods and cities serve different
functions in creating a vibrant and social atmosphere for residents within which to live.
Sidewalks, for example, provide for safety, contact among neighbors and strangers, and
assimilate children. Active sidewalks are always interesting to watch, and therefore are
safer than abandoned areas. For streets to be successful places they must fulfill three
functions. The first is that there should be an obvious division between public and

private space. The second is that there must be “eyes on the street,” or people watching

fiom windows or stores to ensure safety. And finally, sidewalks should have a near .

continuous stream of users to add to the street’s eyes.

12

\\ s//\ " i I— I}-

According to Jacobs, neighborhood streets have many functions:

...to weave webs of public surveillance and thus to protect

strangers as well as themselves; to grow networks of small-

scale, everyday public life and thus of trust and social control;

and to help to assimilate children into reasonable responsible

and tolerant city life. ..[and] they must draw effectively on help

when trouble comes along that is too big for the street to handle.

(Jacobs, 1961)
All of the fimctions that Jacobs outlines are part of creating a sense of community and
weaving social fabric among residents of a neighborhood. Places where people feel safe,
where people feel like they are members, and where there is empowerment and
willingness to help when problems arise—these are successful places, places with a sense
of community, places people care about.

Oscar Newman provides some guidelines for examining sense of community in

his book MW. Planners need to focus on meeting the needs of a’

/

 

community’s residents. “Successful physical communities of interest are created by
people who select themselves into defined three-dimensional environments to be able to
live in close proximity with others who share similar needs which depend on physical
proximity to be satisfied” (Newman, 1980) Physical needs can include community
institutions such as schools and churches. Newman views physical communities as
opportunities to serve the needs of communities of interest. In order to satisfy those
needs, design of communities must consider the population being served.

Newman provides “Design Principles for Housing/Resident Type Combinations”
by examining three different resident types and each resident type's housing needs. The
resident types are families with children, elderly, and working adults. The four building

types are single-family, walk-ups, medium high-rise, and elevator high-rise. Newman

13

produced a chart that shows which type of buildings are recommend for which types of
residents depending on their day-to-day needs and activities. Each group required a
different set of physical traits to meet their needs.

Another factor in creating “communities of interest” is the design of public areas.
They need tobe designed to fit the specific needs of the resident that will be using them.
The third factor for communities of interest is that the design of buildings must promote a
sense of belonging among those who reside there. The fourth factor is that public areas
should serve the smallest number of residents as possible to help link private and public
areas.

Another researcher attempted to study how people behave in public spaces and
whether or not class and density affect the quality of interaction people experience. John
Ottensman studied 12 residential areas that encompassed a range of social classes and
physical environments throughout the United States and Great Britain using ethnographic
research methods. He defined two types of physical environments, high-density urban
and low density suburban; and two types of social classes, lower/working class and
middle class.

The study focused on two main issues, the presence of street life and the amount
of neighboring that occurred in each area. Street life was defined as “intensive social
interaction. . .[tlrat] takes place outside of the residents’ homes on the streets and in
various commercial establishments in the neighborhood” (Ottensman, 1978).
Neighboring was defined as “. . .the extent to which social relationships of the study area
residents are restricted to and are common within their immediate neighborhoods”

(Ottensman, 1978). Using these two concepts, Ottensman found that all high-density

l4

urban areas in the study had an active street life and each also scored high in the
neighboring category. None of the low-density suburban areas had an active street life
and only two had high scores in the neighboring category. Places that lacked non-
residential facilities had reduced neighboring and street activity. All these findings point
to the importance that physical development plays in the creation of sense of community.

Karen Franck also examines the effects of physical design on social behavior in
“Community by Design.” Her research focuses on planned residential developments and
what physical traits in those developments encouraged or discouraged sense of
community. The research locations were 35 moderate income, federally assisted housing
developments. She examined the number and grouping of apartments, the amount of
common space, as well as the demographic characteristics of the population. Through a
survey questionnaire, she measured attachment, fi'iendship/kinship, and acquaintanceship
among the residents. Her findings concluded that the number of apartments affects
community attachment and affects informal neighboring as well as the amount of social
activities. However the number of apartments did not affect fiiendship.

Implications of Franck’s research include both recommendations for local
communities as well as for physical design of housing developments in general. Her first
finding is that local communities need to recognize that housing developments can serve
the same function as a neighborhood. Housing developments should be built to
encourage acquaintanceship, because acquaintances make fewer demands on the privacy
that all pe0ple prize. One method for maintaining privacy and providing for

acquaintances to develop is by regulating the number of apartments in a group. The

15

number of apartments helps to determine the amount and fi'equency of contact among
neighbors.

Physical design recommendations stem fi'om the findings that physical design had
at least the same amount of effect on residents’ behavior as did the social and
demographic aspects. However, it is important to remember that design doesn’t affect
every behavior. When designing a housing development, Franck insists that the designer
needs to ask, “Why do you expect this feature of the built environment to have this
effect?” (Franck, 1983) Examining assumptions and expectations can help to improve the
quality of design for housing developments. Her final thoughts ring as a warning to not
completely depend on design to change or affect peoples’ behaviors. Any residential area
must be multidimensional, it must seek to fulfill social and economic needs as well as
provide a design that promotes certain types of interaction.

Geojeanna Wilson and Mark Baldassare, in their article “Overall Sense of
Community in a Suburban Region: The Effects of Localism, Privacy, and Urbanization,”
discuss the search for community} that is becoming more and more part of Americans'
lives. In order to explore sense of community in a suburban area, Wilson and Baldassare
make use of McMillan and Chavis’ definition of sense of community. One question they
are attempting to answer is if sense of community increases neighboring or if neighboring
increases sense of community.

What Americans have been looking for, according to Wilson and Baldassare, is a
small town feeling which people have attributed to the suburbs. “In America, the search
for community has been closely tied to the suburbs” (Wilson and Baldassare, 1996). The

suburbs have proven to be dualistic by providing personal space and privacy, but also by

16

providing the opportunity to interact with neighbors when desired. Localism provides
residents with the perception that they live in a connected community whose residents are
committed to the community’s future. While local participation is important, the study
also found that privacy is a value shared by most people. Privacy regulates the amount of
interaction among neighbors and strangers in a person’s social life. Privacy is controlled
through design elements such as landscaping, fences, and gates.

For suburban communities both localism and privacy play a role in sense of
community. If privacy is the mechanism that regulates social interaction, then suburban
designs that promote privacy may not cause social isolation to occur, but rather may be a
component in creating “good” neighbors and a “good” community. However, they
found that urbanization does not necessarily create a sense of community. Wilson and
Baldassare suggest that urbanization and the promotion of higher densities in suburbs can
negatively impact the sense of community perceived by residents. The final conclusion is
that both localism and privacy must be incorporated into design of neighborhoods to
promote sense of community among residents. ”There needs to be a balance between the
public and private lives of residents.

In “Social Interaction via 21St Century Housing,” Victor Mirontschuk tackles the
issue of commuter suburbs as places without neighbors, without hearts and without
community. Mirontschuk believes that there is too much privacy and not enough
opportunity to participate in public life in commuter suburbs. His main point is that we
have planned our communities to leave out the socializing that is a crucial part of creating
sense of community. He sees one answer to the lack of community, “The new mixed-

use suburban village where living, working, shopping, civic, and recreation needs are

17

satisfied within walking distance of each other...” (Mirontschuk, 1990). Compacmess,
he asserts, is the key to creating a pedestrian village that is a firlly integrated community.

Mirontschuk calls for “re-humanizing” neighborhood and city form through
design elements like streets, sidewalks, front yards, porches, houses, back yards, and
alleys. Each element plays an important role in creating a human environment. Each
element connects the others to a broader environment, in which pedestrians rule and have
the ability to go places and meet people. There is a need for mixed uses to be within
walking distances for pedestrians. People need to have destinations to get to by foot, if
they are to take to the streets. Environments that include people in the plans help to
create sustainable communities where people enjoy living, working, and playing.

Another critique of the modern American landscape is James Kunstler. In
W, Kunstler gives a scathing report on the unimaginative and
automobile oriented cities and neighborhoods in which Americans reside. Through an
historical account, Kunstler describes the evolution of American land use patterns from
the founding to the present. He claims that after WWII Americans lost sight of how
neighborhoods and cities should be planned. The automobile and administration became
the focus of planning, rather than people and neighborhoods. Kunstler sees the
profession of urban planning as no longer responsible for the design of “good” places or
neighborhoods. “Planners no longer employ the vocabulary of civic art, not do they find
the opportunity to practice it. . .planners are now chiefly preoccupied with administrative
procedure...” (Kunstler, 1993) Planners have forgotten how to plan and in doing so have

been unable to connect activities of daily life without the use of the automobile.

18

The problem with the changes in physical design since the 19503 is that we have
lost a sense of how to build things and we have lost our sense of connection to places in
our neighborhoods and cities. In his final chapter, entitled “Better Places,” Kunstler
describes different paths Americans can take to turn around the decline in culture and
again build “good” places. Without some type of paradigm shift from sprawling
development to sustainable growth, Kunstler senses a decline in America’s global ,
influence. “The future will require us to build better places, or else the future will belong
to other people and other societies” (Kunstler, 1993) Americans must plan places people
will care about and be responsible for.

Kunstler is not the only author encouraging more sensible use of our resources
and more sustainable development through the creation of “good” places. In The

00a 0 '1 ° '-._HI: 0 UOIH'J 0|." -..H oun..r|,T1mOthy
Beatley and Kristy Manning describe how Americans can achieve better places through
compact development, sustainable economic growth, and citizen participation. Beatley
and Manning discuss more than simply design of places, but how people relate and are
organized in those physical places:

Obviously, a community’s physical form and design

influences the opportunities for true community...The

physical characteristics of a sustainable community help to

create a sense of community—a sense of ownership,

commitment, and a feeling of belonging to a larger whole.

Walking spaces, civic buildings, plazas and parks, and

- other public places have the potential to nurture the

commitment and attachment to the larger collective.
(Beatley and Manning, 1997)

The solutions suggested by Beatley and Manning include compact urban

development in the form of urban growth boundaries, point systems, and transfer of

19

development rights programs; preservation of natural and open space; increases in
density; proper investments into public infrastructure; and reurbanization. Planning
needs to de-emphasize the automobile and plan more places with mixed uses and
pedestrians as the focus. Also, cities can longer view themselves as islands, and need to
participate in planning and development en a regional scale.

To create sense of community, planners need to recognize and to promote places
with special assets, such as historical buildings or natural features. Cities and
neighborhoods have personalities that need to be nurtured and developed. Public places
that encourage face-to-face contact are important in developing sense of community.
Beatley and Manning discuss Oldenburg’s concept of the “third place.” The “third place”
can be considered a “hang-out,” such as a local bar or coffee shop. (Beatley and
Manning, 1997) These places are where informal interaction occurs among neighbors and
strangers.

In recent developments, such places are either left out or become unfriendly
places to loiter, such as fast food restaurants. One crucial element to community is
participation. People mix at “third places,” at festivals, shops, and markets. These places
and events provide forums for residents to discuss issues and are finding ways to
participate in community life. Affordable housing, in mixed income areas, is also
important for creating community and sustainability for neighborhoods. Placement of
physical elements is as important as their design to promote community.

In “Understanding and Enhancing Neighborhood Sense of Community,” Steven
Cochrun examines the components of sense of community and explores different

planning mediums for encouraging the development of sense of community in

20

neighborhoods. Using the definition of sense of community created by McMillan and
Chavis (1986), Cochrun emphasizes two ways that urban planners can play a role in
developing sense of community through neighborhood planning.

The first way planners can impact sense of community is through the
development of social policy. Cochrun offers five methods for using social policy to
advance sense of community. The first is to encourage neighborhood groups to apply for
program fimds, rather than having a government employee as the representative write and
file the application. The second is to offer technical assistant to neighborhood
organizations seeking to solve problems or to create beautiful neighborhoods. The third
is to help form neighborhood watch groups. The fourth is to create policies that promote
home ownership. Finally, Cochrun suggests helping to form tenant management of rental
buildings or forming housing cooperatives.

From the physical side of neighborhood planning, Cochrun describes some
historical attempts to use physical planning to increase quality of life. He defines Garden
Cities and Super Blocks as past efforts to use physical design to promote social good.
One example is that of Columbia, Maryland, where the “. . .founder hoped to demonstrate
that he could provide ‘a richer sense of community among people if the physical place
and community institutions were all seen as opportunities to support and enable the
growth of people’” (Rouse in Cochrun, 1994). Cochrun explains several methods of
review that planners can apply when examining designs to help promote sense of
community.

The first important physical design factor that Cochrun mentions is the placement

of public institutions such as schools, churches, and libraries. Another characteristic to

21

look for is the interaction of public and private spaces such as the use and placement of
streets, sidewalks, and houses in relation to one another. The third role planners can play
in creating “good” communities is by creating zoning regulations that encourage multiple
uses in one area. Another physical characteristic that planners can encourage is places
that allow both pedestrian and automobile traffic to move smoothly, but give pedestrian
the right-of-way. The final method of physical planning that Cochrun cites as important
to developing sense of community is to reinforce each neighborhood’s symbols and
boundaries to help create a unique identity and residents’ pride in the neighborhood.

Dan Burden, President of Walkable Communities, Inc. a company devoted to
helping cities develop walkable communities through interactive workshops and on-site
analysis, is a twenty—five year veteran of promoting alternative transportation and
sustainable and walkable communities through his work for the Florida Department of
Transportation, Federal Highway Administration/National Highway Safety
Administration, urban planner, and Florida State Bicycle Coordinator. (Burden, 1998)
He spreads the message that design and physical layout effects whether a place is “good”
and, in his term, walkable or not. Walkable Communities, Inc supports and promotes
sense of community through its work.

On May 11, 1998, Mr. Burden gave a presentation on walkable communities to
Delta Township, Michigan. Using slides, he described five measures to use to determine
if a community is walkable. These measures are: 1.) The number of people present, 2.)
The number of hours the people are there, 3.) The diversity among the people, 4.) A low
number of cars, and 5.) The place "works" in all seasons (weather is not a barrier).

Applying these measures to the pictures of places helps to visually demonstrate what a

22

walkable community is and what non-walkable communities can become. The pictures
provide a model of successful places that can help cities, townships, and neighborhoods
to see their potential and to develop into walkable places.

Burden suggests that successful places have five components. These components
are security, convenience, efficiency, comfort and welcome. (Burden, 1998) Places with
these components, such as Walt Disney World, bring people back again and again.
Successful places attract people and investment. They provide people with places to wait
and connections that draw people fiom one end of the street to the other. Places grow
over time. Places have unique designs; buildings or statues that make them stand out and
are recognized and remembered.

Walkable communities present opportunities for people to mingle with each other
and to shop in a pleasant atmosphere that provides interesting things to do and to see.
Neighborhoods in walkable communities meet the needs of today's homebuyers through
low traffic speeds, volumes, noise, and open space. These factors can be achieved
through design techniques Ed at maximizing walkability.

Burden believes that creating a walkable community also means having a
"healthy" street network. The relationship of land use to trip generation is important to
consider when looking at a community's streets. The network should include trails,
alleys, lanes, streets, avenues, boulevards, and parkways. Each level contains specific
design requirements, such as number of lanes, width of lanes, and types of buffering.
Each level also serves a different purpose. An effective street network that is designed

properly can stop streets from breaking down and causing traffic problems. Proper

23

design can improve turning, borders, and buffers. Streets should be designed for the
ordinary user, not the extraordinary or occasional user.

Burden suggests that an important first step a community can take to promote
walkability and sense of community is to collectively create a vision of what the
community will be in the future. Creating a code that will allow for the development of
walkable communities and that will achieve the shared vision is a crucial step. (Burden,
1998) Code can promote more pedestrian oriented development, can provide safer and
more beautiful streets, and can provide the model of how walkability is achieved.

More and more urban planners and scholars are realizing that many places lack
streets that serve the functions described by Jacobs (1961), Kunstler (1993, 1996),
Burden (1998), Duany, Plater-Zyberk (1996), and others, that have no public spaces, and
that primarily serve the automobile rather than residents that live there. There are a few
design techniques being used by both architects and planners to stop creating dull places
that lack life and to start creating vibrant communities that energize residents. Even
developers are beginning to realize that cookie-cutter suburbs aren’t they answer and they
only succeed in robbing us of tradition and a sense of place. (Turley, 1996) One of the
more popular techniques encouraged by planners, architects, and the Congress on New

Urbanism is Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND).

24

Traditional Neighborhood Design and Sense of Community

 

In 1993, the Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU) was founded to restore urban
areas, to reduce of sprawl and the wasteful use of land, and to build communities that
people care about. CNU focuses its efforts on Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND)
and searches for ways to promote awareness through yearly conferences and standing
task forces. TND seeks to build sense of community by designing a stage that provides
meaning for residents. Slowly, planners, developers, and designers are joining the
bandwagon and supporting changes in the post-World War H methods of planning and
neighborhood and urban design.

Two vocal members of CNU that are very active in TND are Duany and Plater-
Zyberk. These two architects and town planners have created a list of specific principles
of traditional neighborhood design. In general, urban design should have a diverse

balance of public and private spaces. Traditional neighborhoods, according to Duany and

Plater-Zyberk in W (1996), have the following traits:

0 Neighborhoods should have independent identities that when combined with
other independent neighborhoods become a town or a city.

0 Neighborhood size is limited to a 5-minute walk to the center from the edge,
or approximately 'A of a mile, so residents can easily meet the demands of
their daily life without the use of an automobile.

0 Streets are networks that exist to provide pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers
with many options for reaching several destinations.

- Streets are defined by “a wall of buildings that front the sidewalk in a
disciplined manner, uninterrupted by parking lots.” (Duany and Plater-Zyberk,
1996)

0 Buildings have diverse functions but are similar in size and character to each
other.

0 Building functions are mixed between high and low density, mixed income
residential and commercial and office functions.

0 Civic buildings are used at the termination of street vistas and serve as
landmarks in these locations.

25

0 Open space is provided through public squares, playgrounds and parks, and in
some cases greenbelts.

0 Trees must be planted in a uniform fashion along streets.

On-street parking should be provided for convenience and to add a layer of
safety for pedestrians.

o Crosswalks at intersections should remain at a scale that is comfortable for
pedestrians to cross.

0 High traffic volume streets need to be designed as boulevards or avenues to
maintain pedestrian activity and keep commercial viability.

0 Apartments should be allowed above commercial businesses, as well as above
garages and behind single-family houses to create affordable housing among
market rate housing.

Duany and Plater-Zyberk emphasize that current zoning ordinances and building
codes do the opposite of what traditional neighborhood designs try to achieve. Current
zoning ordinances allow only separate residential and commercial uses, and outlaw living
above commercial buildings. Municipal zoning ordinances make mixed income housing
in the same neighborhood difficult if not impossible. Zoning outlaws what makes
neighborhoods livable. Cities and towns need to rethink their zoning ordinances, which
in many cases have never been rewritten since they were first enacted. (Duany and
Plater-Zyberk, 1996) The current zoning practices does not build sense of community; it
creates an environment that is hostile to its development.

Gindroz and Bothwell, in “Traditional Neighborhood Design and Social Capital,”
examine how TND can create sense of community in all types of neighborhoods.
Current neighborhood design has failed “. . .to reproduce the livability of many older
neighborhoods” and has never created a distinction between public and private space
“...and in the process residents lost a critical venue for social exchange” (Gindroz and

Bothwell, 1997). Social interaction is an important factor in building sense of

community. (Schweitzer, 1996) There are three assumptions guiding Gindroz and

26

Bothwell: that physical design affects social interaction, that social interaction affects
participation in civic life, and that participation in civic life helps to determine the quality
of life in a community. (Gindroz and Bothwell, 1997)

The authors emphasize that the relationship among physical elements is an
important part of creating quality neighborhoods. Examining the relationship between
front and side yards to the street, porches to the Sidewalk, windows that face the street,
orientation of mailboxes, type and placement of buffers along the street, and many more
elements can point to the nature of social interaction on a block. “Elements such as front
porches and well-designed streets encourage neighbors to come together and form a
community” (Gindroz and Bothwell, 1997). Strong communities created through a
traditional neighborhood design process are more stable and are a source of pride for
residents. Designs that enable interaction among residents provide the basis for sense of
community to grow.

James Kunstler also provides insight into traditional neighborhood design in his
follow-up book to Were, Were. In a question and
answer format Kunstler seeks to provide insight into the differences between current
zoning and principles of traditional neighborhood design and how TND creates a more
positive environment for a community’s residents. Kunstler says, “Zoning has never
been concerned with the question of beauty. It produces a cartoon of a human
settlement” (Kunstler, 1996). TND creates civic art and “. . .is the practice of assembling
human settlements so that they maximize the happiness of their inhabitants” (Kunstler,

1996). Kunstler maintains that promoting civic art through TND effects the quality of

27

daily life by connecting residents to their surrounding community, without the necessary
use of a car.

The ability for residents to walk to accomplish daily tasks is important in TND
because it allows people to do several chores without spending half the day in the car
running fiom one end of town to the other. A focus on walking also provides for safety,
with Jane Jacobs’ concept of “eyes on the street.” Walking also allows residents to
appreciate beauty and civic art. Pedestrians are able to view buildings and design while
strolling by, instead of while “flying” by in a car. A hierarchy of streets is also necessary
to promote different uses along the streets that have different functions and give
pedestrians route options. Some streets exist to maximize non-motorized transportation,
such as alleys and streets, while others exist to maximize automobile movement, such as
boulevards and avenues.

Often, people fear congestion from higher density uses of land and fear a loss of
privacy without their own “private cottage in the woods.” Without a certain density, it is
difficult to maintain civic life; “There are not enough people living, or business activities,
at the core to maintain the synergies necessary for civic life. The New Urbanism
proposes a restoration of synergistic densities within reasonable limits. These limits are
regulated by building size” (Kunstler, 1996). Duany insists that TND combines the best
of traditional living with modern living. Those who wish to live in isolation can live at
the neighborhood’s outer edge. While those who desire closeness and community can
live at the higher density center. (Duany, ABC Nightline, 1998)

TND and New Urbanism do not seek to become an authoritarian regime in

defining what houses will look like or be built with or to stop people from using their

28

cars. These concepts seek to replace zoning in defining the standard on which we build
our neighborhoods and cities. Several agencies at different levels have ordinances, rules,
and programs that promote sprawl and are difficult to change. However, even though
zoning is an obstacle to TND and many programs and rules stand in the way of redefining
the way we plan our neighborhoods and cities, slowly models of good development are
coming fiom planners, architects, designers, and residents of communities through
participatory planning processes.

Even the building, construction, and development trades are seeking to build
better places for people to live. In “Gathering Places Fulfill the Desire to be Connected,”
Susan Bady describes for the WW what people want in
their homes. In an interview with Perry Bigelow a residential developer in Illinois,
Bigelow said “The underlying premise is that people want to be more connected...So I
created an environment where homeowners wouldn’t have to make appointments with
each other to be friends” (Bady, 1993). Densities were mixed among single-family
homes and four-unit townhouses. Buyers were allowed a final say in the development of
the courtyards and landscaping of their homes, as well as placement of mailboxes. The
developer recognized the importance of providing environments that promote interaction
and the residents also sought an environment where the opportunity to interact existed.

Michael Southward evaluates neotraditional communities in “Walkable
Suburbs?” He uses 5 criteria to compare TND to traditional suburban developments and
to see how “successfirl” TNDS are. The five criteria examine the pattern of urban
development. The criteria are:

l. Built Form, showing the pattern of development,

29

E"

Land Use Patterns, showing the location and density of
different uses,

Public Open Space, _

Street Design and Circulation System, and

. Pedestrian Access.

Southward, 1997)

was»

A

Each of these criteria provides useful insight into how people relate to one another and to
the built environment.

In .the developments Southward studied, he found that the TNDS differed
somewhat from traditional suburban developments. They still had difficulty overcoming
pedestrian access issues and needed to better consider the design needs of their residents.
What the TNDS were lacking was mainly paying attention to the tradition of the place
they were developing. They needed to use the existing history rather than trying to create
a new symbolic tradition.

In “Neotraditionalism and the Corner Store: Can the Community of the Future
Support the Commerce of the Past?,” Alan Ehrenhalt questions the ability of TND to
support the type of economic activities that will provide communities with the ability to
support themselves and meet their needs. He notes that in several TND developments
such as Kentlands near Washington, DC. and Seaside, Florida, “The residential
component of neotraditionalism is working remarkably well. The commercial
component has yet to succeed” (Ehrenhalt, 1996). Ehrenhalt views the commercial
aspect of Main Street economies as too small a scale to be profitable in today’s economy.

However, Andres Duany in an interview on ABC News Nightline program insists
that it is too early to determine whether or not the commercial component of TND is a
failure or a success. In all reality these developments are still quite new and need to have

a residential base before the commercial can succeed. The residential part is succeeding,

30

so the commercial part will soon follow. “The variety of uses, the Shops, the schools, and
the offices, they will come. What the critiques haven’t granted us is the time to complete
our communities. . .When that happens a1 those elements will be in place, and then we can
test it” (Duany, ABC Nightline, 1998). Time is a critical component in creating
community. Meaningful connections among neighbors and to places do not happen
overnight.

These factors are important when studying TNDS, because they aim to create
meaningful places for their residents, but if they are only creating a superficial
environment then any sense of community developed within them will not be
withstanding. It is important to understand how and why different physical components
of TND can promote sense of community. It is also important to examine how design
provides for both the individual and her need for privacy, as well as for the community

and its need for sense of community to thrive.

31

Seaside, Florida

 

History

 

J .S. Smolian purchased the 80 coastal acres that Seaside, Florida now occupies in
1946. The land was originally planned as a summer camp for the employees of his
department store. Smolian picked the name "Dreamland Heights" for his future camp.
However, Smolian's business partner was not interested in the camp, so the land remained
undeveloped. Instead the acres by the Gulf Coast became a vacation excursion for the
Smolian family. By 1969, Smolian was ready to develop his land again. His next idea
for the property was a conference center with small cottages on the beach that the
University of Alabama would sponsor. However, the social and political conditions
never made the realization of Smolian's conference center possible. The land continued
to be undeveloped.

Smolian's grandson, Robert Davis, spent his summers growing up on the
Northwest Florida coast near his grandfather's property. Once grown-up, Davis became a
successful real estate developer in Florida. He built several residential housing
developments. His projects were financial and critical successes. One reason for the
success was because the projects incorporated the housing into the existing natural
surroundings. (Brooke, 1995)

In 1978, Davis inherited his grandfather's property on the gulf coast. Davis'
memories of family vacations inspired him to develop the land. Davis’ development

would be called “Seaside,” because of its relation to Florida’s coast. One major goal of

32

the development would be to revive the building traditions of Northwest Florida. Wood-
fi'ame cottages would be the basic housing design. This type of design would
accommodate generations of families. The design of the roofs, windows, and porches
would allow for good ventilation and would be central to the design. (Seaside
Community Development Corporation, 1998)

Rather than jumping into a development plan, Davis studied town planning,
architecture, history, and urban design. The eighty acres that would become Seaside,
according to schOlar Leon Krier, when properly designed would allow residents to
comfortably walk everywhere. Davis and his wife also spent time driving throughout the
region's small towns to study their architecture and layout. Studying and exploring other
regional small towns convinced Davis of how to build and to design Seaside. (Brooke,
1995)

In 1980, Davis enlisted the help of Miami architects Andres Duany and Elizabeth
Plater-Zyberk to design his community. The architects also spent time researching the
building traditions of Northwest Florida by visiting towns, taking notes and pictures, and
using their research to develop a model of buildings that would be developed into the
town’s Master Plan and Urban Code. (Seaside Community Development Corporation,
1998) Seaside would be designed as a town where people could walk where they wanted
and needed to go and where architecture would "draw" people to sit on their porches and
to interact with other residents. "[Davis] wanted safe streets, generous boulevards,
comfortably scaled buildings, indigenous landscape, and 'an atmosphere of
neighborliness. . .a familiarity that promotes even the practice of cutting through

backyar ' " (Brooke, 1995).

33

Davis and his family moved to Seaside into one of the first two houses built. The
Master Plan and the Urban Code were drafted in the summer of 1982 and finalized in
1983. The Urban Code set the guidelines for building in the community, rather than
traditional zoning and building codes. The Urban Code focused on the architecture that
would preserve the building tradition Seaside sought to revive:

As few rules as necessary are incorporated into the Code in order
to ensure that each Seaside home will continue the regional
building tradition and will contribute to giving Seaside's
neighborhoods the coherence, cohesion, and strong sense of
place...Seaside's houses share a common vocabulary of building
forms and materials, yet there is a great deal of heterogeneity
within the town.

The Code is designed to work with the plan to produce streets
which are comfortable, and even delightful, to pedestrians. The
streets are designed to accommodate cars and parking but to make
walking more convenient and pleasant than driving. (Seaside
Urban Code, Seaside Community Development Corporation)

These codes were put into place to guide the development of the first neighborhood on
Tupelo Street. Two test houses and the pavilion connecting the neighborhood to the
beach were built as a market test to see if the architectural codes and Master Plan would
hinder sales. Sales were better than anticipated.

Since Seaside’s inception in 1980 it has developed through the use of the Master
Plan and Urban Code as development guides. There are now approximately 260 c'ottages
and 350 homes. Some of the residences are owner occupied, some rented, and some are
rental properties for seasonal visitors. The Seaside Community Development
Corporation believes that the commitment to the Master Plan and the Urban Code, which
promotes elements of livability and sense of community, is one of the elements that

attracts new Seaside residents.

34

Physical Elements

 

What makes Seaside different from other communities is its emphasis on
accessibility, architectural integrity, and walkability included in its design and codes.
Major physical elements of Seaside include:

0 Nine Beach Pavilions that connect Seaside's neighborhoods to the beach.

a A Central Square that contains restaurants, a market place, penthouses, an
amphitheater, and the post office.

0 Parks, pools, playgrounds, and recreation courts that are accessible to all
residents.

0 A Neighborhood School near the Central Square.
0 A Street Network that contains boulevards, streets, and alleys.

o The Street Network connects each section of the town to every other section.
There are no cul-de-sacs.

0 Development materials and landscaping materials are all of local origin.
0 Heterogeneous housing developed under a consistent, functional, and pleasing
architectural code.
The positioning of each of these elements creates a well-proportioned small town.
(See Figure 1. Seaside, Florida - Town Map, p. 36)
The town designers set out to create a town with a sense of community. It is
important to understand how the town's physical elements play a role in the level of sense

of community.

35

 

 

     

    

 

 

    

 

 

 

. u

s... 3....“ is.

 

igure 1. Seaside, Florida - Town Map

 

la
if

Why Should We Expect Seaside’s Design to Create Sense of Community?

 

The Urban Code and the Master Plan guide development in Seaside. "The
unambiguous logic of the overall Seaside P1an--the pedestrian-scaled and well-
proportioned streets, the accessible beach pavilions, the harmonious grouping of
residential and commercial buildings, the absence of high-rise beachside condos--makes
a persuasive case for Seaside's underlying message: civilized livability" (Brooke, 1995)
The "purpose" of Seaside’s development is to create a meaningful place where neighbors
know each other and are free to walk to any place in town they wish in order to fulfill
their daily needs.

Several factors influence the sense of community in Seaside. Two researchers,
Jeanne Plas and Susan Lewis, examined the sense of community in Seaside in their
article, “Environmental Factors and Sense of Community in a Planned Town.” Plas and
Lewis set out to investigate the relationship between planned physical characteristics and
sense of community using Seaside, Florida as a case study. This study was intended to
link urban planning research and community psychology research. Little research has
been done linking physical factors to the creation of sense of community. Plas and Lewis
relied heavily on McMillan and Chavis' study for sense of community variables,
membership, influence, fulfillment of needs, and shared emotional connection, as the
basis for the study. They relied on historical research, participant observation, and
survey results for the environmental, town design, architecture, and town philosophy
variables. A total of seven variables were measured in the study.

The study had three phases: observational evidence gathering, historical evidence

gathering, and interview data obtained from town residents and town employees. The

37

first phase sent the researchers to Seaside to be participant observers in the town and to
record their observations. The second phase involved researching historical information
about Seaside and analyzing the Master Plan and Urban Code to determine the sense of
community variables related to the physical design. The final phase was a survey of town
residents and town employees. The survey sample consisted of 125 adults that lived and /
or worked in Seaside. Individual interviews were performed with each respondent. The
interview consisted of an open-ended question tha ". . .asked the research participant to
share perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of Seaside. All of the follow-up
questions were nonspecific and intended to give the respondent the opportunity to
provide information and meaning that he or she considered important" (Plas and Lewis,
1996). The interviewers did not use the seven selected variables to guide the research
participant's interview.

The two researchers individually coded the data into nine categories. The nine
categories were: urban design, architecture, town philosophy, membership, influence,
need fulfillment, shared emotional connection, other relevant sense of community, and
variables unrelated to sense of community. (Plas and Lewis, 1996) These categories
were based on the respondents' answers and on the chosen variables. From the two sets
of coded responses a final codebook was created.

As a result of this observational data, historical research, and the survey of

H W
WV

(residents and workers, Plas and Lewis found that three of Seaside’s physical
characteristics had a positive influence on the sense of community of its residents.
Approximately 80% of the participants agreed on the variables of interest to the

researchers. The researchers felt this could be due to several reasons: the high amount of

38

free time the respondents had and the fact that they were accustomed to hearing similar
questions from perspective Seaside residents and tourists. Responses to the survey were
overwhelmingly positive, with approximately 95% of responses being positive. (Plas and
Lewis, 1996)

The three environmental variables, Town Design, Architecture, and Town
Philosophy received many positive answers from respondents. Town Design strengths
included beach pavilions, walkability, informal places to gather and to meet, and the
“devaluing” of the auto in favor of pedestrian oriented design. (Plas and Lewis, 1996)
Closely connected to Town Design was Architecture. Architecture was important
because of the feeling it created among residents and for the opportunities it provided for
socializing and interaction. Both the strengths of the Town Design and Architecture
variables were promoted through the Town Philosophy that was guided by the Master
Plan and Urban Code.

The four sense of community factors also had positive responses from
participants. Seventy-two percent of respondents identified the membership variable by
talking about ". . .Seaside's ability 'to make us feel at home'" (Plas and Lewis, 1996). The
town market was often described as a place where the community gathered and where
people had "community feelings." The influence variable carried less weight, with only
4% of the respondents speaking of Seaside's influence on their behavior. (Plas and
Lewis, 1996) Two-thirds of the respondents mentioned that Seaside helped to fulfill
needs, especially family needs such as time together and intergenerational activities.
(Plas and Lewis, 1996) The emotional connection variable was talked about by 77% of

the respondents. Responses consisted of the ability to connect with other residents and

39

the quick ability to become friends with neighbors. (Plas and Lewis, 1996) Another
variable mentioned by 45% of the respondents that Plas and Lewis did not anticipate was
that of loyalty to the community. (Plas and Lewis, 1996)

Finally Plas and Lewis examined the connections between the environmental
variables and the sense of community variables. The basis for determining connections
was "If more than 35 people made specific comments that connected ideas in a category
with an idea in a category of the other set of variables, it was considered relevant" (Plas
and Lewis, 1996). Using this methodology three strong connections between the two
variable sets were described. First, Town Design was found to have a strong connection
to generating the emotional connection between residents. Second, Architecture and the
membership variable were connected. Finally, Town Philosophy was related to the
feelings of membership and the emotional connection of the residents.

The findings of the study about the relational nature of the environmental
variables and the sense of community variables measured in Seaside by Plas and Lewis,
along with a written history of Seaside's development by the Seaside Community
Development Corporation, the Seaside Urban Code and Master Plan, a published
photographic tour and description of Seaside, and other information provided by the
community development corporation will help in providing some insights into the
questions posed in the methodology.

The first two questions are interrelated and will be explored simultaneously:

1. How does the design promote neighboring and socializing?

2. Does design create a balance between public and private space?

40

Town design and architecture through the design of homes and their relation to
each other can promote neighboring, socializing, and walkability. One of the researchers
from the Plas and Lewis study noted that, “Within a half hour or so of wandering around
town, I’d realize that most people seemed to be speaking to one another as they crossed
paths” (Plas and Lewis, 1996). It is far easier to chat with neighbors and strangers while
walking than when closed up in an automobile. The ease of using non-motorized
transportation makes stopping and talking very easy. Home designs also promote
neighboring and a balance between public and private space. .

Houses have wide porches that are positioned close to the street and use variations
on the Northwest Florida building tradition as the basis for architecture. As one observer
noted, “These people were not living in their backyards (as people in my own hometown
neighborhood did); they were living on their front porches” (Plas and Lewis, 1996). The
ample porches encourage residents to sit on them and to greet the pedestrians passing by
not far from their houses. Building designs are pleasing to the eye and allow for the
transition between private and public space. The porches do not just promote
neighboring and socializing; they also mediate between private residences and public
streets.

Bridges between public and private spaces can also be found in the placement of
parks and recreation facilities in relation to the neighborhoods. All are within walking
distance. The central square is within walking distance as well. All the shops and “third
places” exist as stores and restaurants around the central square. According to Plas and
Lewis, the town philosophy helped to bridge public and private reahns and was a strength

because of the friendly and social atmosphere residents and visitors felt while in town.

41

(Plas and Lewis, 1996) With residents believing in and acting on the town philosophy,
the social needs of interaction in comfortable places, where “people know your name,”
becomes possible. People are not afraid to relate with each other from their homes or

while walking in the Town Square.
3. Does the design seek to fulfill economic needs?

Seaside’s design attempts to meet some of the economic needs of its residents.
There is a market place that is run every weekend in which outside vendors and residents
participate. This market sells everything from art to clothing. Another source of
economic interaction is at the central square. The central square is home to shops and
restaurants that serve some of the needs of Seaside’s residents.

The shops contained in Seaside’s central square—while meeting some economic
needs—are also a bit trendy than the average shopping center. For example, the grocery
store, Modica Market, is a “unique gourmet grocery,” rather than a full service, possibly a
national chain, grocery store. There are other stores that also serve specific needs rather
than day-to-day needs. There is a specialty cigar store, an aromatherapy store, several
stores that sell “fine art,” and a few stores that sell ice cream novelties such as flavored
ice and yogurt. Many stores exist that serve the general needs of the population outside
of these trendy spots. There are a variety of clothing stores (9), restaurants (7), arts and
crafts stores (9), and financial institutions (2). (Seaside Cottage Rental Agency, 1998)
However, there are other economic needs that Seaside has not firlfilled yet.

The economic needs that have yet to be met are the needs for full-time, well

paying, and stable employment. Most residents still commute to work, leaving their

42

pedestrian paradise to spend an hour in rush-hour traffic. One of the architects, Duany,
maintains that this is not a disadvantage of Seaside. (ABC Nightline, 1998) He
contends that Seaside is not firlly developed and the economic and commercial functions
of the town will slowly develop, as they do in authentic communities. So, while residents
can shop and meet the economic needs of daily life in town, they must go outside to
pursue an economic life and a career.

4. Are civic buildings placed as landmarks throughout the town and the

neighborhood?

Several civic landmarks are placed in one of the most crucial locations in town,
the central square. One significant landmark at the center of town is the Post Office.
Locating a town’s post office in the center is important to creating a place people will
visit. (Burden, 1998) The neighborhood school is in the square where all town children
can reach it by foot or by bicycle with ease. The lyceurn and the amphitheater are also
located in the central square. Beach pavilions are also important town landmarks for the
residents of the neighborhoods that are near the beach. The pavilions can provide a
source of identification and of pride for the neighborhoods. Parks also serve as
terminating vistas to the neighborhoods that have streets that do not meet the beach. The
town design has civic landmarks that may provide neighborhoods with their own

identities.

5. Is there a mix of uses available to meet the needs of a diverse population?

In order to fulfill the needs of a diverse population “The ideal situation would

encourage mixed functional uses—recreational, leisure, consumer, task-oriented—in

43

order to attract individuals to use available open spaces” (Holahan, 1976). Seaside does
its best to create an “ideal” mix of uses. The mix of commercial and recreational uses in
the central square as well as the parks and playgrounds available within walking distance
of each neighborhood provide a mix of locations for residents of all ages and of all
interests to use for a variety of purposes. There are opportunities for sports, swimming,
family outings, picnics, bicycling,relaxing while reading a book near the beach or at a
local restaurant. There are several activities that take place in the town to attract residents
and visitors alike. Community activities include the weekend market and shows and
events at the Lyceum and Amphitheater. The town design provides many different
opportunities for the town's population.

There are at least two missing elements in Seaside. The missing elements are a
community library and a hospital or a clinic. However, these facilities could be

developed as the town grows over time.

6. Is there a mix of market rate and affordable housing to provide housing
opportunities for a diverse population? ’ '

Housing supply is somewhat diverse. Different housing types are dispersed
throughout each neighborhood. Even vacation rental cottages are mixed in with the
owner-occupied housing. One setback of the housing diversity is the low availability of
below market rate housing. Rental housing and apartments are available, but housing
prices are high. The high price of homes shuts lower income people out the town.
“Thus, the incomes of Seaside’s full- and part-time owner residents—most of whom own

an additional residence elsewhere—tend to fall within the upper 20% of American

household incomes” (Plas and Lewis, 1996). Table 1 shows how the average prices of

lots and of homes has skyrocketed over the past 14 years.

Table l. Seaside Real Estate Sales Activity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Date Lot Sales Average Price Home Sales Average Price
1982 12 $18,800 --- ---
1983 9 $21,300 1 $64,900
1984 29 $34,650 4 $97,500
1985 23 $49,904 4 $127,800
1986 33 $46,081 11 $158,000
1987 41 $49,896 10 $161,491
1988 41 $81,689 14 $174,655
1989 33 $88,642 12 $231,131
1990 43 $106,806 14 $240,158
1991 17 $114,005 17 $286,082
1992 32 $134,568 10 $326,000
1993 20 $176,895 16 $347,281
1994 9 $193,222 10 $334,650
1995 10 $219,050 19 $414,263
1996 3 $343,333 14 $503,500

 

 

 

 

 

Source: Seaside Community Development Corporation in the Lusk Review, 1998

This trend is similar to the traditional automobile suburb. And while the mix of
renters and owners is an advantage, there is a definite lack of social class and racial

mixing in the town. “People who own and rent in Seaside tend to be white and are not

45

 

representative of US. minority groups” (Plas and Lewis, 1996). Equal chances to
become homeowners should be a goal of town andneighborhood development. Seaside
has not yet achieved this goal.
7. Do the neighborhoods have “personalities’?

Are their unique traits emphasized as a source of pride?

Neighborhood identities are a part of Seaside’s design. For the neighborhoods
that line up along the beach, beach pavilions serve as landmarks and terminating vistas.
The nine beach pavilions are spaced along the beach shore providing complete access to
the gulf shore for residents and visitors. The beach pavilions serve as “. . .an invitation to
share the beach” (Brooke, 1995). Each beach pavilion was designed by a different
architect to give each neighborhood a different vista to view at the end of the streets and a
different identity. Researchers have found that neighborhood identity helps to promote
membership and belonging to the community. (Plas and Lewis, 1996) Neighbors can take
pride in their pavilion and feel special in belonging to a “separate” neighborhood.

The final two questions deal directly with access to different modes of
transportation and mobility in Seaside:

8. Is the street hierarchy well designed? Does it promote pedestrian and
non-motorized transportation use as well as the use of the automobile?

9. Is the circulation system connective of several different destinations by several
modes of transportation?

These two questions focus on how accessible the town’s amenities and central
square are to residents with different transportation needs and how the circulation system

aids residents in fulfilling their daily needs.

46

The street network is a part of promoting sense of community in Seaside. Seaside
employs the entire street hierarchy from alleys to_ boulevards. Each level provides a
different function. Alleys allow access to houses without having automobiles parked
directly in fiont of each house disturbing the view. Each level provides the ability to
access alternatives routes to several destinations. “Dirt footpaths throughout Seaside
provide additional networks for pedestrian traffic. They also provide unexpected vistas
and intimate views of Seaside homes and gardens. Children love using them as private
highways” (Brooke, 1995). Everyone in town from children to elderly adults can manage
to attend to the tasks of their daily lives and to have the interaction that is important in
promoting sense of community through the accessibility of all modes of transportation.
Since everything is in walking distance, public transportation is not necessary. Seaside
has paid important attention to the infi'astructure needs of its population, so everyone can

be mobile.

10. What other factors play a role in promoting sense of community?

In addition to the environmental variables in Plas and Lewis’ study, the four sense
of community variables played a role in developing sense of community in Seaside. The
variables were membership, influence, needs, and emotional connections. Membership
was important because people felt like important members of Seaside and that the town
had the ability “. . .to make us feel at home” (Plas and Lewis, 1996). Residents also felt
they could influence what happened in Seaside,‘they felt empowered to make a difference
in their community. Needs, such as family or relaxation needs, were also meet by the

variety of parks, recreation facilities, and community markets and activities. Finally, the

47

emotional connections of the residents were developed through neighboring. Residents
talked to people sitting on their porches, walked to and mingled at events.

Town Design was found to have an impact on the emotional connection felt by
residents. The planning efforts created a “good-lookingtown that people enjoy living,
working, and visiting in” (Plas and Lewis, 1996). Architecture encouraged feelings of
membership especially due to the porches and their position to the street. It is easy for
people to chat as they pass a neighbor enjoying the evening sitting on their porch. The
Town Philosophy, to create a place where residents can walk to their destinations and
where friendships can be made and nurtured, promotes membership and emotional

connection among the residents

Advantages and Disadvantages

 

Seaside’s physical layout has several advantages to promoting sense of
community. As shown by the research of Plas and Lewis, the residents of Seaside realize
that their town is “different” from other towns, but they know what it is about their
community that makes is special and they make the effort to preserve what they find
special.

One important advantage to the design of Seaside over “traditional” automobile
suburbs is the accessibility for residents of all ages to explore the community and to
connect with other residents. “It had been primarily designed to give people access to
each other and to their community” (Plas and Lewis, 1996). People are not bound to a

car to get things done. Children can bike anywhere and the elderly can safely walk to

48

their destinations because of the thought out town plan. Each physical element has its
role in the town plan and its position to other elements was carefirlly considered when
creating the master plan.

The ease of understanding the Master Plan and the Urban Code are also important
advantages to Seaside. “The plan is guided by a surprisingly simple Urban Code that is
presented on a single large page rather than in the more typical volumes of complicated
legalese” (Plas and Lewis, 1996). The use of pictures and simple to understand directions
means that everyone building in the town can understand the rules they must follow. (See
Figure 2. Seaside, Florida - Urban Code and Zoning Code, p. 51) Without the
complicated zoning ordinances and building codes, the process of becoming a Seaside
resident is often more pleasant than the process people experience when relocating to
other places that incorporate long and confusing zoning ordinances and building codes
into their plans.

The neighborhood identities created by the parks and beach pavilions are a
significant source of pride and community formation for Seaside residents. People who
feel they have an unique identity are more likely to feel pride and to feel like members of
the community and each neighborhood. Membership is a crucial factor to the promotion
and maintenance of sense of community.

While there has been some firlfilhnent of economic needs, the biggest
disadvantage to Seaside is the lack of growth in commercial and professional office
ventures in the community. Over time several restaurants have developed, but a solid
base of professional centers have not been a great success. Due to this lack of office

development, most residents do not work in Seaside. Office buildings may be slowly

49

developing, but as of yet, most residents commute to work rather than walk. Another
disadvantage to Seaside is the low number of permanent residents versus visitors.

The high price of housing in Seaside is another disadvantage. While diverse
needs of different populations can be met through the facilities in the town, market prices
of homes are too high for the lower and lower-middle classes to afford. “Originally,
Seaside was designed to accommodate residents from a variety of economic
levels...Rather quickly, however, the success of the town planning as well as the high-
quality architecture of these buildings boosted prices beyond the reach of the target
population” (Plas and Lewis, 1996). The lack of below market prices affects the ability
of lower and lower-middle class residents to become homeowners in Seaside. Without a
diversity of classes and races, Seaside will not 'firlfill the goal of a diverse population.

Overall, Seaside presents a very real and well-planned stage for residents that
supports the promotion of sense of community. The advantages point to opportunities for
other cities, towns, and neighborhoods to follow in revitalization and new development
efforts. The disadvantages provide challenges for revitalization and new development
projects to overcome. The disadvantages may have solutions in design techniques, such
as Traditional Neighborhood Design, but more likely the solutions will come from policy
changes and economic and social development programs created by and tailored for the

towns, cities, and neighborhoods in which they will be used

50

Figure 2. Seaside, Florida - Urban Code and Zoning Code

 

'mmf Sunrunqjo spadsu pannbau or" pro snails apog aptsvas BILL

 

 

 

, 1:353?
liriii

Eng: '

 

* E

igEEEi

'— lab-IDI-

Inch-up

OIIO‘III. ' n
I“. “IV-I II.“
”I.” "nun-n
SONIG'IIOI

'UIO

at’a 5,5";
Etta ass
is" ‘iéi

iii"

0
--l‘” "Cl-I..-
.-
-.-
l:l I
---------
I
o o ' 9
can-..
..
z I
-
. C
0

lug; . iiliili anagram
is iiiggil :gga 323i 3; E
I a 4:3!
ii; igiié

i;— 5!: ii

SNOLUNHBU

I emu

W0. mum I'm

With" V I0”
II EMA].

W”
“M MAJ.

3!
2:3!»
IIE r:

 

IEEE

‘0'...”an II."

Inc ICOJO fl ”MCUJU

EICIISVEIS :10 NAAOL 3H1. 2100:) Nvaun

 

l1

 

Conclusions and Recommendations

 

Creating Places that Matter through Traditional Neighborhood Design

 

In order to promote sense of community, Seaside teaches us that one important
step is to create places that people care about and will be active participants in taking care
of the community. Places that having meaning for community members give a sense of
pride, membership, and an obligation to take care of it. Meaningful places are where
residents feel like members and are connected to each other, places where sense of
community exists. Traditional Neighborhood Design (TND) is a technique that attempts
to create places that matter and to promote a sense of community among residents.

The factors of TND that promote sense of community include:
town/neighborhood design, architecture, philosophy, land marks that create identity, the
street hierarchy and layout, the accessibility of community places, and the existence of
“third places.” As shown in the exploration of Seaside, Florida, each of these factors
influences how people relate to each other and to the places they live. The quality of the
relationship among neighbors can be influenced by their physical surroundings.

Seaside, Florida follows the TND technique and has promoted sense of
community among residents so far. The example of Seaside is useful because it was built
“from scratch,” and therefore controls some outside forces, such as existing development
patterns and political influences. What Seaside gives planners and developers are some
keys to creating “good” places. While Seaside cannot be replicated exactly in developed

places, the principles it follows can be adapted to revitalization projects as well as to new

52

developments. Since it takes time for sense of community to be built, how successful
Seaside will become remains to be seen.

What examining Seaside does is provides an example of how the physical
elements of a place effect the level of sense of community residents’ feel. This fact is
important to what planners do and how they make daily decisions that effect the layout of

the places where people live, work, and play.

The Role of Urban Planners in Promoting Sense of Community

 

Urban Planners have several roles to play in promoting sense of community in
cities, towns, villages, and neighborhoods. Planners have a unique job, which allows
them to communicate both with developers and with residents. This uniqueness provides
the opportunity for planners to contribute residents needs to developers' projects and to
provide developers with guidelines that create meaningful places that will fiilfill the
residents' needs. Planners can promote sense of community through:

0 Citizen Participation
0 Codes and Regulations,
0 Civic Art and Public Spaces, and
o The Street Hierarchy.
Citizen Participation

One important step planners can take to promote sense of community is to work

with residents to describe what type of community they desire and how they want that

community to look. Cochrun (1994) and Burden (1998) emphasized the use of charrettes

to gain input from citizens in a short period of time and to make contact with

53

neighborhood groups to get them involved in program development. This type of
participatory planning can take place through charrettes, focus groups, citizen
involvement on commissions, and public meetings to discuss changes to the code. Once
a vision is in place, planners can rewrite the codes, policies, and zoning ordinances to
produce the results the community desires. When the codes match the vision, the

community residents want will start to evolve.

Codes and Regulations

Codes can promote architecture that develops membership and emotional
connections among residents, which are crucial to maintaining a sense of community.
Cochrun (1994), Duany and Plater-Zyberk (1996), and Burden (1998) examine how
planners can use zoning and building codes and policies to promote physical design that
promotes sense of community. Well-designed buildings are interesting to look at and
provide a transition between public and private space; Houses with porches close to the
street allow neighbors to chat as they walk by, creating a friendly atmosphere where
socializing can occur. Architecture also creates beauty. People enjoy walking around
beautiful buildings, rather than speeding by concrete box buildings in a car. The design
of a building can create a place where people want to be, and therefore, can promote
sense of community.

Gindroz and Bothwell (1997) and Duany and Plater-Zyberk (1996) emphasize
that codes can create a mix of uses that encourages a mix of uses within walking distance
of a neighborhood. Having a small grocery store and meeting places is crucial to

promoting sense of community. First, people need to have the option to meet their daily

54

needs through walking. Many people are unable to drive and are therefore left out of
neighborhood and city plans. Planners need to remember those who cannot drive.
Second, informal meeting places, or “third places,” discussed by Beatley and Manning
(1997), are critical places where information is exchanged and people can meet and
mingle with friends and strangers. Informal meeting places allow for socializing to occur

and aids in creating a feeling of membership to a group or to a place.

Civic Art and Public Places

Kunstler (1993, 1996), Beatley and Manning (1997), and Putnam (1995) note that
civic art and public spaces are missing from many cities and towns. Planners need to
work to put civic art and public spaces back into community centers and neighborhoods.
Civic art give residents feelings of pride and create meaning. Duany and Plater-Zyberk
(1996), Ottensman (1978), Kunstler (1993, 1996), and Jacobs (1961) discuss the
importance of public spaces. Public spaces, when properly designed, provide spaces for
people to meet, to sit, and to watch. Both civic art and public spaces give identity to

neighborhoods as. well as meet the needs of families and individuals living in the

neighborhoods.

The Street Hierarchy
As described by Jacobs (1961), Kunstler (1992, 1996), Burden (1998), and others,
a properly design street hierarchy creates accessible neighborhoods and destinations for

residents of all ages in a community. Both Jacobs (1961) and Burden (1998) stress the

55

use of alleys to replace the emphasis on automobiles to pedestrians. Alleys take the
emphasis off garages and off of the automobile and_provide an alternative route of travel
for children away from busy streets. Other levels of streets give access to the elderly, to
bicyclists and pedestrians, and to the automobile. Every mode of transportation has its
place in the hierarchy and each needs to be a focus of the planner. Automobiles can no

longer be the focus of planning street networks.

What is missing in planning today is the focus on community needs. Many
authors cite the focus of planning on administration and code enforcement. Changing
this trend in planning is the first step planning can take towards promoting sense of
community. City, neighborhood, and community planners need to take their work back
into the community they live in and the people they work for. Without a refocus on
community and ways of promoting it, planners will remain administrators and not
effectively create positive change for their future.

Finding ways to promote sense of community through participatory planning,
code changes, and physical planning is crucial to success of urban planning in the next
century. As more and more places compete with each other and more and more places
lose their special identity, people will continue to lose the connection they have to their
homes and communities and will also lose interest in making them better places to live.

Urban Planners contribute to the development of interesting physical stages that
day-to-day life takes place on through their daily decision making. Therefore, Urban
Planners have an obligation to recognize the strengths of their community and to find

ways to promote sense of community through better design.

56

Bibliography

 

ABC, 1998. Nightline: America the Ugly, Forrest Sawyer, anchor.

Bady, Susan. 1993. "Gathering Places Fulfill the Desire to be Connected." Professional
Builder and Remodeler 58: 108-110.

Beatley, Timothy and Manning, Kristy. 1997. The Ecology of Place: Planning for
Environment, Economy, and Community. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

Blassingame, Lurton. 1998. “Sustainable Cities: Oxymoron, UtOpia, or Inevitability?”
The Social Science Journal. 35: 1-12.

Brooke, Steven. 1995. Seaside. Gretna, LA: Pelican Publishing Company.

Burden, Dan. 1998. Walkable Communities Presentation to Delta Township, Michigan.
Delta Township Hall.

Burden, Dan. 1997. Walkable Communities: A Search for Quality. Introduction and
Planning Sections for the Walkable Communities Course.

Chavis and Wandersman. 1990. “Sense of Community in the Urban Environment: A
Catalyst for Participation and Community Development.” American Journal of
Community Psychology 18: 55-81.

Clapp, James A. 1971. New Towns and Urban Policy: Planning Metropolitan Growth.
New York: Dunellen.

Cochrun, Steven Edward. 1994. “Understanding and Enhancing Neighborhood Sense of
Community.” Journal of Planning Literature. 9: 92-9.

Congress for the New Urbanism. On-line. Available: http://www.cnu.org

Duany, Andres and Plater-Zyberk, Elizabeth. 1996. “Some Specific Principles of New
Traditionalist Community Design.” The American Enterprise. 7: 48-50.

Dunham, H. Warren. 1986. “Commentary, The Community Today: Place or Process.”
Journal of Community Psychology, 14:399-404.

Ehrenhalt, Alan. 1997. “The Dilemma of the New Urbanists.” Governing 10: 7-8.

Ehrenhalt, Alan. 1996. “Neotraditionalism and the Comer Store: Can the Community of
the Future Support the Commerce of the Past?” Governing 10: 6-8.

57

Ewing, Reid. 1997. "Is Los Angeles-style Sprawl Desirable?" Journal of the American
Planning Association 63: 107-126.

Florida Department of Transportation. 1995. "Walkable Communities: Twelve Steps for
an Effective Program."

Forsyth, Ann. 1997. "Five Images of a Suburb." Journal of American Planning
Association 63: 45-60.

Franck, Karen A. 1983. “Community by Design.” Sociological Inquiry 53: 289-313.

Friedman, Diana. 1996. “Community: Just What Is All the Talk About?” [online] [New
York]: Metropolis. Available from Internet:
<URLzhttp://www.metropolismag.com/nov96/survey.html>.

Garvin, Alexander and Duany, Andres. 1998. "Is the New Urbanism Passe?." Lusk
Review.

Gindroz, Raymond and Bothwell, Stephanie. 1997. ”Traditional Neighborhood Design
and Social Capital.” Fannie Mae Foundation 1997 Annual Housing Conference.

Glynn, Thomas J. 1986. “Neighborhood and Sense of Community.” Journal of
Community Psychology 14 (1986): 341-352.

Guest, Avery M. and Barrett A. Lee. 1977. “How Urbanites Define Their
Neighborhoods” Pp. 32-56 in Population and Environment. New York: Human
Sciences Press.

Hardwick, Walter G. 1994. "Responding to the 19608: Designing Adaptable
Communities in Vancouver." Environment and Behavior 26: 338-362.

Heller, Kenneth. 1989. “The Return to Community.” American Journal of Community
Psychology 17: 1-15.

Holahan, Charles.197 6. “Environmental Effects on Outdoor Social Behavior in a Low-
Income Urban Neighborhood.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 6: 48-63.

Jacobs, Jane. 1961. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York:
Random House.

Kaline, Dan. 1996. “It Takes More than Good Urban Design to Create Community.”
Public Management. 78. 2- 3.

Key, William H. 1965. “Urbanism and Neighboring.” Sociological Quarterly 6: 379-385.

58

Kunstler, James Howard. 1993. The Geography of Nowhere. New York: Simon and
Schuster.

Kunstler, James Howard. 1996. Home from Nowhere: Remaking our Everyday World
for the T wenty-F irst Century. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Levine, Bruce L. 1986. “The Tragedy of the Commons and the Comedy of Community:
The Commons in History.” Journal of Community Psychology 14: 81-99.

Logan, William Bryant. 1996. “New Towns.” House Beautiful. 138: 42-5.
Lynch, Kevin. 1981. Good City Form. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

McMillan, David W. 1996. “Sense of Community.” Journal of Community Psychology
24 : 3 15-325.

McMillan, David W, and Chavis, David M. 1986. “Sense of Community: A Definition
and Theory.” Journal of Community Psycho‘logy 14: 6-23.

Mirontschuk, Victor. 1990. “Social Interaction via let Century Housing.” Presentation
at the 8th International Conference on Making Cities Livable. Sienna, Italy.

Myers, Dowell. 1988. “Building Knowledge About Quality of Life for Urban Planning.”
Journal of American Planning Association. 54: 347-58.

Newman, Oscar. 1980. Community of Interest. Garden City, New York: Anchor
Press/Doubleday.

O’Brien, David J. and Stephen Ayidiya. 1991. “Neighborhood Community and Life
Satisfaction.” Journal of the Community Development Society 22: 21-37.

Ottensmann, John R. 1978. “Social Behavior in Urban Space: A Preliminary
Investigation Using Ethnographic Data.” Urban Life 7: 13-22.

Plas, Jeanne M. & Susan E. Lewis. 1996. “Environmental Factors and Sense of
Community in a Planned Town.” American Journal of Community Psychology
24: 109-43.

Porteous, J. Douglas. 1997. Environment and Behavior: Planning and Everyday Urban
Life. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Putnam, Robert D. 1995. “Bowling Alone: Amterica’s Declining Social Capital.”
Journal of Democracy 6: 65-78.

Rybczynski, Witold. 1995. “This Old House.” The New Republic. 212: 14-16.

59

Rybczynski, Witold. 1996. “T omorrowland.” New Yorker. 72: 36-9.
Rymer, Russ. 1996. “Back to the Future.” Harper s 293: 65-71.

Sampson, R.J., Raudenbush, S., and Felton, E. 1997. “Neighborhoods and Violent
Crime: A Multilevel Study of Collective Efficacy.” Science. 277: 918-24.

Seaside Community Development Corporation. 1998. “The Seaside Story.”
Available on the Internet: <URL: http://www.seasidefl.com/sstory.htrn>.

Seaside Cottage Rental Association, Seaside Florida. 1998. 1998 Rental Prices and
Town Guide.

Schwab, Jim; Macie, Edward; Corbett, Judy. 1997 . “A Plan for Liveable Communities.”
American Forests. 103: 28-9.

Schweitzer, John H. 1996. Sense of Community in Lansing Neighborhoods. Paper
presented at Defining Community, Reexamining Society Conference, Flint, MI.

Short, John R. 1989. The Humane City: Cities as if People Matter. New York: Basil
Blackwell.

Social Capital Interest Group. 1998. Social Capital -Bridging Disciplines, Policies And
Community's International Conference, April 20-22, 1998, Conference Abstract.

Southworth, Michael and Owens, Peter M. 1993. “The Evolving Metropolis: Studies of
Communities, Neighborhood, and Street Form at the Urban Edge.” Journal of
American Planning Association. 59: 271-87.

Southworth, Michael. 1997. “Walkable Suburbs? An Evaluation of Neotraditional
Communities at the Urban Edge.” Journal of American Planning Association.
63: 28-54.

Stake, RE. 1995. The Art of Case Study Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications, Inc.-

Turley, Henry M. 1996. “Learn from Tradition.” The American Enterprise 7: 71.

Unger, Donald G. and Abraham Wandersman. 1982. “Neighboring in an Urban
Environment.” American Journal of Community Psychology 10: 493-509.

Warren, Roland L. 1983. “The Good Community-What Would It Be?” Pp. 393-401 in
New Perspectives on the American Community edited by Roland Warren and
Larry Lyon. Homewood, IL. The Dorsey Press.

60

Warren, Roland L. and Larry Lyon. 1983. “Basic Approaches to the Community” Pp. 1-6
in New Perspectives on the American Community edited by Roland Warren and
Larry Lyon. Homewood, IL.: The Dorsey Press.

Warren, Roland L. and Larry Lyon. 1988. New Perspectives on the American
Community. Chicago: The Dorsey Press.

Werner, Carol M., Irwin Altman and Barbara B. Brown. 1992. “A Transactional
Approach to Interpersonal Relationships: Physical Environment, Social Context
and Temporal Qualities.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 9: 297-323.

Wiesenfeld, Esther. 1996. “The Concept of “We”: A Community Social Psychology
Myth?” Journal of Community Psychology 24: 337-346.

Wilson, Georjeanna and Mark Baldassare. 1996. “Overall ‘Sense of Community’ in a
Suburban Region: The Effects of Localism, Privacy, and Urbanization.”
Environment and Behavior 28: 27-43.

Yin, R. Case Study Research (2“ ed. ). 1994. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Zehner, Robert B. 1971. “Neighborhood and Community Satisfaction: A Report on New

Towns and Less Planned Suburbs.” Journal of American Institute of Planners 37:
37 9-3 85.

61

l

 

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

 

31293 02656 8745