Post Occupancy Evaluation of Heritage HomesBritton Court

1
Post Occupancy Evaluation of Heritage
Homes/Britton Court

• Joe Rukus
• Jenny Wun
• For Visitacion Valley CDC

2
Table of Contents

• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Research Methods
• Survey Results
• Recommendations

3
Geneva Towers/VVCDC

• Unique in that it was not originally designed as
  public housing project.
• Torn down and rebuilt as Heritage Homes/ Britton
  Court.
• VVCDC handled transition of residents and owns in
  partnership with Mercy Housing
• Now interested developing future projects and
  seeks resident feedback.

http//www.sfsu.edu/jtolson/tower/photos.htm
4
Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE)

• Judges success of interaction of human
  environment and built environment.
• Public housing frequently fails because residents
  needs not taken into account (Cooper and
  Sarkissan, 1986).
• Decided to focus survey on aspects of
• Safety
• Child Play Space
• Community Building
• Architectural Forms

l
5
Table of Contents

• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Research Methods
• Recommendations

6
Safety

• Theory of people defending near home space
  (defensible space) has mixed results in low
  income areas.
• Requires resident belief that neighbors really
  will intervene in problematic situations (Brunson
  et al.,2001)
• Crime best addressed by at micro level, i.e the
  portion of a playground where crime occurs, by a
  team which can craft a solution for the troubled
  area. (Mazerolle, 1997)
• Believe micro analysis will find some areas best
  protected architectural enhancements and others
  best protected by community enhancements.

7
Childrens Play Space

• Parents feel safe when being able to see
  children play (Cooper and Sarkissan,1986)
• Boys and girls have different play styles and
  will rarely join, so playgrounds should
  incorporate individual play areas (Karsten, 2003)
• VVCDC may consider devoting more attention to
  playspace in future projects.

8
Social

• Important to be able to interact with the public
  realm while in private realm space such as a
  porch (Bothwell et al, 1998).
• Provide opportunities for community to interact.
  Kretzman and McKnight (1993) suggests setting up
  a community skills bank.
• Few opportunities to interact with public realm
  comfortably from private realm at Heritage
  Homes/Britton Court.

9
Architectural

• Low rise development creates greater residence
  satisfaction than impersonal high rise
  development (Cooper and Sarkisan, 1986)
• Site design can isolate affordable housing
  residents, e.g. superblocks or other barriers
  (Von Hoffman, 1996)
• Front yards, back yards, and porches increase
  residence sense of ownership and control over
  outdoor spaces (Bohl, 2000)
• Expect high resident satisfaction with low rise
  design of Heritage Homes/Britton Court

10
Table of Contents

• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Research Methods
• Recommendations

11
Survey Design Considerations

• Public housing surveys can have response rate
  challenges.
• Risk of non-response bias from those not filling
  out surveys.
• Surveying techniques
• In person
• Telephone
• Paper
• On Line
• Paper survey thought to be best.

12
Survey Design

• Based on format of Koebel et. al. (1999) at
  Virginia Tech
• Focus group of tenants to get initial feedback
• Followed by paper questionnaire distributed to
  all tenants
• Analysis of data via SPSS

13
Focus Group

• Three female resident participants.
• Previous residents of Geneva Towers.
• Questions created prior to meeting residents.
• Ideas/feelings about issues on safety, open
  space, transition similar among 3 residents.

14
Survey Questionnaire

• Questionnaire designed to meet client
  specifications with focus on feedback for future
  design.
• A substantial portion devoted to safety concerns
  based on focus group feedback.
• Questionnaire also covered design and social
  concerns.
• Open ended questions added for additional
  resident input.

15
Challenges With Survey Implementation

• VVCDC distributed survey to all households in mid
  March.
• Winds blew surveys away resulting in extremely
  low response rate
• VVCDC redistributed survey in early April and
  again had a low response rate
• 10 surveys completed out of 240 households
• Low response rate precludes meaningful data
  analysis of results

16
Table of Contents

• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Research Methods
• Recommendations

17
RecommendationsSurvey Design

• Distribute survey in manner similar to that used
  by Koebel et. al. (1999)
• Mailed out questionnaire with return postage
  envelope and cover letter.
• Follow up postcard 1-2 weeks.
• Mailing of replacement questionnaire after 3
  weeks.
• Achieved a response rate of 46 in Roanoke
  Housing Authority survey.
• VVCDC may consider delegating distribution to
  research team.
• Resident communication announcing survey
  distribution.

18
RecommendationsBased on Literature

• Consider enhancing physical security structures
  if residents do not adopt a defensible space
  philosophy.
• Construct larger, more user friendly childrens
  play areas where children can be easily watched
  from apartment units.
• Construct larger porches and create community
  skills bank to increase social interaction
  between residents.
• VVCDC should use a similar low rise type building
  in future projects.

19
Thank You
20
References

• Bohl, C (2000).New urbanism and the city
  Potential application and implications for
  distressed inner-city neighborhoods. Housing
  Policy Debate. 11, 761.
• Bothwell, S., Gindroz, R., Lang, R.
  (1998).Restoring community through traditional
  neighborhood design A case study of diggs town
  public housing. Housing Policy Debate. 9
• Brunson, L., Kuo, F., and Sullivan, W
  (2001).Resident appropriation of defensible space
  in public housing Implications for safety and
  comunity . Environment and Behavior. 33, 626.
• Cooper Marcus, C. and Sarkissan, W (1986).
  Housing as if people mattered. Berkeley, CA
  University of California Press.
• Karsten, L (2003).Children's use of public space
  The genedered world of the playground. Childhood.
  10, 457.
• Koebel, C., Cavell, M., Etuk, E, Bradshaw, M
  (1999). Resident Satisfaction Survey-Roanoke
  Housing Authority. Roanoke, VA Virginia Tech.
• Kretzman, , J. McKnith, J. (1993). Building
  communities from the inside out. Evanston, IL
  Northwestern University.
• Von Hoffman, A (1996).High ambitions The path
  and future of american low income housing policy.
  Housing Policy Debate. 7, 423-446.
• Visitacion Valley CDC, (2007). Retrieved April 5,
  2007, from Visitacion Valley CDC Web site
  http//www.vvcdc.org/html/index.htm