arizona.openrepository.comarizona.openrepository.com/.../1/capstone_final1.docx · web viewif a...
TRANSCRIPT
Sustainable Residential Development in the South
West
Author: Brian DonovanMentor: Bob VintUniversity of Arizona, 2014
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Abstract – P. 3
Chapter 2: Literature Review – P. 4
Chapter 3: Methodology
Site Selection – P. 9
Procedures – P. 14
Chapter 4: Results – P. 20
Chapter 5: Conclusion – P. 23
References – P. 29
DONOVAN 2
Chapter 1: Abstract
The goal of this study is to address the issues of sustainable residential
housing in the United States, more specifically Tucson and the arid climate of the
southwest. Until recent years the lack of awareness for sustainable practices has
not damaged society, but currently, mankind’s impacts on the planet are
unprecedented. As we progress into the future, acknowledgment of this problem
needs to be addressed with innovation and solutions to secure a guaranteed
healthy future for humanity, the species that humanity coexists with, and planet
Earth. This study examines the principles of development that best produce
sustainability and addresses building form and material use, solar orientation and
shading, and land-use efficiency and governmental policy. These aspects of
development are examined in detail by contrasting a typical University of Arizona
rental development and a development that was constructed with sustainable
consciousness for Tucson’s local population. Sustainable residential
development is an issue that must begin on large scale with government policy
and lawmakers, and end with individual home residencies and educated personal
environmental decisions. The study found that, while there are many different
aspects of sustainable development that are influenced by countless variables, a
sense of cooperation among all phases of construction is the most effective way
to guarantee a smooth transition into a more sustainable future.
DONOVAN 3
Chapter 2: Literature Review
The most widely accepted definition of the word “sustainable” comes from
the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) which states,
“sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present
without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”
(WCED, 1987). While the broader term of sustainability refers to many aspects
of society, to understand the distinction between sustainably housing and non-
sustainably housing it is essential to first understand the concept of sprawl. In
Gottdiener & Budd’s, Key Concepts in Urban Studies, sprawl is termed as low
density “haphazard growth” over a large area with a lack of regional planning,
usually resulting in unnecessary additional public services such as elementary
education or police and fire fighting (Gottdiener & Budd, 2005). The more spread
out, or less dense, a community is the additional resources and infrastructure it
will require to function. In return, the higher the density is in a region the more
effective those same resources can be consumed and distributed equally among
the population. This difference is critical to comprehend, especially because
recently in society the phrase sustainable has become an overused term. The
over use of the term has lead an unfortunate “[reconditioning] to describe
anything negative that pertains to urban growth like boundless development and
ecological destruction” (Peiser, 2001).
There is also a distinct difference between “strong” and “weak”
sustainability. Weak sustainability is a concept that survives on the basis that
humans will always value economic gains greater than environmental
DONOVAN 4
conversation or natural benefits. Strong sustainability rejects this perception and
states that natural benefits cannot be substituted for any amount of economic
benefit (Neumayer, 2003). Attention to whether a concept addresses a problem
with a strong or a weak sustainable solution is important, especially when
considering information presented by politicians or the media. Differentiation
between these two types of sustainability is crucial in determining educated
personal opinions on any issue of sustainable development.
While the relative significance of each characteristic of sustainability is
widely debated, Smith describes the key factors that contribute to sprawl in,
Sprawl, Squatters And Sustainable Cities: Can Archaeological Data Shed Light
On Modern Urban Issues, as: raising incomes, highway construction and factors
that favor automobile use, poor mass-transit systems, market forces affecting
land values and job locations, the fragmented nature of laws, administration, and
planning within metropolitan areas, political relationships between developers
and local officials (Smith, 2010). Many of these problems began in the United
States during the “baby-boomer” generation of the post World War II era, a
generation that grew up in a time where the “American Dream” was a federally
subsidized large plot of land with a white picket fence and sprawling front and
backyard for the family to enjoy. The new “Millennial Generation” does not
identify with the same American Dream as their parents and many individuals in
younger generations aspire to live in a lively downtown area of a major city
(Winston & Eastaway, 2008).
DONOVAN 5
If a lack of regional sprawl and high density translates into a more
sustainable community, then it is important to direct developmental efforts and
policies away from suburbs and back to downtowns and city centers. The
process of large-scale real estate development resulting in scattered low-density
and discontinuous car-dependent construction is usually a result of declining
older suburbs and shrinking city centers (Hayden, 2004). As society focuses on
deterring away from outward development, it is also crucial to consider short and
long term city planning and install governmental policies to support the system.
Samuel Stanley’s, Sustainable Development in American Planning, addresses
this concept and he stresses the importance of defining specific goals and
objectives revealing that “relatively little attention has been given to the
institutional context in which sustainability goals can be realized, or the
economic, social, cultural and political institutions necessary to achieve them”
(Stanley, 2006). Without consensus on a coherent framework for achieving
sustainable development goals it is unreasonable to expect results and,
ultimately, the scenario leaves cities and city planes in a policy vacuum (Stanley,
2006). Smith contributes to this argument stating that the large and diverse
literature about sustainable development, historically over the last 30 years,
ignores urban centers as a problem and implies little or no discussion of the role
of policymaking and management (Smith, 2010). A famous example of policy
impeding the development of a region is the Florida’s Concurrency Laws from the
1980’s. This is an incident where a misinformed policy maker, in an attempt to
reduce the amount of sprawl, passed law requiring that all infrastructure be built
DONOVAN 6
prior to residential development and consequently increased sprawl significantly
(Peiser, 2001). If this lawmaker had spoken to scientists or experts on the issue
then this never would have been able to happen, representing a real world
situation that truly impeded the progression of sustainable development in the
United States.
On the largest scale, sustainable development requires government and
policy cooperation in order to meet a desire for higher density and digression
away from the traditional suburb. This will result in better utilization of community
resources and transitions into the concept of “smart growth”. Smart growth is not
restrictive of population, economic, or social progression, but aids in a more
sustainable approach to doing so on already developed land (Stanley, 2006).
Another aspect of smart growth is material use, which is unique to the climate of
the region being developed. For the southwest region of the United States and
Mexico, there requires an especially distinguishing style of building because of
the climactic restrictions the desert demonstrates. This region of the southwest
is vast, but this is where we begin to see small-scale development’s importance
to the process of becoming a more sustainable society.
The temperature of this hot-arid region can exceed 110 °F and receives
an average yearly rainfall of less than 12 inches, this is extremely unique,
especially in comparison to any other region of the United States, and the type of
building style and natural materials required reflects this. (Vint & Neumann, 2005)
The southwestern region of the United States is also one of the fastest
expanding areas of the country and one of its largest cities, Phoenix, between
DONOVAN 7
1940 and 1960 saw a population increase from 65,000 to 439,000 people and an
increase in municipality from 9.6 to 187 square miles (Konig, 1983). In addition
to the outward migration of people, the retail and other industries of the city
followed and from 1948 to 1958 the central business district of Phoenix saw a
26% drop in businesses (Fairbanks, 2006). This multiple industry expansion
from the downtown area into the previously undeveloped wilderness of the
Arizona desert in such a short period of time can begin to explain how the
problem of sprawl has quickly escalated on a national scale. When Phoenix, and
other cities of the southwest, underwent these developmental patterns the
traditional building techniques and materials of the native nations of Arizona were
replaced with easily repeatable and cheap low-density suburb housing (Vint &
Neumann, 2005). As a result of this pattern untraditional development there are
numerous types of building in Tucson, many of which have been designed
specifically for University of Arizona student rentals. It is the goal of this paper to
compare the dissimilarities between this standard college residential
development and a house built with the intention of being “sustainable”.
DONOVAN 8
Chapter 3: Methodology
Site Selection
The first residential development being examined in this study is
representative of a University of Arizona student rental house in a large
development named “The Village”. These houses have been developed around
Tucson in small blocks, but this specific house is located on the cross streets of
North 3rd Avenue and East Adams Street. The house is one of four of its kind
located on two adjacent residential plots. Michael Goodman deigned the project
architecturally, and this cluster of student housing development can be seen
below in Site Plan 1 taken from Google Maps.
Site Plan 1 (Google Maps, 2014)
The owners of this property have had the luxury of maintaining it without the
burden of long-term renters because of University student rental patterns, and
DONOVAN 9
are not expected to make improvements over years of occupancy. Each of the
four households in this development has 4 bedrooms, 5 bathrooms, a kitchen,
living room, 3-car garage, 2 balconies, and a small backyard. The layout of an
individual house can be seen below in Floor Plan 1, which shows the first floor of
the residency on the left and the second floor on the right.
Floor Plan 1
Upon analysis of these building designs, it would seem that the architect
did a satisfactory job in utilizing space and amenities, but students are the ones
paying the bills not the owners. The utilities inside the home, electric and water
are completely paid each month by renting occupants and there is no incentive
for the owners to make sustainable improvements. Why should the owner of the
home install expensive new water or energy saving technologies when there are
DONOVAN 10
not monetary benefits in the long run? Students are still going to rent the house,
pay the bills, and then move into a new residency the next year.
The second comparative residential development being analyzed in this
study was constructed as part of “The Smart Lofts” project. The Smart Lofts are
also an example of rental housing in Tucson, but dissimilar to the Village
because the property was intended to be rented by local residents of Tucson,
and not frequently alternating student tenets. The Smart Lofts were
architecturally designed by Bob Vint, and can be see below in Site Plan 2 taken
from Google Maps.
Site Plan 2 (Google Maps, 2014)
A floor plan of this home’s first floor can be seen below displayed in Floor Plan 2
while the second floor’s plan is show in Floor Plan 3. This development, like the
Adams development, does a great job utilizing space and includes the many of
DONOVAN 11
same attractive features as the other house, but has two bedrooms not four and
exchanges the 3-car garage for private outdoor space. This is important
because the heat from the non-air-conditioned garage rises through the floors in
the above bedrooms. This creates discomfort from difference in temperatures in
the Adams Avenue house and makes the cool units work unnecessarily.
Floor Plan 2
DONOVAN 12
Floor Plan 3
An example of another sustainable characteristic that the Glenn Street
project incorporated that the other residency did not is keeping the natural
vegetation and landscape gradient from before construction began until the
project was finished. Conventionally in Tucson it is common practice to
completely wipe a plot of land clean of all growth before construction, build, and
then plant new vegetation after the house is completed. Not only does this
practice introduce non-native invasive species into the Tucson desert more
rapidly, but it also degrades the surrounding environment as a whole. Again
sustainability concepts rely on cooperation between development and the natural
environment, not opposition.
DONOVAN 13
Procedures
In order to complete a full sustainability analysis of the two residential
developments it is important to analyze certain characteristics of the buildings
and how each performs on a monthly parallel. These building features of
sustainability are building form and material use, solar orientation and shading,
and land-use efficiency and governmental policy. All of these concepts together
reflect how sustainable a building is or isn’t in its design and illuminates the
practical functioning of the building through testing and analysis.
Material use and building design are two of the most important aspects of
construction in a desert climate, but both have been ignored in recent historic
trends in Tucson. Indigenous inhabitants of the Sonoran Desert had to rely on
instinct to provide comfortable housing in the same weather conditions because
of the lack of harnessed energy, air conditioning, and other amenities that desert
cities take for granted today (Vint & Neumann, 2005). The lack of technology of
their time challenged the native nations of Arizona to adapt building techniques
that exhibit resourceful use of natural materials and environmental forces that
were manageable at the time. Some examples of this biological ingenuity are
solar orientation, thermal storage mass walls, earth cooling, evaporative cooling,
vegetated and built shade devices, and natural ventilation (Vint & Neumann,
2005). As in many aspects of living sustainably, the cost of environmental
materials is greater than the non-sustainable option and explains the recent
trends in non-native material use. “In 2004 the regional cost per square foot
DONOVAN 14
(PSF) of wall area as approximately $18.00 for unplastered adobe, compared to
$12.00 PSF for an insulated, plastered concrete block wall and $8.00 PSF for
frame [and] plaster wall” (Vint & Neumann, 2005). The development on Adams
Avenue chose the cheaper form of construction and used wooden frame and
plaster as shown below in Image 1.
Image 1, 2014
The setback to wooden frame and plaster construction is that the materials are
considered low mass construction, while the more expensive concert “Integra”
blocks of the Glenn Street development are high mass construction. The mass
of the construction is derived from the thermal storage capacity and while high
mass construction absorbs heat, low mass construction insulates by creating a
thermal barrier (Vint & Neumann, 2005).
The Smart Lofts might not have saved money in material use, but because
these residencies were made out of Integra insulation block as opposed to
DONOVAN 15
traditional concert cement building blocks or frame and plaster, and this gives
them a large sustainable and economic advantage. Integra blocks are more
sustainable than other materials because they retain heat better through
intelligent design and higher hear absorbing capacity. This unique design can be
seen below in Image 2.
Image 2 (Vint, 2013)
The amount of energy that a building expedites is dependent on the material use
of the walls and roofing, but also in its design and orientation to nature. The Intra
blocks are designed to reduce heat loss by channeling the heat of the walls
inside or outside to reduce the amount of air conditioning or cooling that a
building needs, but sharing walls is even more effective in temperature
regulation.
This development on Glenn Street has four different occupancies, similarly
to the Adams house, but the difference is that two sets of apartments share a
common wall. Shared walls are a strategic concept of sustainable design
DONOVAN 16
because they not only saves money on material use, which is obviously more
sustainable, but shared walls will save the renter on heating and cooling costs.
Proper material use and the utilization of shared walls will lower energy bills by
reducing exposure to elements, restricting heat loss and gain, resulting in lower
air conditioning costs and utility bills (Vint & Neumann, 2005).
In the desert, it is important to consider material use and the amount of
heat being transfer between walls of the interior and exterior of the development,
but sun orientation and shading can influence this exchange of heat just as
drastically. Solar orientation and shading, while always important in building
design, is even more crucial of a concept to consider in long sunny days of the
desert heat. Like sharing walls, solar orientation is something that must be
planed before construction has begun, but can have significant results on the
energy use of a building. Because the sun is relatively predictable, orientation
and shading are extremely effective sustainable practices that have been used in
the Tucson region for thousands of years. Shown below in Image 3 are
differences in sun exposure that a building can receive on the 32 ° north
longitudinal line that the city of Tucson is located on. This diagram, published in
2000 by Graphic Standards, illuminates the influence solar orientation can have
on development in the southwestern region of the United States. The large lines
swooping across the center represent the path of the sun in the sky and confirms
how small degrees of orientation can greatly influence the sustainable efficiency
of a development.
DONOVAN 17
Image 3 (Olgyay, 2000)
As exemplified by the Florida’s Concurrency Laws case, so much of the
construction industry relies on governmental policy and law. Tucson is no
exception to governmental obstruction and local architects and developers deal
with this problem regularly. In the case of the Glenn Street development proper
solar orientation was not possible due to city zoning codes and law, which
drastically reduced the potential sustainability of the building. The inability to
properly orientate to the sun limits the amount of energy that the panels on the
roof can absorb, and also the quantity of sun exposure or heat storage the
building can reduce. These laws were put into place to avoid developers from
taking advantage of the unique population of students in the area and putting up
DONOVAN 18
large residencies in historic neighborhoods to turn a quick profit. While in theory
these policies have good intentions, now that developmental patterns are
converting to more sustainable systems of manufacturing obstruction is doing
more damage than help. The development of Glenn was limited to the amount of
occupants per acre and the ability to have better solar orientation due to parking
codes. By requiring parking regulations the plot of the land could not be utilized
to its full potential, this a typical example of how the laws in the city of Tucson
can impede sustainable progression.
DONOVAN 19
Chapter 5: Results
Solar orientation was not considered during the design phase of the
Adams development and the sun prominently faces the large eastern facing wall
throughout the day. As the sun heats up the low mass materials it warms the
house and makes the air condition unit for more active and consume more
energy. This is where the benefit of using better quality and more natural
materials in the Glenn house should be obvious. The $4.00 PSF difference
between using insulated concert block or a frame and plastered wall might seem
insignificant, but when extrapolated to the square footage of the two
developments the false attraction of these cheaper material use begins to
appear. The 1,347 square foot home on Glenn Street, which was built using the
more expensive insulted cement, could have saved around $20,000 by opting for
the cheaper building material used in the Adams house. Observing the $4.00
PSF difference, multiplying it by the 1,347 square feet of each building, and then
multiplying that sum again by the four houses in the development calculated this
total of $20,000. While the upfront cost of this material might be more expensive,
overtime the choice could prove to be economical as “traditional houses… when
built well, can outlast and outperform conventional wood-frame houses (Vint &
Neumann, 2005).
The Glenn development might have exhausted more funds on
manufacturing materials, but consequently has less heat transfer through the
walls due to the use of high mass materials. The Glenn Street household is not
orientated to the sun perfectly, but pays more attention to the solar cycle then the
DONOVAN 20
Adams Avenue household. The Smart Loafs even uses this orientation to power
solar panels located on the roofs of each individual property and provides its
tenets with an alternative source of energy. The use of alternative energy
sources is a substantial means to reduce both the cost and impact of living in the
desert environment.
A comparison of the utilities each home uses over a 5-month period can
be seen below in the Water Consumption Analysis Table and Energy
Consumption Analysis Table. The analysis tables unfortunately do not reflect the
sustainable efforts that this developer has strived to obtain. While it may appear
that the individual Glenn home consumed fewer resources from the charts, this is
not the case. The Glenn house has 2 less people then Adams and the “average
per person” (APP) on each table is representative of the analysis results.
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Average per
Month
Average per
Person
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Water Consumption Analysis
Adams StGlenn St
Month
Gal
lon
s of
Wat
er (
Th
ousa
nd
s)
Water Consumption Analysis Table
DONOVAN 21
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Average per
Month
Average per
Person
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Energy Consumption Analysis
Adams StGlenn St
Month
Kil
low
atts
of E
ner
gy
Energy Consumption Analysis Table
The amount of resources consumed per month per person is an important
characteristic to observe, but because of the different amounts of people per
house the APP consumption is more critical to observe.
DONOVAN 22
Chapter 6: Conclusion
Although the analysis of the utility bills between the two residencies failed
to demonstrate the effectiveness of sustainable practices in the desert climate, I
am going to explain why. A noticeable flaw in the comparison of water and
energy bills between the residencies is the utility companies’ information and
statistics manipulate the average amount of consumption per person. I was not
aware of this before the study, but apparently the prices of utilities are different
rates throughout the city. One person in a neighborhood does not pay the same
for 1000 gallons of water as someone else in a different neighborhood. Also
included in the electric and water bill are charges for more than just the resource
itself. “Miscellaneous” and “environmental service fees” are examples of some of
the charges that are added to the bills and could be uniquely calculated per
neighborhood as well. The meter reading dates are also all different and some
months are longer than others. The regularity and effectiveness of these bills
explanation on the monthly statement provided for customers is simply not
enough to yield significant results.
In addition to the discrepancy in billing from the utility companies the
amount of water or electricity an individual uses can be greatly affected by
personal decisions like the length of shower per day or if the facet is left on
during shaving. The same is true for electric use. When you leave the room do
you turn all the lights off? The fan? Unplug the television… because even if not in
use, if it’s plugged in the television is still demanding power. The influence that
individuals have over their own bills is just as important as the sustainable
DONOVAN 23
improvements and concepts that have been discussed in this study and the lack
of results from the analysis compliments this indication. In reality small personal
choices like these sway results significantly, especially over a 5-month
compounded period. This is an excellent instance of how small personal
decisions can make a great difference in water and energy conservation. What
this analysis does validate is that no one branch of the developmental process
alone can generate a sustainable community.
The utilities bills might not reflect the sustainable consciences of The
Smart Lofts, but that does not mean these developers are not making a
difference for the environment. While touring the interior of the house it was
apparent that this development is sustainable from the inside out. Physically, the
carpets and the individual roof decks are made from predominantly recycled
materials while the solar panels on the roof heat the houses hot water. Although
this could not be graphed in a table for the report, these long-term techniques of
development are facilitating sustainability and cooperation through a more
natural lifestyle. For example the interior of the house is exposed Integra block,
not for aesthetic reasons, but to prevent the use of excess materials. To cover
the interior walls would be more expensive, and also involve the use of excess
materials from an anonymous factory that manufactures the product using any of
the numerous chemicals expended in large-scale industrial manufacturing
around the world. At first one might think that the developers could simply use a
sustainable product for the interior, as opposed to a move traditional, but there is
no need. It is not essential to use more materials then necessary and the added
DONOVAN 24
cost of the materials, even sustainable, requires the use of resources,
manufacturing those resources, and then transporting the finished product. All of
these steps to use this product, whatever it might be, are harmful to the
environment and the true sustainable material is nothing at all because nothing is
necessary.
The tenets of the Glenn Street development also go above and beyond to
help renter’s monitor their utility bills and inform them on simple, but effective,
ways to live as sustainably as the house was intended. Originally the tenets
required renters to pay their own bills to gain an appreciation of the amount of
resources his or her household consumed, but soon changed this policy because
the utility companies offered them better rates if the bills were paid through the
landlord. This is another example of the manipulation of the utility companies’
information and how consequently the outcome of the analysis was
compromised. The education of renters on their utility bills stretches far beyond
their stay at The Smart Lofts, because now that individual is thinking about their
lifestyle and how that lifestyle impacts the environment. If someone begins
noticing their resource consumption, monitors it, and eventually alters their
lifestyle that individual is going to take that level of conscious wherever he or she
goes in the future.
Another variable of the study that was not observed as effectively as I had
hoped is the concept of solar orientation and shading in both developments. Due
to time restraints this important aspect of sustainable design was not scrutinized
as absolutely as it could have been. If time had not been a restrain, the report
DONOVAN 25
would have benefited from calculating the exact angles the houses are
positioned with orientation to the sun, and then recorded the amount of sunlight
per day each house was actually receiving. This would allow a more in depth
observation of the effects that sun exposure has on diverse materials and the
thermal transfers that are associated with those materials. Another aspect of
shading and material use that was overlooked in the study is the ratio of floor
area to windows in the households. Glass and windows are an excellent way to
let natural light into a home, but the energy loss through heat transfer in the
desert would be an noteworthy relationship to examine, record, and compare.
Enormous or high numbers of windows are another developmental trend that
Tucson has been cursed with in recent history, but opening up homes to beautiful
desert views and scenery with these windows are ironically what is destroying
that beautiful landscape. The more individuals that move to the outer fringe of
Tucson, with hopes of living outside the city and enjoying nature, the closer those
views are from disappearing. Not only does this type of development degrade
the natural environment with pollution and non-native materials, but also as
people move further away from downtown the setting becomes no longer natural.
Each time a new development is built on the outskirts of town it sets a precedent
for the next developer to build even longer distances outside of downtown.
Eventually all the land will be developed with houses and gated communities,
and there will be no desert or beautiful landscape for anyone to enjoy. This
would consequently lower the value of all homes in the real estate market,
drastically reduce the large number of tourists that wish to travel to Tucson each
DONOVAN 26
year, and eventually decrease the quality of life in all parts of Tucson.
Government laws and regulations should be in place to control the rate of which
the city expands into the desert, but it seems that in most cases the city would
rather capitalize on short term gains and profits then invest in the preservation for
the future. The city and its community must make it easier for developers to
construct sustainable housing, large or small scale developments, and restrict
outward progress to impede communities from extending further into the natural
environment.
In addition to the monetary benefits that are a driving force behind the
transition into a more sustainable future, there is also an added variable of
personal responsibility that accompanies the movement. If the excepted average
lifestyle is going to reduce the opportunities and quality of life for future
generations then it is more than irresponsible or ignorant to continue living this
way. This includes all the citizen of the Earth, but especially in developed
countries like the United States. The developed countries of the world are the
ones that will need to spearhead this revolution using the education and
resources provided for us. The developed countries of our society are not only
more capable of reversing current market trends because of the financial
influence they have, but also these same countries are predominantly
responsible for the current environmental complications. It is the excepted high
standard of living in developed countries that is consuming resources and
destroying the planet and it is our responsibility to contribute proportionately.
Developed countries, contrasting to undeveloped countries, have also all gone
DONOVAN 27
through an industrial revolution and the epidemiologic transition which has
resulted in the current levels of pollution and rising levels of planet warming
greenhouse gases. To reverse this current trend there will need to be an
unprecedented level of international cooperation and the notion of individual
countries desires will need to be overlooked. This is the only way to guarantee
that the planet is secure and prosperous in the future for all people.
In conclusion, sustainability is a concept that requires participation
throughout all phases of development. How sustainable a development can
potentially be is defined by complex variables, but the notion begins with
governmental policy and law, continues through intelligent design and planning,
and ends with the educated and environmentally conscience decisions of
individuals. The effort is not confined to just one group of citizens but commands
cooperation from everyone in the construction industry from start to finish. This
is confirmed by the Tucson government restricting building codes to require
specific parking requirements on Glenn Street, the building consequently is not
orientated properly to the sun, and then the idea that individuals living in this
residency can choose to how adjust his or her lifestyle and significantly contribute
in the larger system. Soon, citizens will not consider sustainable practices as an
additional positive characteristic of their residency, but these aspects that make
up sustainable development are going to be expected.
DONOVAN 28
References
1. Gottdiener, M. & L. Budd, 2005. Key Concepts in Urban Studies. London:
Sage Publications.
2. Smith, M. E. (2010). Sprawl, Squatters And Sustainable Cities: Can
Archaeological Data Shed Light On Modern Urban Issues. Cambridge
Archaeological Journal, 20(02), 229-253.
3. Hayden, D., 2004. Field Guide to Sprawl. New York (NY): Pantheon.
4. Staley, S. (2006). Sustainable Development in American Planning: A
Critical Appraisal. The Town Planning Review, 77(1), 99-126.
5. Peiser, R. (2001). Decomposing Urban Sprawl. The Town Planning
Review, 72(3), 275-298.
6. Winston, N., & Eastaway, M. P. (2008). Sustainable Housing in the Urban
Context: International Sustainable Development Indicator Sets and
Housing. Social Indicators Research, 87(2), 211-221
7. Vint, B., & Neumann, C. (2005). Southwestern Housing Traditions.
Tucson: Vint and Associates Architects Inc.
8. Michael Francis Konig. “Toward Metropolitan Status: Charter Government
and Rise of Phoenix, Arizona, 1945-1960. (PhD Diss., Arizona State
University, 1983), 101
9. Fairbanks, R. (2006). The Failure of Urban Renewal in the Southwest:
From City Needs to Individual Rights. The Western History Association,
37(3), 303-325.
DONOVAN 29
10. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). (1987).
Our Common Future. New York: Oxford University Press.
11. Neumayer, Eric. (2003). Weak Versus Strong Sustainability: Exploring the
Limits of Two Opposing Paradigms. Cheltenham, UK.
12. Rosenthal, J. (1960). Planning Advisory Service. American Society of
Planning Officials, 1(139), 2-44.
13. Google Maps, 2014
14. Olgyay, Victor. "Sun-path Diagram for Tucson's Latitude." Graphic
Standards 10th ed. (2000): 803.
DONOVAN 30