neighbours' interpretation of urban infill

Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 2005, volume 32, pages 715 ^ 733

DOI:10.1068/b31157

The results of making a city more compact: neighbours' interpretation of urban infill Suzanne Vallance, Harvey C Perkins, Kevin Moore

Social Science, Parks, Recreation and Tourism Group, Environment, Society and Design Division, PO Box 84, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand; e-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Received 22 June 2004; in revised form 17 December 2004

Abstract. The quest for more sustainable urban forms has added renewed vigour to urban planning, with various types of urban infill and intensification becoming increasingly popular with local authorities. These approaches seek to achieve environmental and social objectives but, despite the supposed advantages of a more consolidated urban form, infill housing as a strategy for growth management is not always well received by local residents and it remains a contentious issue. In this paper the authors report on an enquiry into neighbours' interpretations of, and responses to, infill housing in Christchurch, New Zealand.

Introduction As sites of significant waste production and resource consumption, cities have become an important part of the sustainability debate, and planning approaches such as `smart growth' and `new urbanism' have become increasingly popular with many central and local authorities (Winstanley et al, 2003). Such policies aim to direct growth into existing residential areas so as to reduce dependency on the use of private automobiles and to reduce vehicle emissions by making more efficient use of public transport and minimising urban sprawl onto agricultural land and natural habitats at the urban periphery. These policies are also aimed at reducing the costs of new infrastructure at the urban fringe and promoting a more equitable, vibrant, and safer city. Infill housing is often promoted by planning authorities as one way in which this process of directing growth towards existing residential neighbourhoods can be achieved and its benefits enjoyed. Despite the supposed advantages of a more consolidated urban form (de Roo and Miller, 2000; English, 1999; Gow, 2000; Jenks et al, 1996; 1998; MftE, 2002), infill housing as a strategy for growth management is not always well received by residents (Breheny, 1997; Crane, 1996; Crookston et al, 1996; Gordon and Richardson, 1997). When seen from the perspective of contemporary urban theory this is not surprising. The pursuit of a compact city form and too great an emphasis on the manipulation of the biophysical aspects of the urban ènvironment' for social ends display simplistic and deterministic tendencies that ignore the historical and sociocultural aspects of urban life. Changes to the physical structure of the city reverberate and manifest themselves in the individual and collective imagination in complex ways that are not completely understood. In an effort to examine elements of the relationship between landscape change and urban social life, we present the findings of a research project undertaken in the city of Christchurch, New Zealand, where infilling has been actively promoted by the local council in order to fulfil a number of biophysical environmental goals. We report how residents living in the vicinity of infill housing interpret and respond to the changes in urban form that have occurred as a result of consolidation policies, and we argue that these interpretations cannot be separated from a cultural history that has emphasised

716

S Vallance, H C Perkins, K Moore

the virtues of suburban or low-density urban living. This was achieved by comparing and contrasting the responses of residents who live in infill housing with those who live in the more traditional quarter-acre section.(1) Our research findings are interpreted with reference to Lefebvre's (1991) spatial triad and its links to the concept of sense of place. Such ideas are useful in exploring the links between planning and policy, everyday lived experiences, and the symbolism that is an inherent part of the built environment. The work described in this paper can therefore be regarded as an investigation into the ways disjunctions occur between and within Lefebvre's three `spaces'. After providing a brief theoretical overview to explain these spaces in more detail, we present the background to our case study and make explicit the cultural and sociohistorical ideals underpinning Christchurch residents' interpretations of, and responses to, infill housing. We also provide a brief overview of New Zealand's current planning context and the Resource Management Act (1991). Our research methods and results are then outlined to show how changes to urban policy interact with the symbolic elements of the residential built environment to affect profoundly the everyday lives of residents. The results suggest that in the context of New Zealand's resource management regime a broader interpretation of `the environment' needs to be adopted; one in which biophysical and sociocultural elements are accommodated. Theoretical background For Henri Lefebvre everyday experiences assumed particular importance, and he explored their relationship to policy, spatial manifestations, and the symbolism of places in his book, The Production of Space (1991). Lefebvre acknowledged the often overlooked role of the quotidian in the production of space by using a `conceptual triad' involving spatial practices, representations of space, and representational spaces. Representations of space are conceptualisations of space as constructed by planners, architects, and real estate developers, with their attendant belief or ideological systems. Representational space is directly lived and it `òverlays physical space making symbolic use of its objects (Lefebvre, 1991, page 39) and therefore, as Merrifield suggested, ``there's more there there'' (2000, page 174). Spatial practices give everyday social and urban realities structure and include patterns of interaction and other networks. It is spatial practice that keeps representational space and representations of space both together and apart (Merrifield, 2000, page 175). This triad challenged traditional dualisms in which, for example, space was seen as an `òbjective physical surface with specific fixed characteristics upon which social categories were mapped out'' (Valentine, 2001, page 4). As a result, space is now seen as playing an `àctive role in the constitution and reproduction of social identities, and social identities and relations are recognised as producing material and symbolic or metaphorical spaces'' (page 4). This perspective is related to debates about the imagined geographies of places and the ways in which such geographies underpin people's interpretations of biophysical environmental and social change. As Massey et al (1999, page 17) note, ``The geographical imagination is a highly significant part of ... that `real world' which we socially construct, and has an immense influence upon ways in which people act within it.'' The use of the term ìmagined geographies' recognises the coconstitutive nature of space, that is, the blend of `real', `subjective', and ìntersubjective' spaces. That these three `spaces' are linked emphasises the point that changes in one space will inevitably echo in another. The value of Lefebvre's thesis is the acknowledgment of (1) In New Zealand, a `section' is equivalent to the Anglo-American `plot' or `lot'. Although there are now very few sections of a quarter acre or more, it is still a description that is commonly used.

Neighbours' interpretation of urban infill

717

the intimate connections between abstract, planned spaces, daily life, and these imagined geographies. These ideas connect with work conducted on `place and senses of place' (Eyles, 1985), which incorporated social structure, social interaction, and personal experience into the theorisation of people's relationships with the places in which they live and interact. Eyles (1985, pages 122 ^ 126) identified ten senses of place (for example, social, family, way of life, and environmental) and concluded that `places' cannot simply be described in seemingly objective terms öbuilding height, bulk, area coverage, and so forthöbut should also be viewed as spaces with meanings and values attached to them. More recently, Shields (1991) posited a theory of social spatialisation in which, similar to the work of Foucault, place and sense of place emerge in à discourse of space' in which people's concrete, nondiscursive, practices are informed by, change, and create the cultural discourse of the spatial. In this process purely discursive (that is, ideational, symbolic, and linguistic) ideas of space and imaginary geographies are transformed into the real everyday actions of people. Social spatialisation is not a cognitive structure based on learned rules but is `à cultural formation embodied in ... gestures ... and trained postures in and toward the world, in sets of practical paradigms and algorithms coordinating groups of activities and sites'' which suggest ``what to do, when, and where'' (Shields, 1991, page 65). Social spatialisation therefore incorporates the idea of fluidity and change in place relationships at a variety of scales and emphasises influences from various parts of social and economic networks, whether their origins be distant or local. Massey (1994a; 1994b; 1995) added another dimension to these ideas about the changing and conflicting meaning of places, arguing that the histories of people and their attempts to create places that serve their interests should be factored into discussions of sense of place. The meanings of places therefore relate closely to questions of power and its distribution (see also Berg and Kearns, 1996). Power, in this sense, should not be thought of as dominant and unchangeable. Rather, it is open to challenge and as its basis has ``continually to be renewed, recreated, defended, and modified'' so too will it be ``continually resisted, limited, altered, and challenged'' (Williams, 1997, pages 110 ^ 113). Thus, Massey's (1995, pages 188 ^ 190) terms ``the identity of places, indeed the very identification of places as particular places, is always in that sense temporary, uncertain, and in process.'' More recently, Massey (2004) and others (Amin, 2004; Thrift, 1999; 2004) have elaborated this perspective in discussions of relational space, place, and the politics of place. Relational space refers ``to the mutual constitution of the local and global'' (Massey, 2004, page 7). A relational sense of place and space is centred on nodes or locations through which flow diverse networks of peoples, ideas, resources, practices, etc, that have long histories. Amin (2004) is particularly interested in this conceptualisation of place as it influences what he calls a ``relational politics of propinquity''; this creates a politics of place that is ``shaped by the issues thrown up by living with diversity and sharing a common territorial space'' (page 39) that relates directly to the experience of, and reaction to, infill housing in Christchurch, New Zealand. The case-study area: Christchurch, New Zealand Christchurch is the second largest city in New Zealand. It is located on the east coast of the South Island and has a population of approximately 325 000 people. Christchurch is the result of British colonisation in the mid-1800s, and the most enduring image of the city is that of the `Garden City'. Christchurch has won a number of international awards based on its Garden City image, including Outstanding Garden City in 1996, and the Garden City of the World (Major Cities Nations in Bloom) 1997.

718


Christchurch covers an area of 45 240 ha and, overall, there is a high incidence of owner-occupied dwellings, with an average of 70% of residences falling into this categoryöslightly above the national average of 68%. This figure does, however, represent a significant drop in homeownership levels in Christchurch, which stood at 75.5% in 1986. Levels of homeownership are generally higher in the outer suburbs (as high as 90% in some areas), and rental accommodation tends to be concentrated adjacent to the four avenues and to the south and east of the city. The prevalence of both homeownership and the residential quarter-acre section or lot can be attributed to the early efforts of the Canterbury Association under the guidance of Wakefield and Godley in the 1840s. These men planned the settlement's physical layout and social makeup from their base in England (Rice, 1999). Would-be purchasers of the newly divided sections in what was to become Christchurch had to be members of the Church of England and òf good character'. Land was to be sold at `sufficient price' to raise the capital necessary for schools, churches, and other public works. This would also ensure that those with limited means could be excluded (Rice, 1999, pages 12 ^ 13). Although Christchurch perhaps epitomises colonial attempts at social engineering, the manipulation of social behaviour through land use was common throughout New Zealand. As a corollary, because land held mystical and moral properties for settlers, the single, detached dwelling on a residential section or lot of, preferably, a quarter acre was considered virtuous (Brooking, 1996). Such land use was designed to help the new colony avoid the social ills of urban industrial England, such as overcrowding, prostitution, gambling, and other criminal or immoral behaviour, not to mention illness and disease. Such convictions are clearly demonstrated in the following quotation from Malcolm Mason, Head of the New Zealand Health Department in 1904: ``Small houses and no gardens mean ill health, discontent, and a lack of interest in the home. Between the mental effect of living in a small house with a horizon bounded by the backs of similarly uninteresting edifices, and living in a cottage with a flower garden in front and a vegetable garden behind, there is a very great deal. The public house and the theatre lose much of their attraction, while the effect on children is of the greatest moment'' (quoted in Tennant, 2000, page 28). The vision of the ùrban hell'' (Meacham, 1999) upon which such an antiurban view was based was exemplified by the Romantic Movement, which `àbandoned the city as the centre of human endeavour'' and turned instead to the worship of nature (Ferguson, 1994, page 25). In the new colony of New Zealand, this contrast between city and country could be reconciled if the country could be incorporated into town, hence the popularity of the residential quarter-acre section. Owing to the early work of Godley and Wakefield, Christchurch exemplifies the ways in which these views came to influence urban form and lay the foundation of a popular synecdoche where `the Garden City' has come to represent Christchurch as a whole. Housing policy in New Zealand generally, and in Christchurch in particular, has therefore been strongly influenced by the ideas and concerns outlined above. The efforts of urban planners such as Wakefield and Godley have since been reinforced by central and local government in successive years. Owner-occupation of detached dwellings was promoted by, for example, the 1905 Workers' Dwellings Act and by a number of state and/or public housing schemes. Promotion of this ideal continued until the mid-1980s, when substantial changes were made to the role of central government in New Zealand's economy and society. Although current government policy has changed to a certain extent, most New Zealanders are still deeply


719

immersed in a culture that values low-density, suburban living influenced by agrarian and bucolic mythology. The current planning climate in New Zealand In 1984 the Labour government began a programme of neoliberal restructuring, and this has had an enduring effect on almost all areas of New Zealand life. In environmental terms these changes produced the 1991 Resource Management Act, with its èffects-based' land-use management orientation. The new statute replaced the more prescriptive and interventionist àctivities-based' approach of the earlier Town and Country Planning Acts (1953 and 1977) and is now the primary piece of legislation governing resource use and environmental management. Now, within certain parameters, any land use or activity is permissible provided its effects are no more than minor (Memon and Perkins, 2000; Perkins and Thorns, 2001a). The goal of the Resource Management Act is to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources and it is based loosely on the sustainable development paradigm outlined in the Brundtland Report (WCED, 1987; see also Memon and Perkins, 2000). A requirement of the Act is that councils prepare city plans that establish policies and rules that will be used to regulate resource use in their areas of jurisdiction (MftE, 2001, page 6) based on assessments of the ability of the natural environment to support a given activity. As a result, the Christchurch City Plan (CCC, 1999) promoted a policy of `consolidation', which is a continuation of Christchurch City Council's `containment' and greenbelt policy in force under the 1977 Town and Country Planning Act but it is also influenced significantly by European and North American models of urban consolidation. Consequently, in the late 1980s Christchurch went through a period of central city and suburban infill of the sort illustrated in figure 1 (over). This was facilitated by the council's land subdivision rules, market demand for medium-density housing, limited greenfield land zoned for residential development, and a burgeoning number of small-scale housing developers who saw opportunities for profit. Although there was some market support for infill housing, demand continued for housing on larger sections on the urban periphery, and objections to infill housing became a common feature of the local media. As a result, in the mid-1990s the city council rezoned `rural' land as `residential' at the periphery of the city. At one and the same time the council was therefore promoting a policy of urban intensification but also releasing land for extensive residential subdivision on the margins of the city. The results of these developments on built environment have been substantial, with new periurban subdivision and `lifestyle block' developments becoming far more prevalent.(2) Conversely, infill housing continues to be built, but at a much lower rate, as shown in figure 2 (over), which illustrates the changing nature of consents issued for infill housing ùnits' compared with consents for detached `dwellings' on quarter-acre type sections, from 1992 to 2002. Although research conducted by Christchurch City Council (Plew, 1999) clearly established that infill housing was meeting many of the needs of inhabitants, the author of the report, Plew, recommended further research into neighbours' opposition to infill housing, opposition that continued to be vociferous and widespread. This paper is based on our research into the views of residents who lived either contiguous to or in the vicinity of infill housing in Christchurch.

(2) Lifestyle

blocks are sections of 4 ^ 20 ha (10 ^ 50 acres) in rural or semirural areas within commuting distance of an urban centre.

720


New townhouse

Three new townhouses

Original older house

(a)

(b) Six three-storey attached townhouses Two new detached townhouses

Original older house

(c)

(d)

Figure 1. Types of infill housing commonly found in Christchurch, New Zealand (source: Plew, 1999). Note: infill housing of types (a) ^ (c) is now common throughout suburban Christchurch, whereas infill of type (d) is more prevalent in areas close to the suburban malls and central business district. Units Dwellings

Number of consents

1600 1200 800 400 0

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996 1997 Year

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Figure 2. Building consents issued for units and dwellings, 1992 ^ 2002, in Christchurch, New Zealand (source: http://archived.ccc.govt.nz/reports/technicalreports/2002/resbuildingconsents/).

Methods The research involved the collection of qualitative and quantitative data. Initially, we conducted observations and interviews with twenty-one Christchurch residents who were neighbours of infill housing. Of these, seventeen responded to an advertisement placed in the Christchurch newspaper The Press asking neighbours how they felt about the infill housing next door. With one exception, this group of quarter-acre residents were, at best, ambivalent about this form of housing. This phase of the research could


721

therefore be described as an exploration of the reasons behind anti-infill sentiment and how infill housing was influencing the symbolic and lived aspects (or representational spaces and spatial practice, to use Lefebvre's terms) of the home and neighbourhood. We then designed a questionnaire, consisting primarily of five-point Likert-scale-type questions, which was sent to 755 homes randomly selected from the development consents database of Christchurch City Council. This was completed by 261 respondents (a response rate of 35%). The survey was administered to residents who belonged to one of three groups. (1) neighbours on a quarter-acre section; (2) neighbours living in infill housing; and (3) nonneighbours (residents on a quarter-acre section within sight of, but not adjacent to, any infill development) on a quarter-acre section. (3) The division of the sample into these three groups was based on the notion (largely derived from media commentary about invasion of privacy and offstreet parking problems) that neighbours' reactions, regardless of section type, would be substantially different from those of nonneighbours. The nonneighbours group were initially included to compare their reactions with those of neighbours. We were therefore somewhat surprised to discover only one statistically significant difference between the responses of neighbours and nonneighbours, but twenty differences between quarter-acre residents (whether adjacent or not) and those living in infill housing. The study thus became more centred on exploring why section type, rather than direct effects (such as shading), played such an important role. Results Of the three groups, neighbours on a quarter-acre section provided the highest response rate (42%), and neighbours in general were more likely to participate in the survey than were nonneighbours. Higher participation rates (37%) were also found for residents of the Living 1 zones, which have the lowest housing densities.(4) Christchurch City Council was able to provide information on the number of consents for infill housing developments in different area units of the city.(5) The highest survey responses rates (45%) were obtained from respondents living in area units with the most (301 or more) consents issued for some form of infill housing development. The majority of respondents (62%) lived next to a single infill housing development, and most (60%) had not experienced any additional infill developments since they began residence at that address. Physical changes and the appropriation of space

It has been noted that New Zealanders are vehement about protecting their privacy (for example, Mitchell, 1972) and it is arguably this aspect, along with access to sunshine, that Christchurch residents most treasure. In their representations of space, formalised in the City Plan, Christchurch City Council has made some attempt to preserve the perceived right to be free from surveillance (Saunders and Williams, 1988) and to give access to sunshine via recession planes, minimum `setbacks', height restrictions, and the like. The interviews showed, however, that blanket measures such as these may have met with only limited success given the highly individualised experiences of suburban living and the often unique conditions surrounding new (3) All

infill housing residents were, by definition, neighbours of infill and it was therefore impossible to survey a nonneighbours infill population. (4) Residential zones are divided into Living 1, 2, 3, 4, and `hills'. Living 1 zones have the lowest housing densities, and Living 4 zones the highest. (5) Each zone is further divided into smaller neighbourhoods, or àrea units', with fixed boundaries.

722


infill housing developments. Indeed, many of the interviewees responded to our advertisement to protest against the ways in which the infill next door had invaded their privacy: Leona: ``They sit out on their balcony and look straight into our window. The next apartment sit out on their balcony and sun ... . On the balcony. Right next door to our bedroom window. They use the balcony as outdoor living ... . Those ones used to bug me to start off with, it really did. But I thought `no I'm going to rise above this'. So every time we go past that window, those people in number 5 and 7 can look and see exactly what I'm doing. What I'm eating. We draw the curtains at night.'' Julie: ``We used to have perfect privacy. Now we've got apartments which have full length windows and bedrooms that look down over our garden and into our house.'' Interviewer: ``How does that make you feel?'' Julie: `Ì hugely resent the loss of privacy. I hugely resent it!'' Much of this resentment sprang from the changes many of the interviewees had made to their everyday habits or spatial practices as a result of the infilling, such as rearranging barbeque areas or moving washing lines so as not to feel embarrassed when they put their underwear on a washing line that was now situated directly under the window of the infill housing next door. Interestingly, some respondents called this outright `theft' and considered their neighbours to have `stolen' their landscape. This emphasis on privacy was reflected in the survey results where, on a five-point Likert scale, 86% of respondents indicated that privacy was either ìmportant' or `very important'. It was noteworthy that the variable `Ìnfill housing has invaded my privacy'' contained the only statistically significant difference between neighbours and nonneighbours. In most other respects, as we discuss below, responses to the survey were dictated more by section type than by propinquity. The survey showed that, for the respondents, the importance of privacy was second only to sunlight, with 90% of those surveyed stating that sunlight was an ìmportant' or `very important' aspect of their house and section. Interview data support Pawson's (2000, page 79) view that suburban developments, advertised in the 1960s and 1970s as receiving `Àll the Sun that Shines'', could only be `à metaphor for the prospects of a good life'' on the Canterbury Plains, where everything gets all the sun that shines. Pawson's identification of sunlight as a metaphor for ``the good life'' really emphasises the ways in which symbolic or representational spaces, strengthened by government rhetoric and colonial idealism, have become an integral part of suburban living. There goes the neighbourhood ...

Although the City Plan makes some attempt to cater for neighbourhood amenity and facilities, the interview showed that it is difficult indeed to identify, predict, or control the cumulative effects of infill housing, despite the real effect it has on `neighbourhood character'. Survey respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement with the statements `Ìnfill housing fits in with the character of the area'' and `Ì resent the loss of character homes to infill housing''. Although almost 14% of respondents indicated some level of agreement that infill housing `fits in' with the character of their neighbourhood, over half disagreed. In addition, almost 55% of respondents agreed that they resented the loss of character homes, whereas only 19% disagreed with this statement. Further analysis showed, however, that these responses tended to differ by section type. Those respondents living on a residential quarter-acre section were more likely to disagree that infill housing fits in with the neighbourhood character


723

(60% of respondents) than those living in infill housing (33%). These differences were statistically significant [ w 2 17:457, degrees of freedom (df ) 2, p < 0:00]. Also statistically significant (w 2 7:278, df 2, p < 0:05) were the differences in response by section type to the statement `Ì resent the loss of character homes to infill housing'', with 61% of those on a quarter-acre section agreeing compared with 45% of those living in infill housing. In table 1 we provide the results of other factors thought to affect neighbourhood character. Of these, the importance of open space (w 2 8:042, df 2, p < 0:05) and greenery (w 2 7:193, df 2, p < 0:05) differed by section type, as did the belief that houses should not be built too close together (w 2 8:909, df 2, p < 0:05), that new housing should not be built on the same site as the original house (w 2 6:634, df 2, p < 0:05), that big houses should not be built on small sections (w 2 9:627, df 2, p < 0:01), and that infill housing was making the neighbourhood overcrowded (w 2 6:143, df 2, p < 0:05). The remaining variables listed in table 1 were not statistically significant. Two variables in particularöthe importance of open space and of trees and greeneryöwere often discussed at some length during the interviews. Interviewees often associated the clear-felling of trees with infill housing as the sections were prepared Table 1. Differences in residents' response, by section type: neighbourhood character (source: authors' survey). Statement

Open space [is important] quarter-acre infill Greenery [is important] quarter-acre infill Houses shouldn't be too close quarter-acre infill Dislike infill on same site as old house quarter-acre infill Dislike big houses on small section quarter-acre infill Infill makes neighbourhood crowded quarter-acre infill Should have interesting roofline quarter-acre infill Dislike garages in front of house quarter-acre infill Should be made of brick quarter-acre infill Fences should be low quarter-acre infill a Owing

Response (%) a agree

neutral

disagree

54.5 42.2

35.2 34.9

10.2 22.9

80.3 65.1

12.4 22.9

7.3 12.0

88.2 74.4

7.3 12.2

4.5 13.4

46.6 48.8

35.4 22.0

18.0 29.3

69.3 59.0

21.0 16.0

9.7 24.1

75.1 60.2

20.3 31.3

4.5 8.4

47.1 32.5

37.9 50.6

14.9 16.9

34.5 42.2

31.6 25.3

33.9 32.5

20.1 23.2

46.0 45.1

33.9 31.7

22.5 21.7

35.3 20.1

42.2 48.2

to rounding errors, row totals may not sum to exactly 100.0%.

724


for development, and this was seen as having a detrimental effect on the neighbourhood's `natural' attributes. Furthermore, they saw this loss of greenery and open space as extremely ironic given the Council's biophysical environmental justification for intensification. It is an important example of the ways in which formal representations of space (infill housing as a means of achieving a `sustainable city' form), representational space (trees as an integral part of Christchurch's Garden City image, and a symbol of an open, healthy neighbourhood), and spatial practices (residents responding to trees as indicators of seasonal change, habitats for birds, and shaded sitting areas) can be at odds: Mrs Donald: ``Because you're constantly surrounded by dead things öbuildings, walls, it's a bit like a rat in a maze. The typical rat race. Where do I go? I'm surrounded by walls. If I turn this way I see walls, If I look this way I see a wall, if I turn this way I see a wall. And that is fine if you're living in the city and you come home at night and the curtains are drawn because you've been working all day or whatever. But when you're in a suburb. In Christchurch! The Garden City! You lose privacy, you lose your sense of roots, your sense of establishment; it's very unsettling.'' Regina: ``[Trees] bring the wildlife. The city is dead unless you have life. It has a psychological effect. It doesn't matter if its a professional person in big business or some solo mother who is just struggling to make a living, or a little elderly ladyönature is universal. And it's the little things in life ... nature is the most calming. And you can go and meditate in your garden.'' The ways in which infill housing developers interpreted and applied the rules associated with the formal representations of space encompassed by the City Plan were a common feature of the interviews, and we were often shown examples of infilling where regulations had been stretched to the limit in order to `cram' as many units on the section as possible. This, combined with novel rooflines and the abandonment of eaves, meant some infill housing looked out of place. Some interviewees described such housing as taking on a fortress-like appearance (figure 3) with these and other effects combining to produce what was described as a `jarring mish mash' of housing types that compromised the legibility of the neighbourhood.

Figure 3. A `mean-eyed' fortress, Christchurch, New Zealand.


725

The city

The interviews often revealed a strong sense that infill housing had made the neighbourhood appear less ordered, less stable, and, in some ways, less understandable. As a corollary, the overarching guiding vision of the Garden City image appeared to become all the more important, and the interviewees were generally vehement about the need to protect the Garden City. The very nature of life in the city, an ùnnatural environment', meant that every tree should be treasured, as the following, typical, comments show: Mrs Donald: ``The visual quality of Christchurch, those intangibles, are becoming more and more important to people, like the name `Garden City'.'' Rhonda: `Ànd you look down [from the Port Hills] at various parts and once you know the city you can pick out the suburbs and look at the character of those suburbs. And the older suburbs are by far the most beautifully treed. They have discernible greenery around them. And you could say that that's a product of the fact that they've been here longer but I don't believe that if you went up there in another 50 years the more modern subdivisions or the infilled areas would reflect that. So you're diminishing what Christchurch used to be öthe so-called Garden City.'' Comments such as these reveal more than mere NIMBYism; they display a belief that infill housing doesn't have a place anywhere in the suburbs of the garden city. The survey data indicated similar concerns among the wider Christchurch population, with a total of 72% of respondents either agreeing or strongly agreeing that the Council should not let developers ruin the Garden City image. Again, further analysis showed that survey respondents living on a residential quarter acre were more likely to agree with this statement (77%, compared with 66% of those living in infill housing, w 2 8:148, df 2, p < 0:005). Social changes

As a requirement of the 1991 Resource Management Act, the focus of the City Plan is very much on the biophysical environment; however, many of the physical effects of infill housing to which interviewees objected were thought to be accompanied by social changes as well. Interestingly, such changes were commonly attributed to specific physical features of the infill development, such as fencing or technological devices. The so-called èasy-care' infill housing, for example, was seen as attracting busy people who `won't give you the time of day' or `can't be bothered with you'. Brian was not alone in observing: ``They drive into their internal garages in their car, through their automatic gates that open and shut, and they leave the same way. There is very little social interaction.'' After noting that it was now possible never actually to meet your neighbour in person, Brian continued his account: ``To me it signified where we are going as a society. We do less and less face-to-face and rely on technology more and more. Even when you knock on the door the God damned computer says `Hi, how are you?' You haven't even got a real face there anymore. And we've got a real lack of understanding of each other in our society today and it's only going to get worse. Our tolerance of each other is going to become less and less ... . Body language? We will need to have a keyboard across our faces!'' The types of activities upon which Brian's conclusions were based did not necessarily take place daily, but over time they contributed to the interpretation of infill housing and its social context. It is important to realise, therefore, that objections to

726


infill housing were not based solely on the features of the built form; the social behaviour of infill residents also helped shape the interviewees' responses to this type of housing. The survey data showed, once again, a number of differences in response by section type (see table 2) to questions on this topic. Respondents living on quarter-acre sections were more likely to regard community spirit as important (w 2 11:302, df 2, p < 0:005), more likely to disagree with the propositions that infilling had made the neighbourhood better (w 2 10:131, df 2, p < 0:01), that it had improved the neighbourhood's identity (w 2 13:813, df 2, p < 0:001). This group also had a greater propensity to agree that infill housing brought the `concrete jungle' to the suburbs (w 2 8:062, df 2, p < 0:05) and that infill housing usually ends up as a rental property (w 2 6:877, df 2, p < 0:05). Table 2. Differences in residents' response, by section type: effects of infill (source: authors' survey). Statement

Community spirit [is important] quarter-acre infill Neighbourly relations [are important] quarter-acre infill Infill has made neighbourhood better quarter-acre infill Infill improves neighbourhood identity quarter-acre infill Infill makes good use of land quarter-acre infill Infill brings the concrete jungle quarter-acre infill Infill becomes rental property quarter-acre infill [Infill] should be kept to specific areas quarter-acre infill Don't know the people in the infill quarter-acre infill Infill has high turnover of occupants quarter-acre infill Infill has brought nice people quarter-acre infill Infill brings social problems quarter-acre infill a Owing

Response (%) a agree

neutral

disagree

51.1 28.9

30.7 44.6

18.2 26.5

76.4 63.9

16.9 25.3

6.7 10.8

15.3 30.9

37.9 38.3

46.9 30.9

15.0 25.0

32.4 40.0

52.6 35.0

25.8 48.2

30.9 26.5

43.3 25.3

52.5 35.8

29.9 33.3

17.5 30.9

37.1 24.1

38.3 36.7

24.6 39.2

37.9 30.4

29.3 30.4

32.8 39.2

56.3 50.6

30.7 32.1

13.1 17.3

25.0 29.1

50.0 36.7

25.0 34.2

22.5 21.7

35.3 30.1

42.2 48.2

74.1 60.5

16.1 27.2

9.8 12.3

to rounding errors, row totals may not sum to exactly 100.0%.


727

One of the most pervasive strands running through almost all the interviews was the belief that infill housing was substandard in terms of materials and design and that this would have widespread and significant social consequences. With only one exception, the interviewees were concerned that their long-term plans were threatened by the proximity of a vastly inferior residence and that they were now living in the `slums of the future'. Gerry outlined his anxieties this way: ``My greatest concern is that there's no quality in the construction [of much of the infill]. They are sold as upmarket residences for $200 ^ 250 thousand each and there's actually no quality in the construction. They're all untreated timber, wire netting, polystyrene and plaster sprayed over it. Already, for those that have been there for 5 years plus, you look down the road and you can see all the studs and dwangs [the uprights and cross-members of internal timber framing] through the plaster as though it's been breathing or something. And I think it's a time bomb, all of this. The value of this [our house] could plummet quite dramatically. What concerns me is that we'll be left living in a slum area. Because the walls will start to leak and they'll depreciate quite rapidly and they'll become cheap rental hovels. And that will not happen in 80 or 90 years as it did with this type of housing. It will happen in 20 years.'' These anecdotal reports have been substantiated, at least in part, by the so-called Hunn Report (Hunn et al, 2002). In February 2002 the New Zealand Building Industry Authority appointed an Overview Group on the Weathertightness of Buildings, chaired by Don Hunn, to investigate reports of substandard housing in New Zealand. The group found that cost cutting, inappropriate design, and poor workmanship had resulted in leaking housing. Although the extent of this problem in the residential housing market has yet to be officially determined, the Parliamentary Briefing Service (PBS, 2002) described the problem as `systemic', and the Consumer Online (2004) estimated 75 000 ^ 90 000 homes could be affected. Media coverage of the problem has simply made explicit, and reinforced, the link between the quality of infill housing and the interviewees' perceptions of potential slums and social problems. Of course, this is only one scenario among many but, given New Zealand's history of homeownership and its purported moral benefits, tenants of cheap rentals, rightly or wrongly, continue to be seen as the least desirable of neighbours and a serious threat to the future of residential areas. The interview and survey data made it clear that opposition to infill housing rested on more than the quality and durability of the building. The statement ``provided it is of good quality the Council should encourage infill housing'' received less support from those living on residential quarter-acre sections (w 2 11:240, df 2, p < 0:005). In these terms, anti-infill sentiment is more about symbolism associated with such housing than its quality per se, as further analysis showed that residents on a quarter-acre section were generally more likely to agree with any negative statements about infilling. Way of life

Pervading the interview data was the conviction that those living in infill housing had `different' (that is, slightly peculiar) lifestyles and were `not like us'. In fact, statistical analysis of the survey data showed notable similarities among infill and quarter-acre residents in terms of income, age, marital status, living zone, ethnicity, and housing tenure. Also of interest was the fairly minimal difference in the mean number of years the resident had lived at the address (fourteen years for those on a quarter-acre section, and twelve years for those in infill housing). Length of tenure, however, appeared to play a fairly influential role in terms of acceptance of infill housing.

728


Table 3. Correlations: the four variables (statements) and length of time in the house. Statement

Spearman's r

Infill housing has improved the neighbourhood Infill housing makes good use of land The council should encourage infill housing The council's regulation of infill housing is adequate

r (254) 0:207, r (251) 0:127, r (250) 0:175, r (242) 0:160,

p < 0:001 p < 0:05 p < 0:005 p < 0:05

Correlation analysis with four indicative variables (see table 3) showed that, in simple terms, the longer one had been living at that same address, the less likely one was to agree with these positive statements about infilling. Statistical analysis did reveal some important differences. Residents of quarter-acre sections were more likely to have children living at home than did those living in infill housing. This is consistent with Plew's (1999) study of infill housing residents in Christchurch. In the context of suburbia being promoted since the end of the Second World War by various governments as the ideal place in which to raise a family (as evidenced by the far greater numbers of state houses built for families than for single people or couples), it was no surprise that respondents living on a quarter-acre section were more likely to agree that it was important for children to have room to play. Of quarter-acre residents, 73% thought this was important, compared with only 43% of those in infill housing (w 2 22:119, df 2, p < 0:001). Lynn's observation was fairly typical: ``There are children in there. One that has sold in recent times had four and in this one, there're two children. Right next door. I can only describe them as horrible little monsters! But then, they were horrible because of where they were living. It's a horrible place to have children. They were only there Monday to Friday. They were horrible. They would scream and shout. But you can understand it. My kids would have been the same if they had been cooped up in that area. Most unsuitable for children.'' Statements such as this would not have been out of place in New Zealand's colonial past, when the rhetoric associated with detached dwellings served to encourage migration to the young colony. Similar comments were made about that other ubiquitous feature of suburban Christchurch: the family pet. Yet, the interviews highlighted the role dogs, in particular, played in creating and maintaining opportunities for neighbourly interaction: Jude: ``But as a dog owner for all those years there's a real sense of community through the dogs. Up and down the lane and in the park. So that's another community binder. So you meet all these people through the dogs. You don't know their names, just know their dog's names. So you refer to each other as Fluffy's owner. That's how you met a lot of those people and get to know each other's names afterwards, but you're known by the dog's name to start off with.'' Like the children, pets were seen by residents of quarter-acre sections to be happier, healthier, and safer on a quarter-acre section than in infill housing. Importantly, pets and children were also seen as a barometer of neighbourliness; a good neighbour was one you could call upon to baby sit or feed the cat while you go on holiday. Residential quarter-acre living was also seen as a way of providing better opportunities to get in touch with living things, and the interviewees spoke with pleasure about their ornamental or vegetable gardens. The taste of home-grown vegetables was greatly enhanced, we were told by residents of quarter-acre sections, by feelings of satisfaction an intimate knowledge of the processes involved in growing one's own food.


729

Not surprisingly, w 2 analysis of the survey data showed a statistically significant difference by section type regarding the importance of gardens (w 2 31:682, df 2, p < 0:001). Of those living on a residential quarter-acre section, nearly half (49%) thought having a vegetable garden was important, compared with only 18% of infill housing residents. Clearly, this highlights the different values and lifestyle choices residents of the different types of sections tend to make. What is interesting is that formal representations of space as evidenced by Christchurch City Council plans and urban management documents and practices do not always adequately acknowledge these differences. Room for children and pets to play and the importance of a vegetable garden helped build the picture of the `New Zealand way of life' as interpreted by quarteracre residents. The firm belief expressed by many of the interviewees that those living in infill housing really did live differently was captured in the survey variable ìnfill housing goes against the New Zealand way of life'. Not surprisingly, those living on the residential quarter-acre sections were more likely to agree that infill housing goes against the New Zealand way of life (42%) compared with those living in infill housing (32%). Residents living in infill housing were almost twice as likely to disagree with this statement [46% compared with 27% of those living on a quarter-acre section (w 2 8:838, df 2, p < 0:05)]. This last variable neatly summarised many of the differences in lifestyles and beliefs that had been discussed by the interviewees and presented here and it succinctly demonstrates the differences in the attitudes, lifestyles, and beliefs about infill housing held by the various groups. Activity and safety

Most of the interviewees had noticed greater levels of activity in their neighbourhood as a result of the infill housing, but this increase was not always as welcome as compact city advocates have suggested. The idea is that a more vibrant street life should bring the benefits of informal surveillance (Jacobs, 1961) but, although this may indeed be the case, increased activity was also accompanied by greater noise, more traffic, and a sense that the neighbourhood was becoming overcrowded. Some interviewees spoke of `1000%' increases in traffic at all hours of the day and night, and so on. This awareness of intensified activity supports Jenks et al's (1996; 1998; 2000) thesis that increases in activity levels are more likely to generate negative attitudes towards infilling housing than increased levels of density per se. Although dependency on private motor vehicles may be reduced in a compact city, the interviewees' observations were that motor car use had increased substantially. This was seen as both inconvenient and dangerous. Some interviewees reported pets being killed on the road, and others expressed concern for their children. Of the survey respondents, 67% rated safe streets as `very important', and a further 22% reported it to be ìmportant' (a combined total of 89%). The increased traffic was also seen as having a detrimental effect on the general `feel' of the street as a social space, as Bet's story shows: Bet: `Ì knew every person who lived in every house along there. And they knew me, and they knew the children. A lot of them were old people but we still knew them all. Today, I only know Kevin and Harriet, because they've been here a long time. The woman over the back, she introduced herself but these people don't want to know.'' Interviewer: ``Can you think why things have changed?'' Bet: `Èveryone's out in cars. The only way that I've ever seen children coming out is by car in the morning.''

730


This lack of communication was therefore attributed to the street no longer being considered a site of sociability but simply a means of getting from one place to another. Traffic was variously seen as a threat, a nuisance, or as undermining neighbourhood sociability, but the interviewees raised additional concerns that further contradicted those aspects of the informal surveillance thesis that suggest that a vibrant street life is conducive to feelings of security and safety. On the contrary, in the context of suburban Christchurch, unknown people were considered dangerous by one individual, or, more commonly, were regarded simply as being disinterested in neighbourhood affairs. This became evident in a number of interviews, of which the following is an example: Interviewer: ``Do you know the neighbourhood kids?'' Rae: `Òh yeah! Yes. I know their names. Any of us [in this street] would sort of surrogate parent them. If we saw them ... . If they fell off their bike, someone would pick them up and take home. Rather than leaving them there. It works quite well.'' Interviewer: ``Do you think the people in the infill over there would know where to take them, ... know who they were? '' Rae: ``No. Not at all!'' One interviewee quite clearly expressed the view that if she wanted to live among teeming hoards of strangers she would rent an apartment in the central business district. Again, this points to the importance of cultural and historical conventions as to what is considered appropriate in particular parts of the city. For the interviewees, the adverse effects of traffic, noise, and pollution largely outweighed the biophysical environmental benefits of a more consolidated city form, and informal surveillance was not effective in areas where community spirit was waning. It is also debatable whether Christchurch suburbanites actually desire activity and vibrancy on their streets. A `quiet neighbourhood' was seen as either ìmportant' or `very important' by nearly 70% of respondents, but only 13% thought `lots of activity' was in any way desirable. In general, this research suggests that, despite a poor reputation for quiet suburbs among many academics, some people prefer quiet suburbs with little traffic over vibrant streetscapes with high levels of activity. Discussion Particularly important to this discussion is Lefebvre's (1991) spatial triad and its links to recent developments in the sense-of-place literature. Our research highlights the importance of historically embedded and constitutive conventions, customs, and discourses that significantly shape life in the suburbs. It is an excellent example of social spatialisation, the cultural formation through which residents know ``what to do, when, and where'' (Shields, 1991, page 65). As our study shows, current interpretations of infill housing are significantly influenced by New Zealand's history of widespread owneroccupation of detached `family' homes on residential quarter-acre sections and the moral rhetoric that has surrounded such housing. Public policy, such as state provision of housing and the lending criteria of financial institutions, have contrived to reinforce this particular form of suburban living. These contribute to representational spaces bolstered by a culture that values spatial practices such as backyard cricket, vegetable growing, flower gardens, outdoor barbeques, playing with pets, and so on. These traditions and conventions are, in Shields' terms, `èmbodied in ... gestures ... and trained postures in and toward the world, in sets of practical paradigms and algorithms'' (Shields, 1991, page 65) and represent the very essence of suburban living for many people throughout much of New Zealand. These spaces can be compared with and, as our research shows, actually contrasted to those of residents living in infill housing whose lifestyles often take a nontraditional form.


731

Our research also shows that the increased diversity of people, lifestyles, and buildings that infill housing brings to neighbourhoods has implications for the senses of place associated with particular areas and the extent to which particular senses of place can survive in areas undergoing change. The strong family, social, and way-of-life senses of place traditionally linked to the suburbs have been significantly affected by infill housing. For some residents, the result is a sometimes chaotic and conflicting set of place relations, which can lead to high levels of distrust both of neighbours and of local government, and manifests itself in concerns about change, social diversification, and new ways of living projected from afar. Although it may be argued that the link between planning praxis and people's feelings is somewhat tenuous, the strength of emotion expressed by respondents during this research makes it essential that the relationships between the two are better explored. By employing Lefebvre's conceptual triad we can see how changes in planning orthodoxies and praxis, inherent in, for example, urban consolidation policies, have affected the daily lives and everyday habits of many Christchurch residents in deeply felt ways. An important point arising from our research in Christchurch is that Lefebvre's spaces change, and provide the conditions in which new practices may develop, at vastly different rates. Although planning and policy may change overnight, symbolic representational spaces and spatial practices may take much longer to adapt and adjust. This emphasises Lefebvre's point that the links between each `space' should be better understood so as to avoid alienating the people from the places and spaces in which they live. Lefebvre's thesis certainly highlights the danger of interpreting infill housing as purely `bricks and mortar' as seen in many formal representations of space. The symbolism inherent in Lefebvre's representational spaces' should alert us to the imagined elements of the city and the ways that agonistic engagement around such elements become a central component of the politics of place (Amin, 2004; but see also Perkins, 1988a; 1988b; 1989). This was made abundantly clear in our Christchurch case study, especially during discussions about infill housing as `the slums of the future'. Seen in the context of imaginary spaces it is almost wholly irrelevant as to whether or not infill housing will, in fact, become the slums of the future. What is important is that many people living on a residential quarter-acre section tend to believe it is so, and these beliefs govern their interpretations and responses. Such beliefs have their roots in New Zealand's urban history, where the distrust of ìtinerants' and the ill health associated with multi-unit dwellings has a long pedigree. Many of the images and ideals on which adverse reactions to infill housing are based relate to the suburban identity residents have accepted and perpetuated since European settlement in New Zealand and they are therefore unlikely to change with the same rapidity as amendments to the City Plan. Conclusions Christchurch's residents of European origin have been constructing their ideals and representations of the city ever since the first four ships landed with Wakefield's carefully selected settlers, and many residents are still passionate about the Garden City image that emerged in the early 1900s. Much of the imagery associated with suburbia concerns families, open spaces for psychological and physical wellbeing, owner-occupation, and detached homes in order to avoid the propagation of Òld World slums'. It is on these images that New Zealand's suburban areas were founded and on which senses of place still rest for many Christchurch residents. Departures between Lefebvre's three spaces are almost inevitable, as formal representations of space can change so much faster than representational spaces and spatial practice.

732


Our research has shown that policy change can exert a powerful effect on everyday life and the symbolism of places and spaces. Developments in planning and their implementation can have unintended effects, and the chances of this are exacerbated when the sociocultural dimensions of `the environment' are ignored. If the compact city is a desirable planning goal, infill housing must be carefully designed and built in such a way as to accommodate people's geographic imagination and the symbolism that is an integral part of the built environment. The dynamics of the relationships between place, policy, and everyday life must be better understood to facilitate the successful introduction of environmentally sustainable policy. Acknowledgements. Our thanks to Christchurch City Council for funding the research upon which this paper is based. In this regard we especially thank Ivan Thomson, Senior Planner at the Council, for supporting our work. References Amin A, 2004,``Regions unbounded: towards a new politics of place'' Geografiska Annaler 86 33 ^ 44 Berg L D, Kearns R A, 1996,``Naming as norming: `race', gender, and the identity politics of naming places in Aotearoa/New Zealand'' Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 14 99 ^ 122 Breheny M, 1997, `Ùrban compaction: feasibile and acceptable? '' Cities 14 209 ^ 217 Brooking T, 1996, `Ùse it or lose it: unravelling the land debate in late nineteenth century New Zealand'' New Zealand Journal of History 30 141 ^ 162 CCC, 1999 Christchurch City Plan Christchurch City Council, 163 ^ 173 Tuan Street, PO Box 237, Christchurch Consumer Online 2004, `À big wet problem'', http://www.consumer.org.nz Crane R, 1996, ``Cars and drivers in the new suburbs: linking access to travel in neotraditional planning'' American Planning Association Journal 62 51 ^ 65 Crookston M, Clarke P, Averly J, 1996, ``The compact city and quality of life'', in The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? Eds M Jenks, E Burton, K Williams (E & FN Spon, London) pp 134 ^ 142 de Roo G, Miller D, 2000 Compact Cities and Sustainable Urban Development (Ashgate, Aldershot, Hants) English M, 1999, `À guide for smart growth'' Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy 14(3) 35 ^ 39 Eyles J, 1985 Senses of Place (Silverbrook Press, Warrington, Cheshire) Ferguson G, 1994 Building the New Zealand Dream (Dunmore Press, Palmerston North) Gordon P, Richardson H, 1997, `Àre compact cities a desirable planning goal? '' Journal of the American Planning Association 63 95 ^ 106 Gow L, 2000, ``Curbing the sprawl: urban growth management in the United States: lessons for New Zealand'', Ministry for the Environment, PO Box 10362, Wellington Hunn D, Bond I, Kernohan D, 2002, ``Report of the Overview Group on the Weathertightness of Buildings to the Building Industry Authority'', http://www.building.dbh.govt.nz/e/publish/ news 128.shtml Jacobs J, 1961 The Death and Life of Great American Cities (Random House, New York) Jenks M, Burton E,Williams K, 1996 The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? (E & FN Spon, London) Jenks M, Burton E,Williams K, 1998 The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form? (E & FN Spon, London) Jenks M, Williams K, Burton E, 2000, `Ùrban consolidation and the benefits of intensification'', in Compact Cities and Sustainable Urban Developments Eds G de Rook, D Miller (Ashgate, Aldershot, Hants) pp 17 ^ 29 Lefebvre H, 1991 The Production of Space first published in 1974 (Blackwell, Oxford) Massey D, 1994a Space, Place and Gender (Polity Press, Cambridge) Massey D, 1994b, ``Double articulation: a place in the world'', in Displacements Ed. A Bammer (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, IN) pp 110 ^ 119 Massey D, 1995, ``Places and their pasts'' History Workshop Journal 39 182 ^ 192 Massey D, 2004, ``Geographies of responsibility'' Geografiska Annaler 86 5 ^ 18 Massey D, Allen J, Pile S, 1999 Understanding Cities (Routledge and The Open University, London) Meacham R, 1999 Regaining Paradise: Englishness and the Early Garden City Movement (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT)


733

Memon P A, Perkins H C, 2000 Environmental Planning and Management in New Zealand (Dunmore Press, Palmerston North) Merrifield A, 2000, ``Henri Lefebvre: a socialist in space'', in Thinking Space Eds M Crang, N Thrift (Routledge, London) pp 167 ^ 182 MftE, 2001, ``Getting in on the Act'', Ministry for the Environment, PO Box 10362, Wellington MftE, 2002,``People, places, spaces: a design guide for New Zealand'', Ministry for the Environment, PO Box 10362, Wellington Mitchell A, 1972 The Half Gallon, Quarter-acre, Pavlova Paradise (Whitcomb and Tombs, Christchurch) Pawson E, 2000, ``Confronting nature'', in Southern CapitalöChristchurch; Towards a City Biography 1850 ^ 2000 Eds J Cookson, G Dunstall (Canterbury University Press, Christchurch) pp 60 ^ 84 PBS, 2002, ``Leaky Buildings'', Parliamentary Briefing Service, http://www.clerk.parliament.govt.nz/ content/1207/02-10LeakyBuildings.pdf Perkins H C, 1988a, ``Bulldozers in the Southern Part of Heaven: defending place against rapid growth. Part 1: local residents' interpretations of rapid urban growth in a free-standing service-class town'' Environment and Planning A 20 285 ^ 308 Perkins H C, 1988b, ``Bulldozers in the Southern Part of Heaven: defending place against rapid growth. Part 2: the Alliance strikes back'' Environment and Planning A 20 435 ^ 456 Perkins H C, 1989,``The country in the town. The role of real estate developers in the construction of the meaning of place'' Journal of Rural Studies 5 61 ^ 74 Perkins H C, Thorns D C, 2001a, `À decade on: reflections on the Resource Management Act 1991 and the practice of urban planning in New Zealand'' Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 28 639 ^ 654 Plew E, 1999, ``Townhouse report'', Christchurch City Council, 163 ^ 173 Tuam Street, PO Box 237, Christchurch Resource Management Act, 1991, Wellington, New Zealand (under the authority of the New Zealand Government) Rice G, 1999 Christchurch Changing (Canterbury University Press, Christchurch) Saunders P, Williams P, 1988, ``The constitution of the home: towards a research agenda'' Housing Studies 3 81 ^ 93 Shields R, 1991 Places on the Margin: Alternative Geographies of Modernity (Routledge, London) Tennant M, 2000, ``The decay of home life? '', in At Home in New Zealand: History, Houses, People Ed. B Brookes (Bridget Williams Books, Wellington) pp 24 ^ 40 Thrift N, 1999, ``Steps to an Ecology of Place'', in Human Geography Today Eds D Massey, J Allen, P Sarre (Polity Press, Cambridge) pp 295 ^ 321 Thrift N, 2004, `Ìntensities of feeling: towards a spatial politics of affect'' Geografiska Annaler 86 57 ^ 78 Town and Country Planning Act, 1953, Wellington, New Zealand (under the authority of the New Zealand Government) Town and Country Planning Act, 1977, Wellington, New Zealand (under the authority of the New Zealand Government) Valentine G, 2001 Social Geographies: Space and Society (Pearson Education, Harlow, Essex) WCED, 1987 Our Common Future World Commission on Environment and Development (Oxford University Press, Oxford) Williams R, 1977 Marxism in Literature (Oxford University Press, Oxford) Winstanley A, Thorns D C, Perkins H C, 2003, ``Nostalgia, community and new housing developments: a critique of `new urbanism' incorporating a New Zealand perspective'' Urban Policy and Research 21 175 ^ 189 Workers Dwellings Act, 1905, Wellington, New Zealand (under the authority of the New Zealand Government)

ß 2005 a Pion publication printed in Great Britain