Residential areas and civil aviation airport location criteria.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A major concern of community planning is with the social implications for people of the integration of the uses of space. One of the implications of this is the examination of the impact of the various uses of space on residential communities. In the past seventy years, civil aviation has grown to where airports require large amounts of space. As a major facility, the airport has a definite and distinctive impact on proximate residential communities. Airport location as dictated by two basic kinds of factors, those of physical ground and airspace requirements and the relationship to residential areas were examined. The solution to the second problem is currently to avoid these areas. This, however, neglects the problem of the impact of the airport on existing proximate residential areas. To put the problem in perspective the basic physical and airspace requirements were examined. To examine the second problem the following hypothesis was developed:- The proximity of a civil aviation airport significantly lowers the environmental quality of a residential area. There are two components to the hypothesis, that of the subjective view which residents take of the airport, and an examination of the facility from a residential point of view. The term "environmental quality" which is normative was operationalized in terms of five characteristics of the airport. 1) Aircraft Noise. 2) Air pollution from aircraft. 3) Non-occupant aircraft crash hazards. 4) Location of industry attracted by the airport. 5) Ground vehicle traffic. Each of these characteristics was examined to determine what its impact is on a residential area. Following this an attitude survey of Berkeville, a residential community located immediately adjacent to the Vancouver International Airport was undertaken to determine the residents attitudes to each of the five characteristics. Data on the socio-economic characteristics of the residents of Berkeville was also gathered, and questions directed to the reasons for moving to and staying in the area. Using the multivariate contingency tabulations program (MVTAB) socio-economic characteristics were correlated with the attitudes to each characteristic. The major conclusions of the thesis are that:- 1) The proximity of the airport results in a decline in the environmental quality of Berkeville. This is largely a function of aircraft noise and air pollution. These two characteristics create conditions for an area in constant transition. 2) Occupation, age, and length of resident were the most important and consistent indicators of attitudes to the five characteristics, but that the attitudes are in many cases generalized regardless of socio-economic characteristics. 3) The negative attitudes to non-occupant crash hazards, which constitute a small risk to the residents, can be traced to the areas'high population turnover, a situation which is linked to aircraft noise and aircraft air pollution. 4) The residents perceived quite clearly that the ground traffic problem had decreased over time. 5) The airport industrial area (excluding ground traffic) had little negative impact on Berkeville. 6) Attenuation of the aircraft noise and air pollution problems at the source is the only long-term solution to the problem. In the interim, residential areas and airports should be separated. , Attenuation of these two characteristics at the source, the maintenance of present airport zoning, separation of ground traffic, and central location of airport industry would result in compatibility of the airport and residential uses.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,018 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».