Orchard Park: a tenant survey of the second installment of public housing in Vancouver (December 1958-May 1960)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Orchard Park Housing Project, first tenanted in December 1958 is the second instalment of subsidized housing in Vancouver. Also managed by the Vancouver Housing Authority under the sanction of federal, provincial and municipal governments, it is the sister project to "Little Mountain", the public housing project situated at Main Street and 33rd Avenue, Vancouver. This project has been the subject of a previous survey (Elaine Fromson, Joy Hansen, and Roger Smith: The Little Mountain Low-Rental Housing Project: A Survey of its Welfare Aspects.) An important similarity to the Little Mountain project is that Orchard Park, too, was constructed without direct involvement with slum-clearance; in other words, the people here re-housed were drawn from many different locations to a new site. This study attempts to analyse, from the tenants’ point of view, the efficacy with which their various "welfare" needs are being met by the provision of publicly-owned housing; the ramifications of project-community relations; and the administrative implications of the entire undertaking. This information was obtained by means of interviews (a one-in-three sampling of the tenant population), averaging approximately one hour in length. Proportional samples of the tenant "categories" were obtained, with regard to (a) types of family ("complete" families, "broken" families, "single" occupants) and (b) income groups. An overall statistical picture, for comparison, was derived from the registration files of the Vancouver Housing Authority. Tenant reactions varied greatly depending partially upon previous housing experience; but the provision of new, bright, and clean surroundings, with adequate heat and hot water, was hailed with virtual unanimity. However, several areas of concern are outstanding (1) No appropriately planned facilities for children exist; (2) initial laundry arrangements were unsatisfactory; (3) the layout of Orchard Park includes three "through" streets, a hazard to both young and old; and, (4) so far as space and facilities are concerned, absolutely no provision has been made for tenant gatherings. The growing proportion of lower-income families, and also of multi-problem families in local public housing is vital in the implications of this study, which are discussed fully in Chapter IV. It is clear that not only further research, but more attention to "welfare practicalities" is essential, if present deficiencies are to be avoided in the future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".