MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607168501

Common Interest Development in Canada: Private Communities and the Future of Canadian Cities

2014· article· en· W2607168501 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul Hesse

Bibliographic record

VenueWinnSpace (University of Winnipeg) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessEnvironmental planningEconomic growthGeographyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the phenomenon of Common Interest Developments (CIDs), more commonly known as "gated communities", within the Canadian context.Comparing Canadian CIDs to their US counterparts.The author notes that Canadian developments are more likely to target seniors, tend to have fewer security features and are usually developed on a smaller scale.The author cautions that the proliferation of CIDs may have significant implications for local politics and Canadian cities.CID residents in the US are gaining political clout through well-organized homeowner associations, which constitute an effective lobbying force.Such associations are increasingly advocating measures such as tax rebates for their constituency, arguing for an end to what they call "double taxation" since CID residents pay both municipal taxes and monthly fees to the CID.The paper argues that CIDs are exclusionary by nature, fostering homogeneity in age, race, and income group, and that the proliferation of such development will lead to greater segregation in Canadian cities. Common Interest Developments in Canada"We're all Sandycovers!"Sandycove Acres, Ontario's largest Adult Lifestyle Community, trumpets itself as "the perfect retirement community".In Sandycove, just outside of Barrie, Ontario, you will find that: Peace of mind comes with knowing that the managers will maintain the community character of Sandycove Acres just as it is today.From Architectural Control, to upkeep of the community, to control of maintenance and operating costs, the Private Community concept helps to ensure that Sandycove Acres will change very little over the years.(Sandycove Acres Limited, n.d.a) Residents aren't just buying a home, they are buying into a planned community.This is evidently a popular message.Since its establishment, Sandycove has been home to over 3,000 retirement-age families (Sandycove Acres Limited, n.d.a). Communities like Sandycove Acres are known as common interest developments (CIDs).While every CID is different, there are common features.The appeal of communities like Sandycove Acres comes from their privacy.In almost all the cases, the perimeter of the community is walled, and

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.254
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWinnSpace (University of Winnipeg)Same topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207