Design and Affordable American Housing
AbstractAmericans have experimented with new models for affordable housing for more than two centuries. The private sector, public agencies, and nonprofit organizations have all played a role. Architecture and site planning have been crucial elements in these efforts, yet they have received scant attention. In arguing that the design of good housing is neither elusive nor subjective, this article explores some of the best practices-and a few mistakes. The article begins with a historical background of diverse endeavors to provide better, more affordable housing for single women, workers, public housing tenants, immigrants, homeless individuals, and low-income families. It then relates this legacy to recent efforts to integrate housing with community development.IntroductionGiven the U.S. history of housing booms and busts and a penchant for novelty, Americans have experimented for more than two centuries with innovations and reforms that promised to produce less expensive, better quality housing for more people. These promises were sometimes marketing ploys or political rhetoric. Public programs have never provided more than 5 percent of total U.S. housing production, and the poorest citizens have often been left out. Nonetheless, the goal of expanding affordable housing has been resonant in the public and private realms, including the fields of architecture and construction.Builders have pursued ways to economize since the late 19th century. Private philanthropists constructed "model tenements," hoping to elevate a deplorable building type with simplified designs, public health, and moral uplift. Experiments with neoteric building materials and construction systems sought to reduce production costs. States and municipalities funded cooperatives. The federal government created the first public housing for the unemployed "deserving poor" during the Great Depression-although the main concerns were job creation and support for the private sector.1The Federal Housing Administration's (FHA's) financial supports for suburbanization joined postWorld War II (WWII) shelter magazines in promoting small, visibly modern "economy houses" for suburban workingand middle-class families-if they lived in White neighborhoods (Harris, 2013).2 Addressing the assisted low-income housing stock, President Lyndon Johnson's 1968 task forces on urban poverty and violence lambasted the shortage of good subsidized housing, yet resolutely condemned modern highrises (NCUP, 1968).These efforts ground to a halt with President Richard Nixon's 1973 moratorium on housing and community development assistance. When federal funding for housing was reinstated, it focused principally on vouchers for private developers. New assisted housing production never again approached the level of the early 1970s. Design innovations persisted in very local and transgressive ways, however, as religious groups and community design corporations built small-scale "contextual" enclaves. By the 1980s and 1990s, urban activists had formed coalitions based on housing issues as varied as gentrification, job training, and historic preservation.Architecture is a crucial element in achieving good housing, yet it usually plays at best a minor role in deliberations about cost and value.3 This contradiction stems in part from fundamental misconceptions. Architecture is not a matter of taste or mere aesthetics. Design quality is crucial to good affordable housing. The skillful organization of interiors, views, public areas, outdoor spaces, and even facades is especially important when budgets and square footage are at a premium (Davis, 2004; Feldman and Koch, 2004; KEA, 2006).As many practitioners and scholars have documented, good design is not elusive or subjective.4 Four themes characterize the best practices, whatever the era, scale, aesthetic, or auspices.1. The direct involvement of residents encourages better design. Diverse groups have asserted their distinctive needs and preferences, sometimes challenging the architects' priorities and the power of cultural norms. …
Perceived Safety of LIHTC Residents in Ohio: Impacts of Building Design
Ecological theories of crime have found that perceptions of neighborhood safety are influenced by a broad range of building features. Yet most research on how building design impacts perceptions of neighborhood safety for low-income renters was developed in a period of affordable housing defined by dense, segregated, and brutalist-inspired public housing. Research on low-income rental design has yet to focus on how residents in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) properties perceive their levels of neighborhood safety, and how that may be influenced by building design. This study uses survey responses from 652 LIHTC residents in Ohio paired with design attributes and crime data to test how residents’ perceptions of neighborhood safety are related to building design features, controlling for neighborhood violent and property crimes. We find that design features minimally impact residents’ perceived neighborhood safety, and this does not vary significantly by resident characteristics. We suggest this contrast with past literature may relate to the design and maintenance standards associated with LIHTC properties. We recommend that housing finance agencies continue to encou- rage or incentivize affordable housing developers to design housing with features to increase natural surveillance, access control, and territoriality, and to focus on fostering community for LIHTC residents.
MAS-NMR spectroscopy studies in the setting reaction of glass ionomer cements.
OBJECTIVES
The main objective is the characterisation of the setting reaction in glass ionomer cements based on experimental ionomer glasses with different fluorine content and a commercial glass ionomer cement liquid by using 13C CP/MAS-NMR, 29Si, 27Al and 31P MAS-NMR spectroscopy in order to receive information specifically about the cross-linking process.


METHODS
Different fluorine containing glass compositions based on 4.5SiO2-3Al2O3-1.5P2O5-(5-z)CaO-zCaF(2) where z=0-3, were mixed with a commercially available polymer liquid to form glass ionomer cements. The cements were subjected to 27Al, 13C CP/MAS, 29Si, and 31P MAS-NMR analysis.


RESULTS
The 27Al spectra showed clearly the formation of six-fold coordinate Al(VI), that may crosslink the carboxyl groups in the poly-acid molecules. A shift towards to more positive values of the carboxyl peak in the 13C CP/MAS-NMR spectra showed clearly the proton dissociation of the carboxyl groups. A shift towards more negative values was observed in the 29Si MAS-NMR spectra, suggesting formation of hydrated silica gel and consequently formation of additional Si-O-Si bonds. 31P MAS-NMR spectra also reflected changes in the coordination state around a PO4(3-) tetrahedron. Increasing the fluorine content of the glasses resulted generally in increased reactivity during setting, due to promoting cross-linking and repolymerisation of the silicate phase, followed by clear changes in the MAS-NMR spectra.


CONCLUSIONS
The cross-linking process during the setting reaction of glass ionomer cements can be followed by MAS-NMR spectroscopy observing the conversion of Al(IV) to Al(VI). The acid base setting reaction is completed in 1 day and no further significant changes in the MAS-NMR spectra can be observed. Further study is required in order to understand the role of phosphorus.