28:51 - If you can't spend 43 minutes right now to watch the whole doc - then instead SKIP AHEAD to 28:51 -- IT BEGINS a direct explanation of what "Defensible Space" means, which specific building design mistakes it addresses which attract & produce crime & safety problems for residents... and shows specific examples of how physical design alterations produce tangibly better outcomes for communities & parents, safer play spaces for kids, which deter crime and promote more personal investment & pride in maintaining and upkeeping one's own dwelling.
They are tearing the Aylesbury Estate down now, thank goodness. I lived there for three years - the flats were lovely inside with huge windows, loads of light and airy - but the estate was allowed to disintegrate: the lifts rarely worked, external lights were broken, vandalism and graffiti was everywhere. They tore the walkways down in the 1980's as they became a rat-run for criminals that could not be policed. The old lady next door had moved in at the beginning - she spoke of window boxes and neighbourly pride, and she still mopped the communal corridor weekly. As the estate fell apart, the local council moved in "hard to house", desperate tenants, often immigrants, who didn't complain and many tenants illegally sublet the flats so that they became overcrowded. When I left, eight years ago, it had become infested with ants, too. This is prime London real estate - sadly, it is being rebuilt to house the wealthy whilst the poor are being relocated to the outskirts of the city and even further afield. Architecture can destroy lives, too.
Paul: I just loved your last sentence. This made for a cacophonic rejoiner. Was it the fault of the architecture why vandalism and venom were vying for vicissitude in this veritable vicinity? If one is a regular home owner, it is incumbent upon him to repair and update his domicile in order to maintain the operating and salient structural soundness. Moreover, a building doesn't renovate or repair itself, maintenance will always be inevitable. The redress would be to *re-address the vandals* who are causing confusion in the area.
Loving your alliteration, but: No. The local government had to build homes, cheaply and quickly to clear the slums, which I would imagine were even worse, and to house the bombed-out homeless. Fair enough. What happened was that they were appalling and naive new landlords, and immediately found that they could not maintain the estate. It was too huge a project, but the tenants were poor and had no voice and had lost their sense of community. However, being poor. they re-elected the local Labour (left-wing) government time and time again, out of habit, perhaps, or lack of faith in alternatives. Because they could still count on their vote, Labour ignored them. Until property prices went through the roof and they relished the opportunity to tear them down and sell the land to rich investors. So, no: architecture was not the problem here, but those "semi-private" play areas and spaces belonged to no-one, and corralled kids and criminals into unlit, unattended spaces where they could not be seen or heard by their parents. As it fell into disrepute (after about 10 years) the local government gave up, and just housed anyone in the estate. To forget about them: Which they did.
@@paulwebster7359 agreed. The inability to recognize poor leadership which can always be counted on to fail when the govt is in charge, is typically never realized. No one can create a better life for someone else. Something as important as one's domicile should be earned.
So you describe how the place was neglected and later intentionally ruined by council and redevelopers and say "thank goodness" for that, proceeding to blame architecture? I am saving your comment cause it is just a fantastic example of how irrational the whole narrative around housing estates is. Clearly, there are forces in play that have self-interest, but that they managed to make people hate their own home is quite an achievement. Once that happens it cannot be saved indeed. BTW, the crime on Aylesbury Estate was never higher than the London average and funny you mention ants which alongside cockroaches I have encountered in terraced housing with garden -- the traditional British housing dream, right? All of this has nothing to do with architecture whatsoever unless you allow to be brainwashed into hating your own home as corrupt and unsuitable for human inhabitation -- which it is not.
Thank you for uploading this. These are so interesting to me, I actually find the buildings beautiful (just from a large, impressive man-made monument point of view) but I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in one or want anybody else stuck there either. Fascinating to see they spent so much money building Pruitt-Igoe, and all the lives that lived there, the good and the bad... and then they had to tear it down eventually. Mind blowing that this happened all over the world! I can see why they thought it would work, and why it didn't...
I think this would be a wonderful opportunity to pause for a moment and give thanks for the many great contributions of the black community and their culture to our society. Their peaceful and generous nature makes them ideal neighbors, lending testimony to their exceptional family values and parenting skills unrivaled by any other culture. Their commitment to academic excellence enriches our schools and serves as an example to all who hope to achieve prominence as a people. Real estate values are fueled by the influx of African-Americans into an area due to their caring and respectful nurturing of these communities, an example of all they have achieved by their enthusiasm for self-improvement through hard work and self-reliant can do nature. Without their industrious and creative drive we would be poorer as a nation.
I've been fascinated with how much influence the architecture of buildings can have upon its residents. The Pruitt Igoe Myth is also a great documentary (though most who found their way to this doc have probably already seen it). I loved the guy in the UK who commented that the architect of their complex should have to come live in it for a week. I realized halfway through this doc that Oscar Newman was also involved with the famous public housing development that was built in Yonkers, NY (see miniseries Show Me A Hero). That crazy beard makes him easy to spot!
That's absolute nonsense, people were MADE to feel that way by the upper/middle class snobbery and conservativism, condemning those estates practically on the day they were opened (such as Aylesbury). There is nothing more inhumane in concrete than there is in brick or glass. Your tastes are being conditioned by prevailing narrative/trends, which tell you what you should aspire to. It's both makes the upper class feel better about itself and it allows for the redevelopers to ever present an evolved, refined version of that dream, making you pay more for something you don't need. People were/are happy living on the estates, there is no more crime statistically than elsewhere in the London's inner boroughs and most of it is kids vandalising anyway, so largely a victimless crime. In any case, nothing that cannot be addressed and nothing to do with the architecture turning people into monsters.
It astounds me that so many still stupidly associate the blame for the failures of such projects on the notions of race and even architecture. Pruitt Igoe did not fail just because the residents were black, or because the buildings were too windoeoy or whatnot, it failed because Pruit Igoe, like much of the modern western urban environment, does not make any sense. In the past the whole point of living in a city was either for the concentration of jobs, or for the privilege of centralisation. Over time we saw that give way to the joke that is the modern suburb, white flight occurred, and then the city centres became overtly ghettoised by migrant populaces. Then you have this ludicrous half assed job of simply stuffing these groups into nice looking, but badly run and maintained buildings. What the fuck did people expect? The jobs went away and it became a slum. Economically the desperation or force which moves these groups into such places will by definition cause these very issues, outside of that if you really wanted migrant populations to acclimatise, investing in schools and education policy is way more important than fancy buildings. You can stuff a man into a suit, but that does not mean he will look like James Stewart.
Pruett Igoe was horribly designed and built even worse. Cheap, thin drywall, no balconies. They were basically dark, cement boxes that nobody wanted to live in. What finally killed it was the Housing Authority had no money to maintain it.
15:17. That San Francisco housing project at the Fisherman's Wharf area was demolished in the early 2000s and rebuilt. The location was crime-ridden (robbery, drug dealing, and occasional murder) and not exactly a good image given the frequency of tourists in that proximity waiting for the cable cars. The area is less of a blight after the rebuild. 36:00 The St Francis Square is still around. Across the street from Japan Town. Unchanged.
@5:41 the era was truly that they expected the projects to be a place where the poor could got away too and wouldn't mind staying away! The powers that be thought they could put these ppl aside and all the problems of said city would go away, are at be contained!
It was a great place let go by the people and the government if it was built as a condo it would still be standing - when you give people something for nothing they do not respect and protect it
Plumbing ripped out, windows broken, lights smashed, garbage strewn everywhere ... still happening today in single level public housing dwellings in my neck of the woods. People who -- for whatever reason -- have never worked to earn a wage (sometimes for generations) tend to have zero respect for property, especially when it's handed to them for low or zero rent.
Some selective fact presentation to say the least. Yes there were problems with the architecture of Pruitt-Igoe but a lot of that was due to standardization for cost savings. What was built was in many ways not what the architect proposed.... Many many other socio-economic factors were more predominant in the failure of this development.
Sounds like they had the same problems in the States as we do here in the UK with these estates !!! They are too big to maintain and become homes for the unemployed and undesirable !!
It's pretty easy to mistakenly think building design can produce crime. Actually, I think building design can make it easier or harder to engage in prosocial or antisocial behavior. Building design can facilitate behavior. Not produce it.
I know many estates were built as part of slum clearing but the whole idea of mass public housing is horrible. there is a stigma straight away. Public housing should be spread through the community in regular houses and flats. Surely thats a better way.
No, because people on assistance are generally not good neighbors. It's not fair for someone's lifetime investment to be minimized by low iq criminals lowering proprty values. I would say more education in the trades. Certify local residents in the fields needed to maintain these properties.
26:07 highly alarming then, now a few decades later it's nothing worth mentioning. We got those bloody cameras absolutely everywhere and a few care to mind any more
How about this, that everyone REFUSE to discuss. MAY it be the kind of people that lived there?? Maybe it would have been different if only whites or only asians lived there?
As the Singaporeans have found out, if you simply take the first (or most prolific) graffiti "artist" out to the public space, and cane his hands to a bloody pulp, graffiti stops entirely. Same with muggings and other anti-social behavior. Severe corporal punishment can undo years of bad parenting. Capital punishment prevents the "bad seeds" from infecting future generations. Singapore has housing densities WAY higher than shown here, but virtually zero crime.
Interesting concepts. I can agree with the Mungo Jerry guy on principle, but not results. As we all know, Brownsville is murder central, not some public housing utopia. Those wonderful visible common areas are dominated by gangs and criminals. Also, even low density 1 and 2 story housing projects around the country are being shut down due to crime, with the criminals being snuck into mixed income housing (in middle class neighborhoods). The building design makes a difference, but in the end, it is the people. HUD can move one or two thug families with 7 kids into your neighborhood and the rape, robbery, assault, and murder will start. LE will do a good job at first, but lawsuits by Marxist groups will push them back, and people will start to move out. The city will respond by moving more poor people in, and in a few years, it becomes a no go zone. With mass immigration of poor uneducated and violence prone people to America, the problem will get worse and worse.
Funny that Marseilles was pronounced ‘Ma Sales’ in Britain in the 1970s. Interesting documentary though. But rather a bleak summing up by Oscar Newman; why couldn’t communal areas/ public spaces inspire a sense of communal responsibility instead of crime?
+Mark Maloney Interesting to note they're trying to encourage this kind of encapsulated living in the upper middle class, now, the aging population this kind of budgeted housing should have been erected for.
+Mark Maloney Mungo Jerry did go to great lengths to gloss over differences in the people. I can agree with everything he said about building design, but in the end it is always the people. South Chicago neighborhoods were all lower and middle class for many decades and there was little crime. Lots of single family houses with yards. Now they call it Chiraq.
I don't think it's the building's fault exactly, but the design wasn't thought out properly. As architects, it should be our duty to design with a priority to facilitate this kind of interaction with neighbors, community and the street, and to encourage this environment of safety. Of course, architects can't force it, the people living in it will decide how they use it, but design can certainly encourage.
Lets blame any one or any thing,just don't blame the people who lived there and trashed it!That would be racist to expect those people to except any blame for any thing they do.
Instead of playing the victim of big bad political correctness how about you nut up and say what it is you want to say? Or you don't want to deal with the blowback because it will hurt your feelings?
![Shareปลาวาฬ ส่งท้าย SS1 พาเปียโน ขึ้น Ferrari ก่อนไปขาย แลก Nissan l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KAknGkTNIvg/mqdefault.jpg)
28:51 - If you can't spend 43 minutes right now to watch the whole doc - then instead SKIP AHEAD to 28:51 --
IT BEGINS a direct explanation of what "Defensible Space" means, which specific building design mistakes it addresses which attract & produce crime & safety problems for residents... and shows specific examples of how physical design alterations produce tangibly better outcomes for communities & parents, safer play spaces for kids, which deter crime and promote more personal investment & pride in maintaining and upkeeping one's own dwelling.
They are tearing the Aylesbury Estate down now, thank goodness. I lived there for three years - the flats were lovely inside with huge windows, loads of light and airy - but the estate was allowed to disintegrate: the lifts rarely worked, external lights were broken, vandalism and graffiti was everywhere. They tore the walkways down in the 1980's as they became a rat-run for criminals that could not be policed. The old lady next door had moved in at the beginning - she spoke of window boxes and neighbourly pride, and she still mopped the communal corridor weekly. As the estate fell apart, the local council moved in "hard to house", desperate tenants, often immigrants, who didn't complain and many tenants illegally sublet the flats so that they became overcrowded. When I left, eight years ago, it had become infested with ants, too. This is prime London real estate - sadly, it is being rebuilt to house the wealthy whilst the poor are being relocated to the outskirts of the city and even further afield. Architecture can destroy lives, too.
Paul: I just loved your last sentence. This made for a cacophonic rejoiner. Was it the fault of the architecture why vandalism and venom were vying for vicissitude in this veritable vicinity?
If one is a regular home owner, it is incumbent upon him to repair and update his domicile in order to maintain the operating and salient structural soundness. Moreover, a building doesn't renovate or repair itself, maintenance will always be inevitable.
The redress would be to *re-address the vandals* who are causing confusion in the area.
Loving your alliteration, but: No. The local government had to build homes, cheaply and quickly to clear the slums, which I would imagine were even worse, and to house the bombed-out homeless. Fair enough. What happened was that they were appalling and naive new landlords, and immediately found that they could not maintain the estate. It was too huge a project, but the tenants were poor and had no voice and had lost their sense of community. However, being poor. they re-elected the local Labour (left-wing) government time and time again, out of habit, perhaps, or lack of faith in alternatives. Because they could still count on their vote, Labour ignored them. Until property prices went through the roof and they relished the opportunity to tear them down and sell the land to rich investors. So, no: architecture was not the problem here, but those "semi-private" play areas and spaces belonged to no-one, and corralled kids and criminals into unlit, unattended spaces where they could not be seen or heard by their parents. As it fell into disrepute (after about 10 years) the local government gave up, and just housed anyone in the estate. To forget about them: Which they did.
@@paulwebster7359 agreed. The inability to recognize poor leadership which can always be counted on to fail when the govt is in charge, is typically never realized. No one can create a better life for someone else. Something as important as one's domicile should be earned.
So you describe how the place was neglected and later intentionally ruined by council and redevelopers and say "thank goodness" for that, proceeding to blame architecture? I am saving your comment cause it is just a fantastic example of how irrational the whole narrative around housing estates is. Clearly, there are forces in play that have self-interest, but that they managed to make people hate their own home is quite an achievement. Once that happens it cannot be saved indeed. BTW, the crime on Aylesbury Estate was never higher than the London average and funny you mention ants which alongside cockroaches I have encountered in terraced housing with garden -- the traditional British housing dream, right? All of this has nothing to do with architecture whatsoever unless you allow to be brainwashed into hating your own home as corrupt and unsuitable for human inhabitation -- which it is not.
Thank you for uploading this. These are so interesting to me, I actually find the buildings beautiful (just from a large, impressive man-made monument point of view) but I sure as hell wouldn't want to live in one or want anybody else stuck there either. Fascinating to see they spent so much money building Pruitt-Igoe, and all the lives that lived there, the good and the bad... and then they had to tear it down eventually. Mind blowing that this happened all over the world! I can see why they thought it would work, and why it didn't...
they are much like the trump buildings in nyc just filled with the rich instead of the poor
@@ramona2400 muh billionaire investor posse be vandalisin da walls wit da spray champagne.... n shieet
I think this would be a wonderful opportunity to pause for a moment and give thanks for the many great contributions of the black community and their culture to our society. Their peaceful and generous nature makes them ideal neighbors, lending testimony to their exceptional family values and parenting skills unrivaled by any other culture. Their commitment to academic excellence enriches our schools and serves as an example to all who hope to achieve prominence as a people. Real estate values are fueled by the influx of African-Americans into an area due to their caring and respectful nurturing of these communities, an example of all they have achieved by their enthusiasm for self-improvement through hard work and self-reliant can do nature. Without their industrious and creative drive we would be poorer as a nation.
The low income Father was not allowed to live with the wife and kids at Pruit-Igoe. Federal Law.
P-I was called, " The Girlfriend Factory"
I've been fascinated with how much influence the architecture of buildings can have upon its residents. The Pruitt Igoe Myth is also a great documentary (though most who found their way to this doc have probably already seen it). I loved the guy in the UK who commented that the architect of their complex should have to come live in it for a week. I realized halfway through this doc that Oscar Newman was also involved with the famous public housing development that was built in Yonkers, NY (see miniseries Show Me A Hero). That crazy beard makes him easy to spot!
That's absolute nonsense, people were MADE to feel that way by the upper/middle class snobbery and conservativism, condemning those estates practically on the day they were opened (such as Aylesbury). There is nothing more inhumane in concrete than there is in brick or glass. Your tastes are being conditioned by prevailing narrative/trends, which tell you what you should aspire to. It's both makes the upper class feel better about itself and it allows for the redevelopers to ever present an evolved, refined version of that dream, making you pay more for something you don't need. People were/are happy living on the estates, there is no more crime statistically than elsewhere in the London's inner boroughs and most of it is kids vandalising anyway, so largely a victimless crime. In any case, nothing that cannot be addressed and nothing to do with the architecture turning people into monsters.
It is the demographics.
It astounds me that so many still stupidly associate the blame for the failures of such projects on the notions of race and even architecture. Pruitt Igoe did not fail just because the residents were black, or because the buildings were too windoeoy or whatnot, it failed because Pruit Igoe, like much of the modern western urban environment, does not make any sense. In the past the whole point of living in a city was either for the concentration of jobs, or for the privilege of centralisation. Over time we saw that give way to the joke that is the modern suburb, white flight occurred, and then the city centres became overtly ghettoised by migrant populaces. Then you have this ludicrous half assed job of simply stuffing these groups into nice looking, but badly run and maintained buildings. What the fuck did people expect? The jobs went away and it became a slum. Economically the desperation or force which moves these groups into such places will by definition cause these very issues, outside of that if you really wanted migrant populations to acclimatise, investing in schools and education policy is way more important than fancy buildings. You can stuff a man into a suit, but that does not mean he will look like James Stewart.
Thank You! Your answer is on point.
so great. what a wonderful documentary
Oscar Newman is so underrated!!
So much respect for that guy! 🎩💘
It is not the buildings. It is the demographics.
Pruett Igoe was horribly designed and built even worse. Cheap, thin drywall, no balconies. They were basically dark, cement boxes that nobody wanted to live in. What finally killed it was the Housing Authority had no money to maintain it.
15:17. That San Francisco housing project at the Fisherman's Wharf area was demolished in the early 2000s and rebuilt. The location was crime-ridden (robbery, drug dealing, and occasional murder) and not exactly a good image given the frequency of tourists in that proximity waiting for the cable cars. The area is less of a blight after the rebuild. 36:00 The St Francis Square is still around. Across the street from Japan Town. Unchanged.
@5:41 the era was truly that they expected the projects to be a place where the poor could got away too and wouldn't mind staying away! The powers that be thought they could put these ppl aside and all the problems of said city would go away, are at be contained!
It was a great place let go by the people and the government if it was built as a condo it would still be standing - when you give people something for nothing they do not respect and protect it
Plumbing ripped out, windows broken, lights smashed, garbage strewn everywhere ... still happening today in single level public housing dwellings in my neck of the woods. People who -- for whatever reason -- have never worked to earn a wage (sometimes for generations) tend to have zero respect for property, especially when it's handed to them for low or zero rent.
The Gateway Arch: A monument to all the people that had the good sense to leave St. Louis.
It's baffling we came to such catastrophic state... We are sick. so sick, modernity is cancer
Some selective fact presentation to say the least. Yes there were problems with the architecture of Pruitt-Igoe but a lot of that was due to standardization for cost savings. What was built was in many ways not what the architect proposed.... Many many other socio-economic factors were more predominant in the failure of this development.
(black people)
Great watch. Thank you for this.
Sounds like they had the same problems in the States as we do here in the UK with these estates !!! They are too big to maintain and become homes for the unemployed and undesirable !!
It’s not that they were too big
There’s a lot more to why public homes collapsed .
Great doc, excellent upload.
It's pretty easy to mistakenly think building design can produce crime. Actually, I think building design can make it easier or harder to engage in prosocial or antisocial behavior. Building design can facilitate behavior. Not produce it.
I know many estates were built as part of slum clearing but the whole idea of mass public housing is horrible. there is a stigma straight away. Public housing should be spread through the community in regular houses and flats. Surely thats a better way.
No, because people on assistance are generally not good neighbors. It's not fair for someone's lifetime investment to be minimized by low iq criminals lowering proprty values.
I would say more education in the trades. Certify local residents in the fields needed to maintain these properties.
26:07 highly alarming then, now a few decades later it's nothing worth mentioning. We got those bloody cameras absolutely everywhere and a few care to mind any more
@28:44 1965 CHEVROLET BISCAYNE STATION WAGON 6 CYL/3 ON THE TREE!
How about this, that everyone REFUSE to discuss. MAY it be the kind of people that lived there?? Maybe it would have been different if only whites or only asians lived there?
9:56
As the Singaporeans have found out, if you simply take the first (or most prolific) graffiti "artist" out to the public space, and cane his hands to a bloody pulp, graffiti stops entirely. Same with muggings and other anti-social behavior. Severe corporal punishment can undo years of bad parenting. Capital punishment prevents the "bad seeds" from infecting future generations. Singapore has housing densities WAY higher than shown here, but virtually zero crime.
The UK is a decaying society that would benefit from these kinds of control hugely.
i think singapore would benefit from better employment opportunities than the pruitt igoe residents. next to no jobs were available in the city
Damn, There one of those "merry go round's". Used to have fun getting sit on those.
some nasty stuff going on with this tape...
It's the tracking!
Interesting concepts. I can agree with the Mungo Jerry guy on principle, but not results. As we all know, Brownsville is murder central, not some public housing utopia. Those wonderful visible common areas are dominated by gangs and criminals. Also, even low density 1 and 2 story housing projects around the country are being shut down due to crime, with the criminals being snuck into mixed income housing (in middle class neighborhoods). The building design makes a difference, but in the end, it is the people. HUD can move one or two thug families with 7 kids into your neighborhood and the rape, robbery, assault, and murder will start. LE will do a good job at first, but lawsuits by Marxist groups will push them back, and people will start to move out. The city will respond by moving more poor people in, and in a few years, it becomes a no go zone. With mass immigration of poor uneducated and violence prone people to America, the problem will get worse and worse.
Funny that Marseilles was pronounced ‘Ma Sales’ in Britain in the 1970s. Interesting documentary though. But rather a bleak summing up by Oscar Newman; why couldn’t communal areas/ public spaces inspire a sense of communal responsibility instead of crime?
So ... it's the building's fault?
+Mark Maloney
Interesting to note they're trying to encourage this kind of encapsulated living in the upper middle class, now, the aging population this kind of budgeted housing should have been erected for.
+Mark Maloney Mungo Jerry did go to great lengths to gloss over differences in the people. I can agree with everything he said about building design, but in the end it is always the people. South Chicago neighborhoods were all lower and middle class for many decades and there was little crime. Lots of single family houses with yards. Now they call it Chiraq.
Adam Horowitz
Exactly.
Yes, the buildings matter. It's like feng shui
I don't think it's the building's fault exactly, but the design wasn't thought out properly. As architects, it should be our duty to design with a priority to facilitate this kind of interaction with neighbors, community and the street, and to encourage this environment of safety. Of course, architects can't force it, the people living in it will decide how they use it, but design can certainly encourage.
@21:54 lil mama said, " I don't need no skates!"
Lets blame any one or any thing,just don't blame the people who lived there and trashed it!That would be racist to expect those people to except any blame for any thing they do.
Instead of playing the victim of big bad political correctness how about you nut up and say what it is you want to say? Or you don't want to deal with the blowback because it will hurt your feelings?
We have the same issues in Scotland. This isn't about race, but architecture. Feeling pride and ownership does make a difference.
Melissa I love you
They need to tear down all of the remaining old projects in NYC and dissolve NYCHA.
They not doing that in nyc
What happened was they let the thugs move in
the ' thugs ' were born out of ' them '. the thugs didn't move in from somewhere else.
The tenants tore up these buildings
BUILDINGZ WUZ RAYCIS !
Professor O. Newman is surely a smart man.
Was.
And his ideas have been tried with no measureable decrease in crime rates whatsoever.
socially deterministic guff!
I dindonuting it dem building is bad mon !