User talk:Fa10062

The Decline of Public Space and the Issue of Homelessness in the Modern City.

Intro:

Public space is in decline as more land is sold to private firms who then proceed to "fortify" (Virlo cited in Bottomley & Moore, 2007: 176) it with CCTV, fences and private security. What is left of public space is also heavily monitored and the homeless are being driven to specific areas where they are unmatched and ignored. Areas such as London's South Bank and City provides a clear example of how private and public spaces are changing as well of demonstrating who is welcome and who is excluded. It also brings into question what is public space and is it truly public.

Defining public space:

"public space is not so much about ownership but use" (Bottomley & Moore, 2007: 172) a place described by Amin (undated: 3) which varies in use and has its own dynamic of use and rules, such as a town square; busy at lunch time, empty at night. It is clear therefore that as Mitchell (2005: 85) says a public space is a place for engagement where the "movement of people is determined by habit, purpose, orientation and responses to signs/obstacles" (Amin, undated: 6). However the definition of public is a major part of what someone's determination of what a public space is, Bottomley & Moore see the use of a space as the determining factor between public and private where as Amin and Mitchell are much more aware of the changing "public culture shaped by circumstances and flow" (Amin, undated: 1) which often sees the exclusion of minorities and those who may not belong, creating a space for a specific type of person and although public space allows for socialisation and interaction with others Mitchell (2005: 78-89) argues that the people we are allowed to interact with becomes are those not excluded from the areas we live and work in.

Ownership:

Mitchell (2005: 78-87)) looks at the new attitude we have towards public spaces especially how people would rather be left alone than interact, this is highlighted in the Colorado law where it is illegal to knowingly go closer than 8ft to another individual and interact with them without their permission. This attitude leads to the increased privatisation of public space as we try to prevent meeting the wrong sort of people. The South Bank and City area of London clearly showed how privatisation has led to a filtering of people allowed into the area. On 2 separate occasions (Tuesday 13th December and Sunday 18 December) the people who were seen in the area were City workers or security staff with very few not wearing suits. The area west of Tower Bridge is largely controlled by More London with a private shopping centre, Hayes Galleria, and the east of Tower Bridge is owned by Butlers Wharf who provide luxury accommodation. Around these areas are signs (as shown) which state the code of conduct of the owners. What is controversial about this area is the Majors offices which is supposed to indicate transparent government is located within the land owned by More London, this questions just how public the City Hall actually is. Another example of how privatisation has led to the filtration of people is in "Basingstoke shopping centre, where a local woman's institute was banned from setting up a charity stall because it would be detrimental to business" (Bottomley & Moore, 2007: 185). Despite the apparent freedom one receives in a privately owned space it is clear that those who are not welcome are prevented from entering such spaces, especially when the area is heavily policed.

Policing:

As noted in the previous paragraph security is an important part of private space, preventing those who are not wanted and keeping those who are welcome safe and secure. More London pride themselves with 24 hour security bringing "safety and piece of mind to visitors" (morelondon website). Walking around the area it is clear how this is implemented, with a private security force and CCTV covering every corner of the location. This is not just private property issue however, there are "over 500, 000 cameras across Britain" (Fyfe & Bannister, 1998: 256) with London having so many that a single person is "caught on camera about 300 times a day" (Bottomley & Moore, 2007: 194). This shows that both private and public spaces have heavy security to prevent anti-social behaviour and keep watch on the people in that space and beyond. This limits the actions which are available in a public space with the knowledge that the state is watching and controlling what we can and can not do. Furthermore fences and closing times also prevent who is allowed into an area. On the South Bank of the Thames there were numerous gates and fences preventing access of people, many of which also had a closing time stopping access from homeless people and those looking for shelter. Hayes Galleria for instance closed at 8pm and the More London and Butlers Wharf plots had numerous signs highlighting the zero tolerance of rough sleepers and advertised the presence of security personnel who could remove you from the premises. The design of such places also can act as a measure against the unwanted, Mitchell (2004: 21) describes how architecture acts as a barrier to certain people and activities.. This was seen in the South Bank and City area where open spaces were covered by cameras and fences prevented access, also anti-sleep benches could be seem around Tower Hill tube station. The buildings and footpaths were well lit up and the lack of any sheltered door ways or other spaces prevented rough sleepers and also act as a hindrance to anti-social behaviour and any other unwanted actions.

Homelessness:

Homelessness in London has been highlighted as a real problem by Boris Johnson, and subsequently the Major created the "No Second Night Out" policy which is aiming to put an end to homelessness in London by the end of 2012 (NSNO Website). Around the South Bank the policy seems to be working with only 3 homeless seen on the first visit and none on the second. Those who were spotted located themselves North of the river sheltering in the stair wells of tower bridge or by Tower Hill tube station where it is public property and busier, especially at the times where people are going home. When speaking to one homeless man he said "I've been warned not to go to the other side [south]" this is because that land is privately owned and therefore those trying to find shelter are unwelcome. The public space around the Tower of London showed signs of anti-homeless measures with benches (pictured) which stops people sleeping on them as well as "no sleeping" signs. However the help for homeless people, especially in London, is on the rise. The "Charing Cross Homeless unit helps to deal with crimes committed by and to homeless people as well as offering help" (Fooks & Pantazis, 1999: 128) and the NSNO campaign by Boris Johnson has also claimed to be reducing those on the streets and giving them help. Whether this is a cover for hiding homeless people for the Olympics is yet to be seen but it is clear from walking around the South Bank and city area that homelessness is in decline and that the reduced public space in the area is forcing those who remain into specific locations in the area.