the LAtimes reports on a growing trend for buildings and public spaces like parks to disassociate from the public realm in an attempt to make them drive-by proof. The initiative was the brainchild of City Councilman Ed Reyes, a former urban planner representing Los Angeles' 1st District that includes the Pico-Union and MacArthur Park, the densest and poorest neighborhoods in the city.
"If you just build boxes and windows, you're not going to help,"
"Every development is geared toward the people that have to live there on a day-to-day basis," Reyes said. "When we look at the pragmatism of our neighborhoods, we have to ask questions: Where is the bullet going to come from? What projectile elevation should we adhere to in our development? Where should we situate the trees?"
What is gained in safety is a loss for the future of the public street in these neighborhoods. This lack of eyeballs on the street or into these parks is counter to security through design tenets where visibility and stand off distance are the prime criteria.
While the drive-bys may be discourages by blocking the line of sight or trajectory of bullets, this forced seclusion opens the door for muggers, rapists, and other scum that avoid highly visible and trafficked places.
This trend isn't just limited for places serving poor folks, high end residential development have often taken the fortress mentality around downtown LA. The only difference is that the pastiche of historicist applique that hides the barriers.
To paraphrase Margaret Atwood, freedom from isn't the same as freedom to do.
There is a parallel in bomb-proofing buildings - the innovation that blew the costs on Miralles' Scottish Parliament sky high.
Renzo Piano was quoted in the Financial Times on Saturday talking about his St. Giles redevelopment (central London), and how he had made the ground level intentionally transparent, similar to the New York Times building in NY:
Edwin Heathcote from the FT writes:
I mention that I’ve recently visited his new skyscraper for The New York Times and that he seems to be doing something similar there, making the lobby public and see-through, creating indoor, public routes through a city where public and private are usually powerfully distinct. “In New York, after September 11, there was a temptation to make everything like a fortress, solid and closed. But in fact we found that transparency is safer than opacity, everyone can see what is happening.”
I like his thinking.
If you want to stop the drive-by shootings, half of the problem is the driving...
mL & pA -makes me wonder about the surveillance society we're getting into on this side of the pond. Is big brother watching, or just does it seem like they are because of all the cameras. And if he is watching, does he care?
I remember living in london in '94 and having the cameras track me down the street. what does watching really prevent? or do the recordings just provide evidence for forensics?
i live in downtown detroit. there's crime here, but there are also clever ways to outsmart it through design. for instance at mies' lafayette park, all glass houses definitely lead to many eyes on the street. on multiple occasions car theives have been thwarted by neighbors looking out their windows.
i've also found landscaping to be good thief deterrent. we planted thick bushes in front of all of our hopper windows. it's way more than any intruder wants to deal with.
psyarch: i think the 'drive' in drive-by is a huge factor that allows these crimes to happen. shooting someone, and then getting away on foot, bike or bus is much less appealing.
treekiller & psyarch: there is a huge difference between eyeballs and surveillance cameras... eyeballs are attached to brains, and brains (at least in most humans) have the capability of comprehending and acting on morality and ethics. people at the scene have the best chance of acting on a perceived threat and possibly preventing it. big brother only comes in after the fact to clean things up and try to track the criminal down.
many gun-rights supporters use this logic: if you take guns out of the hands of the public, the only people left with guns are the criminals... doesn't this logic extend to the streets and parks as well?
if you take the guns out of the hands of the public, it becomes much harder for criminals and kids to get their hands on em...why can't the NRA concede this point?
its not like the public owning guns reduces the amount of gun deaths in any place except texas...
that only works to keep the guns away from the general public.
so then there is no chance of defending themselves whatsoever.
i'm all for having only sport shooting, but don't see how it would be feasable to get all guns from all people.
but when everyone owns guns, you get the middle east. that's what the NRA doesn't see, and since it's funded by the gun mfrs. and fundie dingbats, it's not gonna change it's "vision"
clearly if drive-by shootings are a problem we should be banning cars.
not sure about guns. when i was young a criminal-type tried to kill me with a knife. i sometimes wonder what would have happened if he had a gun. violence is pretty much just bad stuff, regardless of where it happens. this was, btw, in the middle of the day in a run-down new urbanisty community. nobody came to my aid though i spect one or two people saw it happen. my faith in eyes on the street is deeply colored by that experience (and others, similar nature). design might work as advertised but i really think society needs to change more than building typologies do. a city of barricaded buildings would be very sad. the outcome of society grounded in fear...
the gary comer youth center in chicago, bu John Ronan Architects is largely bullet-proof. All the glazing facing the street is reinforced and ribbon windows are hidden in with the cement panel facade as a kind of camouflage. Here's a link to the GCYC site:
in Downtown LA, most of the new developments are playing to the fact that Downtown is still a scary, crime ridden place. The buildings are set up as fortresses that you drive into (through a gate) and have everything that you need inside of the building. There is no reason to walk the streets of Downtown LA
I had a neighbor, we called her Auntie Rosie. Nice old lady. She took the bus everywhere. Walking home from the bus stop one day, she was approached by a punk, who said, "Give me your money." Her eyes lit up with fire, and she said, "YOU GO HOME TO YOUR MOTHER, AND TELL HER WHAT YOU TOLD ME!" The guy started to run away, and she went chasing him, yelling, "COME BACK HERE! I'M NOT FINISHED TALKING WITH YOU! You come HERE!"
There was an exhibit last year at the Wind Tunnel in Pasadena called Open House, which was a compendium of utopian models past and present. One entry (by realities:united) had a model of a neighborhood, where all the houses had ground floor walls that lifted up. Like on piano hinges. Like Marilyn Monroe's dress. On all four sides. Now, while the designers' concept was about climate suits and opening up the house to nature, for me, the pee-in-your-pants moment came when I realized this design turned the clearly-defined-zones-of-privacy on its head. It was no longer this-is-mine-you-stay-there but instead this-is-my-neighborhood-you're-a-guest.
jump, re: banning cars, my inner recovering automotive enthusiast is saying, YES! I mean, NO! I, mean... can we at least try to design a sidewalk that can be just as alluring as a Ferrari, if not more so?
The gun thing always puzzled me. I know a lot of responsible people who own guns (for hunting, but there are plenty of places where you are on your own out there) who I have no fear that they abuse them. Additionally "Just take away the guns and the violence will go away" has not seen the nightly news in London - or as we like to joke "stabbytown".
What does need to happen is to implement structures that allow law enforcement to find the straw dealers and lax resellers who funnel guns to criminals. Basically registration, including keeping a record of the ballistic information. The allegory I can use is fingerprints. One side would argue that since some criminals could use gloves we should never take fingerprint and the other side thinks we should outlaw cloves just in case a criminal might think of using them.
I've heard that hybrids are the new drive-by car of choice because they are so quiet that it makes it easier to sneak up on people. At least they're going green.
I remember hearing reports (mostly from wait, wait on NPR or from the news of the weird) where there are bicycle-by-shootings, scooter-by-shooting (modsters, attack!) rollerblade-by-shootings, even riding-lawnmower-by-shootings. put wheels on it, and people will shoot from it.
bullet proof architecture
the LAtimes reports on a growing trend for buildings and public spaces like parks to disassociate from the public realm in an attempt to make them drive-by proof. The initiative was the brainchild of City Councilman Ed Reyes, a former urban planner representing Los Angeles' 1st District that includes the Pico-Union and MacArthur Park, the densest and poorest neighborhoods in the city.
"If you just build boxes and windows, you're not going to help,"
"Every development is geared toward the people that have to live there on a day-to-day basis," Reyes said. "When we look at the pragmatism of our neighborhoods, we have to ask questions: Where is the bullet going to come from? What projectile elevation should we adhere to in our development? Where should we situate the trees?"
What is gained in safety is a loss for the future of the public street in these neighborhoods. This lack of eyeballs on the street or into these parks is counter to security through design tenets where visibility and stand off distance are the prime criteria.
While the drive-bys may be discourages by blocking the line of sight or trajectory of bullets, this forced seclusion opens the door for muggers, rapists, and other scum that avoid highly visible and trafficked places.
This trend isn't just limited for places serving poor folks, high end residential development have often taken the fortress mentality around downtown LA. The only difference is that the pastiche of historicist applique that hides the barriers.
To paraphrase Margaret Atwood, freedom from isn't the same as freedom to do.
why dont we just get rid of guns??? seems a lot easier
...and people think Im crazy for wanting to leave LA
There is a parallel in bomb-proofing buildings - the innovation that blew the costs on Miralles' Scottish Parliament sky high.
Renzo Piano was quoted in the Financial Times on Saturday talking about his St. Giles redevelopment (central London), and how he had made the ground level intentionally transparent, similar to the New York Times building in NY:
Edwin Heathcote from the FT writes:
I mention that I’ve recently visited his new skyscraper for The New York Times and that he seems to be doing something similar there, making the lobby public and see-through, creating indoor, public routes through a city where public and private are usually powerfully distinct. “In New York, after September 11, there was a temptation to make everything like a fortress, solid and closed. But in fact we found that transparency is safer than opacity, everyone can see what is happening.”
I like his thinking.
If you want to stop the drive-by shootings, half of the problem is the driving...
the only problem there is that it requires people to actually watch, listen, pay attention, etc.
something that americans at least have shown an unwillingness to do.
mL & pA -makes me wonder about the surveillance society we're getting into on this side of the pond. Is big brother watching, or just does it seem like they are because of all the cameras. And if he is watching, does he care?
I remember living in london in '94 and having the cameras track me down the street. what does watching really prevent? or do the recordings just provide evidence for forensics?
Design for best behaviour, not worst. People will meet your expectations every time.
big brother is always watching, luckily he is often too incompetent to get off his ass and do anything
discusses whether it is the gun, the bullet, or the hole that kills people in drive-by shootings and how the gangs will love the new walled off parks.
one of my favorite projects in detroit - a house by two cranbrook grads in a fairly bad detroit neighborhood.
i live in downtown detroit. there's crime here, but there are also clever ways to outsmart it through design. for instance at mies' lafayette park, all glass houses definitely lead to many eyes on the street. on multiple occasions car theives have been thwarted by neighbors looking out their windows.
i've also found landscaping to be good thief deterrent. we planted thick bushes in front of all of our hopper windows. it's way more than any intruder wants to deal with.
psyarch: i think the 'drive' in drive-by is a huge factor that allows these crimes to happen. shooting someone, and then getting away on foot, bike or bus is much less appealing.
treekiller & psyarch: there is a huge difference between eyeballs and surveillance cameras... eyeballs are attached to brains, and brains (at least in most humans) have the capability of comprehending and acting on morality and ethics. people at the scene have the best chance of acting on a perceived threat and possibly preventing it. big brother only comes in after the fact to clean things up and try to track the criminal down.
many gun-rights supporters use this logic: if you take guns out of the hands of the public, the only people left with guns are the criminals... doesn't this logic extend to the streets and parks as well?
if you take the guns out of the hands of the public, it becomes much harder for criminals and kids to get their hands on em...why can't the NRA concede this point?
its not like the public owning guns reduces the amount of gun deaths in any place except texas...
barry,
that only works to keep the guns away from the general public.
so then there is no chance of defending themselves whatsoever.
i'm all for having only sport shooting, but don't see how it would be feasable to get all guns from all people.
but when everyone owns guns, you get the middle east. that's what the NRA doesn't see, and since it's funded by the gun mfrs. and fundie dingbats, it's not gonna change it's "vision"
jafidler,
Here is HousingOperative - the team behind that house.
http://www.openarchitecturenetwork.org/2126pierce
One of the designers, Matt Miller, is out in Uganda right now building
http://www.openarchitecturenetwork.org/kutamba
C
very cool cameron.
clearly if drive-by shootings are a problem we should be banning cars.
not sure about guns. when i was young a criminal-type tried to kill me with a knife. i sometimes wonder what would have happened if he had a gun. violence is pretty much just bad stuff, regardless of where it happens. this was, btw, in the middle of the day in a run-down new urbanisty community. nobody came to my aid though i spect one or two people saw it happen. my faith in eyes on the street is deeply colored by that experience (and others, similar nature). design might work as advertised but i really think society needs to change more than building typologies do. a city of barricaded buildings would be very sad. the outcome of society grounded in fear...
jump- and I thought canada was safe!!!! I got mugged in philly by a punk with a hoagie down his pants.
the gary comer youth center in chicago, bu John Ronan Architects is largely bullet-proof. All the glazing facing the street is reinforced and ribbon windows are hidden in with the cement panel facade as a kind of camouflage. Here's a link to the GCYC site:
http://www.gcychome.org/architecture.html#
-andrew
in Downtown LA, most of the new developments are playing to the fact that Downtown is still a scary, crime ridden place. The buildings are set up as fortresses that you drive into (through a gate) and have everything that you need inside of the building. There is no reason to walk the streets of Downtown LA
I had a neighbor, we called her Auntie Rosie. Nice old lady. She took the bus everywhere. Walking home from the bus stop one day, she was approached by a punk, who said, "Give me your money." Her eyes lit up with fire, and she said, "YOU GO HOME TO YOUR MOTHER, AND TELL HER WHAT YOU TOLD ME!" The guy started to run away, and she went chasing him, yelling, "COME BACK HERE! I'M NOT FINISHED TALKING WITH YOU! You come HERE!"
There was an exhibit last year at the Wind Tunnel in Pasadena called Open House, which was a compendium of utopian models past and present. One entry (by realities:united) had a model of a neighborhood, where all the houses had ground floor walls that lifted up. Like on piano hinges. Like Marilyn Monroe's dress. On all four sides. Now, while the designers' concept was about climate suits and opening up the house to nature, for me, the pee-in-your-pants moment came when I realized this design turned the clearly-defined-zones-of-privacy on its head. It was no longer this-is-mine-you-stay-there but instead this-is-my-neighborhood-you're-a-guest.
jump, re: banning cars, my inner recovering automotive enthusiast is saying, YES! I mean, NO! I, mean... can we at least try to design a sidewalk that can be just as alluring as a Ferrari, if not more so?
(sigh), no. Yes, it's amazing how speed bumps cripple a lowered masterpiece into a dainty thing tippy-toeing over. Like Bo Peep. With the skirts up.
Oysters and Trifle
Tumbles and I had our 1st date at that show
mdler
Congratulations! I peed in my pants at that show!
The gun thing always puzzled me. I know a lot of responsible people who own guns (for hunting, but there are plenty of places where you are on your own out there) who I have no fear that they abuse them. Additionally "Just take away the guns and the violence will go away" has not seen the nightly news in London - or as we like to joke "stabbytown".
What does need to happen is to implement structures that allow law enforcement to find the straw dealers and lax resellers who funnel guns to criminals. Basically registration, including keeping a record of the ballistic information. The allegory I can use is fingerprints. One side would argue that since some criminals could use gloves we should never take fingerprint and the other side thinks we should outlaw cloves just in case a criminal might think of using them.
I've heard that hybrids are the new drive-by car of choice because they are so quiet that it makes it easier to sneak up on people. At least they're going green.
I remember hearing reports (mostly from wait, wait on NPR or from the news of the weird) where there are bicycle-by-shootings, scooter-by-shooting (modsters, attack!) rollerblade-by-shootings, even riding-lawnmower-by-shootings. put wheels on it, and people will shoot from it.
hey Archinect Paul
is there anyway to get Radiohead's 'Bulletproof' to play on this thread?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.