Undergraduate Architectural Dissertation

AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SENSE OF SECURITY IN MIXED USE URBAN DEVELOPMENTS A CASE STUDY ON TWO STREETS IN MADURAI CITY OF TAMIL NADU, INDIA

AN ARCHITECTURAL DISSERTATION REPORT

Submitted by

BHAVATARINI K (Reg No.: 11AR07) In partial fulfillment for the award of the degree Of

BACHELOR OF ARCHITECTURE IN ARCHITECTURE

THIAGARAJAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, MADURAI-625015 (A Govt. aided, ISO 9001:2000 Certified Autonomous Institution)

ANNA UNIVERSITY: CHENNAI 600 025 NOVEMBER 2015

THIAGARAJAR COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING (A Govt. aided Autonomous Institution Affiliated to Anna University)

MADURAI-625015

ANNA UNIVERSITY: CHENNAI 600 025 BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE This to Certify that this report “AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SENSE OF SECURITY IN MIXED USE URBAN DEVELOPMENTS - A CASE STUDY ON TWO STREETS IN MADURAI CITY OF TAMIL NADU, INDIA” is a bonafide work of “K BHAVATARINI” (11 AR 07 IX SEM) who carried out the work in Architectural Dissertation under my supervision within the time period of June to November 2015

INTERNAL

EXTERNAL

EXAMINER

EXAMINER

SUPERVISOR

HEAD OF THE DEPARTMENT

Acknowledgement I extend my gratitude to Prof. Dr. J. Jinu Louishidha Kitchley, the Head of the Department of Architecture and my project supervisor for her able guidance in deciding the direction of the research and taking it forward.

I then thank Prof. Dr. S. Radhakrishnan, the dissertation coordinator for his constant motivation that took us through.

I also thank Ar. V. Balasubramaniam, the external examiner during the various stages of the dissertation, for his resourceful comments and reviews that were of great significance in the course of the dissertation.

I thank my father who accompanied me during the site visits and assisted me in the documentation process.

Finally, I thank all the staff members and friends for their undying encouragement and support.

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS PARTICULARS

PAGE NO.

Acknowledgement ................................................................................................................. 1 List of figures ......................................................................................................................... 8 List of charts ........................................................................................................................ 11 List of tables ......................................................................................................................... 11 Abstract ................................................................................................................................ 12 Aim ................................................................................................................................. 13 Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 13 Methodology ................................................................................................................... 13 Scope and limitations ...................................................................................................... 14 Social significance .......................................................................................................... 15 Outcomes ........................................................................................................................ 15 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 15 1.1. Sense of security ...................................................................................................... 16 1.1.1. Behavioural changes with fear .......................................................................... 16 1.2. Mixed use developments.......................................................................................... 17 1.3. Madurai – the city and its people ............................................................................. 17 1.4. The case studies chosen ........................................................................................... 18 2. Supporting theories ..........................................................................................................19 2.1. Prospect – refuge theory .......................................................................................... 19 2.2. Broken windows theory ........................................................................................... 19 2.3. The theory of new urbanism .................................................................................... 20 3. Study methodology ..........................................................................................................20 3.1. Pre-visit study .......................................................................................................... 22 3.1.1. Identification of the factors ............................................................................... 22 2

3.1.1.1. Kind of development.................................................................................. 22 3.1.1.1.1. Organic development .......................................................................... 22 3.1.1.1.2. Planned development .......................................................................... 22 3.1.1.2. Prospect-refuge .......................................................................................... 23 3.1.1.2.1. View range .......................................................................................... 23 3.1.1.2.2. Refuge points ...................................................................................... 23 3.1.1.3. Broken windows ........................................................................................ 23 3.1.1.3.1. Street elements .................................................................................... 23 3.1.1.3.2. Street lighting ...................................................................................... 23 3.1.1.3.3. Traffic level ......................................................................................... 23 3.1.1.3.4. People groups ...................................................................................... 24 3.1.1.4. Surveillance (New Urbanism).................................................................... 24 3.1.1.4.1. Informal surveillance .......................................................................... 24 3.1.1.4.2. Formal surveillance ............................................................................. 25 3.1.1.4.3. People activity (Casual surveillance) .................................................. 25 3.1.1.5. Individual factors ....................................................................................... 26 3.1.1.5.1. Gender ................................................................................................. 26 3.1.1.5.2. Age ...................................................................................................... 26 3.1.1.6. Time of the day .......................................................................................... 26 3.1.1.7. Day of the week ......................................................................................... 27 3.1.2. Contextualisation of the broken windows theory ............................................. 27 3.1.3. Preparation of the score-finding matrix ............................................................ 29 3.2. Site visit ................................................................................................................... 32 3.2.1. Understanding the development ....................................................................... 32 3.2.2. Preparation of the base map .............................................................................. 32 3.2.3. Plotting of the perspective points ...................................................................... 32 3.2.4. Documentation of the elements considered ...................................................... 32 3

3.2.5. Observation of the people’s behavioural patterns ............................................. 32 3.2.6. Surveys regarding the safety in the development ............................................. 32 3.3. Post-visit data processing......................................................................................... 33 3.3.1. Preparation of the maps of the documented data .............................................. 33 3.3.2. Filling of the matrix and the arriving of the cumulative SEI scores ................. 33 3.3.3. Ranging of the SEI scores ................................................................................. 33 3.3.4. Preparation of the gradient map ........................................................................ 34 3.4. Initial Analysis ......................................................................................................... 34 3.4.1. Identification of the safe and unsafe zones ....................................................... 34 3.4.2. Classification of the streets in the developments .............................................. 34 3.4.3. Computation of the contribution of each factor in the sense of safety of the chosen examples ..................................................................................................................... 35 3.5. Validation ................................................................................................................. 35 3.6. Final Analysis .......................................................................................................... 35 3.6.1. Conclusion of the effect of each factor within each development .................... 35 3.6.2. Comparison of the effects of each factor between both developments ............ 35 3.6.3. Inference ........................................................................................................... 35 4. Case study 1 – Town hall road, Madurai .........................................................................36 4.1. Site visit ................................................................................................................... 36 4.1.1. Understanding the development ....................................................................... 36 4.1.2. Preparation of base map .................................................................................... 37 4.1.3. Plotting of the perspective points ...................................................................... 38 4.2. Post-visit data processing......................................................................................... 39 4.2.1. Documentation maps ........................................................................................ 39 4.2.2. Filling the score-finding matrix ........................................................................ 47 4.2.3. Preparation of SEI gradient map ....................................................................... 55 4.3. Analysis.................................................................................................................... 56 4

4.3.1. Choosing the case examples ............................................................................. 56 4.3.2. The impact of the factors in the case examples ................................................ 57 4.3.2.1. Arterial roads: ............................................................................................ 57 4.3.2.1.a. West Chithirai street ............................................................................ 57 4.3.2.1.b. West Masi street .................................................................................. 58 4.3.2.1.c. Town hall road .................................................................................... 59 4.3.2.1.d. West Marret street ............................................................................... 60 4.3.2.2. Feeder roads ............................................................................................... 61 4.3.2.2.a. Valayalkara street ................................................................................ 61 4.3.2.2.b. Dhanappa Mudhali street .................................................................... 62 4.3.2.2.c. Perumal theppam south street – outer lane ......................................... 63 Perumal theppam south street – inner lane ......................................................... 64 4.3.2.3. Residential lanes ........................................................................................ 65 4.3.2.3.a. Lane near West Tower street............................................................... 65 4.3.2.3.b. Vellalar street ...................................................................................... 66 4.4. Inference .................................................................................................................. 67 4.4.1. Contribution of each factor to the overall sense of security ............................. 67 4.4.2. The impact of each factor ................................................................................. 67 4.4.2.1. Prospect range ............................................................................................ 67 4.4.2.2. Refuge ........................................................................................................ 68 4.4.2.3. Traffic level ................................................................................................ 68 4.4.2.4. Street lighting ............................................................................................. 68 4.4.2.5. Street elements ........................................................................................... 68 4.4.2.6. People groups ............................................................................................. 68 4.4.2.7. Informal surveillance ................................................................................. 69 4.4.2.8. Formal surveillance .................................................................................... 69 4.4.2.9. People activity (casual surveillance) .......................................................... 69 5

5. Case study 2 – Anna nagar 80 feet road, Madurai ........................................................... 70 5.1. Site visit ................................................................................................................... 70 5.1.1. Understanding the development ....................................................................... 70 5.1.2. Preparation of base map .................................................................................... 71 5.1.3. Plotting of the perspective points ...................................................................... 72 5.2. Post- visit data processing........................................................................................ 73 5.2.1. Documentation maps ........................................................................................ 73 4.2.2. Filling the score-finding matrix ........................................................................ 81 4.2.3. Preparation of SEI gradient map ....................................................................... 89 5.3. Analysis.................................................................................................................... 90 5.3.1. Choosing the case examples ............................................................................. 90 5.3.1.1. Arterial roads ............................................................................................. 91 5.3.1.1.a. Apollo hospital junction ...................................................................... 91 5.3.1.1.b. Golcha complex junction .................................................................... 92 5.3.1.1.c. Suguna stores junction ........................................................................ 93 5.3.1.1.d. Anna nagar main road through Suguna stores junction ...................... 94 5.3.1.2. Feeder roads ............................................................................................... 95 5.3.1.2.a. Ulavar sandhai road............................................................................. 95 5.3.1.2.b. A cross lane ......................................................................................... 96 5.3.1.3. Residential lanes ........................................................................................ 97 5.3.1.3.a. New LIG colony .................................................................................. 97 5.3.1.3.b. Muthamizh kudiyiruppu...................................................................... 98 5.3.1.3.c. Church street ....................................................................................... 99 5.3.1.4. Parks......................................................................................................... 100 5.3.1.4.a. Park in the NW sector ....................................................................... 100 5.3.1.4.b. Park in the SW sector in front of the church ..................................... 101 5.3.1.5. Pavements along the 80 feet road ............................................................ 102 6

5.4 Inference ................................................................................................................. 103 5.4.1. Contribution of each factor to the overall sense of security ........................... 103 4.4.2. The impact of each factor ............................................................................... 103 4.4.2.1. Prospect range .......................................................................................... 103 4.4.2.2. Refuge ...................................................................................................... 103 4.4.2.3. Traffic level .............................................................................................. 104 4.4.2.4. Street lighting ........................................................................................... 104 4.4.2.5. Street elements ......................................................................................... 104 4.4.2.6. People groups ........................................................................................... 104 4.4.2.7. Informal surveillance ............................................................................... 104 4.4.2.8. Formal surveillance .................................................................................. 105 4.4.2.9. People activity (casual surveillance) ........................................................ 105 6. Final inferences .............................................................................................................. 105 6.1. Contribution of each factor to the overall sense of safety ..................................... 105 6.2. The key factors and their effects ............................................................................ 106 6.2.1. Surveillance..................................................................................................... 106 6.2.2. Street elements ................................................................................................ 106 6.2.3. Street lighting .................................................................................................. 106 6.3. Comparing the organic and the planned developments ......................................... 107 Bibliography ...................................................................................................................... 108

7

List of figures Figure 1 Behavioural changes with sense of safety ....................................................................................................... 16 Figure 2 Mixed use development .........................................................................................................................................17 Figure 3 Madurai .....................................................................................................................................................................17 Figure 4 Madurai - location ................................................................................................................................................. 18 Figure 5 The case studies chosen ....................................................................................................................................... 18 Figure 6 Refuge point - an example .................................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 7 Informal surveillance – classification ................................................................................................................. 25 Figure 8 Broken windows theory - Contextualisation - Ranging ............................................................................... 28 Figure 9 Perspective points ................................................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 10 Range circles .......................................................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 11 Ranging the SEI scores ........................................................................................................................................ 34 Figure 12 Town hall road - location map ......................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 13 Town hall road - base map ............................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 14 Town hall road - perspective points ................................................................................................................ 38 Figure 15 Town hall road - refuge map ............................................................................................................................ 39 Figure 16 Town hall road - broken windows theory - street elements map ........................................................... 40 Figure 17 Town hall road - broken windows theory - traffic elements map ........................................................... 41 Figure 18 Town hall road - street lighting map .............................................................................................................. 42 Figure 19 Town hall road - broken windows theory - people groups map ............................................................ 43 Figure 20 Town hall road – Informal surveillance map ................................................................................................ 44 Figure 21 Town hall road - formal surveillance .............................................................................................................. 45 Figure 22 Town hall road - People activity (casual surveillance) map ..................................................................... 46 Figure 23 Town hall road - Final SEI Gradient map ...................................................................................................... 55 Figure 24 Town hall road - Chosen case examples ....................................................................................................... 56 Figure 25 West Chithirai street - map ............................................................................................................................... 57 Figure 26 West Chithirai street - photograph ................................................................................................................. 57 Figure 27 West Chithirai street - influence of the factors ............................................................................................. 57 Figure 28 West Masi street - map ...................................................................................................................................... 58 Figure 29 West Masi street - photograph ........................................................................................................................ 58 Figure 30 West Masi steet – influence of the factors ..................................................................................................... 58 Figure 31 Town hall road - map ......................................................................................................................................... 59 Figure 32 Town hall road - photograph .......................................................................................................................... 59 Figure 33 Town hall road – influence of the factors ...................................................................................................... 59

8

Figure 34 West Marret street - map .................................................................................................................................. 60 Figure 35 West Marret street - photograph .................................................................................................................... 60 Figure 36 West Marret street - influence of the factors ................................................................................................ 60 Figure 37 Valayalkara street - map ................................................................................................................................... 61 Figure 38 Valayakara street - photograph ..................................................................................................................... 61 Figure 39 Valayalkara street – influence of the factors ................................................................................................ 61 Figure 40 Dhanappa Mudhali street - map .................................................................................................................... 62 Figure 41 Dhanappa Mudhali street - photograph ....................................................................................................... 62 Figure 42 Dhanappa Mudhali street - influence of the factors .................................................................................. 62 Figure 43 Perumal theppam south street - outer lane - map .................................................................................. 63 Figure 44 Perumal theppam south street - outer lane - photograph ..................................................................... 63 Figure 45 Perumal theppam south street - outer lane – influence of the factors ................................................. 63 Figure 46 Perumal theppam south street - inner lane - map .................................................................................... 64 Figure 47 Perumal theppam south street - inner lane - photograph ..................................................................... 64 Figure 48 Perumal theppam south street - inner lane – influence of the factors ................................................. 64 Figure 49 Lane near West Tower street - map ............................................................................................................... 65 Figure 50 Lane near West Tower street -

photograph .............................................................................................. 65

Figure 51 Lane near West Tower street - influence of the factors.............................................................................. 65 Figure 52 Vellalar street - map ........................................................................................................................................... 66 Figure 53 Vellalar street - photograph ............................................................................................................................ 66 Figure 54 Vellalar street - influence of the factors ......................................................................................................... 66 Figure 55 Anna nagar 80 feet road - location map ...................................................................................................... 70 Figure 56 Anna nagar 80 feet road - base map .............................................................................................................71 Figure 57 Anna nagar 80 feet road - perspective points .............................................................................................. 72 Figure 58 Anna nagar 80 feet road - refuge map ......................................................................................................... 73 Figure 59 Anna nagar 80 feet road - broken windows theory - street elements map ........................................ 74 Figure 60 Anna nagar 80 feet road - broken windows theory - traffic elements map ........................................ 75 Figure 61 Anna nagar 80 feet road - street lighting map............................................................................................ 76 Figure 62 Anna nagar 80 feet road - broken windows theory - people groups .................................................... 77 Figure 63 Anna nagar 80 feet road – informal surveillance map ............................................................................. 78 Figure 64 Anna nagar 80 feet road - formal surveillance map ................................................................................. 79 Figure 65 Anna nagar 80 feet road - people activity (casual surveillance) map ................................................... 80 Figure 66 Anna nagar 80 feet road - final SEI gradient map ..................................................................................... 89 Figure 67 Anna nagar 80 feet road - Chosen case examples .................................................................................... 90 Figure 68 Apollo hospital junction - map ......................................................................................................................... 91

9

Figure 69 Apollo hospital junction - photograph ........................................................................................................... 91 Figure 70 Apollo hospital junction - influence of the factors ....................................................................................... 91 Figure 71 Golcha complex junction - map ...................................................................................................................... 92 Figure 72 Golcha complex junction - photograph ......................................................................................................... 92 Figure 73 Apollo hospital junction - influence of the factors ....................................................................................... 92 Figure 74 Suguna stores junction - map ......................................................................................................................... 93 Figure 75 Suguna stores junction - photograph............................................................................................................. 93 Figure 76 Suguna stores junction - influence of the factors ........................................................................................ 93 Figure 77 Anna nagar main road through Suguna stores junction - map ........................................................... 94 Figure 78 Anna nagar main road through Suguna stores junction - photograph ............................................... 94 Figure 79 Anna nagar main road through Suguna stores junction - influence of the factors .......................... 94 Figure 80 Ulavar sandhai road - map .............................................................................................................................. 95 Figure 81 Ulavar sandhai road - photograph ................................................................................................................. 95 Figure 82 Ulavar sandhai road - influence of the factors ............................................................................................ 95 Figure 83 Anna nagar 80 feet road – a cross lane - map .......................................................................................... 96 Figure 84 Anna nagar 80 feet road – a cross lane - photograph ............................................................................ 96 Figure 85 Anna nagar 80 feet road – a cross lane - influence of the factors ........................................................ 96 Figure 86 New LIG colony - map ...................................................................................................................................... 97 Figure 87 New LIG colony - photograph .......................................................................................................................... 97 Figure 88 Ulavar sandhai road - influence of the factors ............................................................................................ 97 Figure 89 Muthamizh kudiyiruppu - map ...................................................................................................................... 98 Figure 90 Muthamizh kudiyiruppu - photograph ........................................................................................................ 98 Figure 91 Muthamizh kudiyiruppu - influence of the factors .................................................................................... 98 Figure 92 Church street - map .......................................................................................................................................... 99 Figure 93 Church street - photograph............................................................................................................................. 99 Figure 94 Church street - influence of the factors ........................................................................................................ 99 Figure 95 Park in NW sector – location map ................................................................................................................ 100 Figure 96 Park in NW sector - photograph ................................................................................................................... 100 Figure 97 Park in NW sector – Plan and section ......................................................................................................... 100 Figure 98 Park in SW sector - location map ................................................................................................................ 101 Figure 99 Park in SW sector - photograph ................................................................................................................... 101 Figure 100 Park in SW sector – Plan and section........................................................................................................ 101 Figure 101 Pavements along the 80 feet road - map ................................................................................................. 102 Figure 102 Pavements along the 80 feet road - photograph ................................................................................... 102 Figure 103 Pavements along the 80 feet road - influence of the factors ............................................................ 102

10

List of charts Chart 1 Study methodology – an outline ......................................................................................................................... 21 Chart 2 Factors influencing the sense of security ........................................................................................................... 22 Chart 3 Broken windows theory - Contextualisation - Initial results ........................................................................ 28 Chart 4 Broken Windows theory - Contextualisation - Condensed results ............................................................ 29 Chart 5 Town hall road – contribution of each factor to the overall sense of security ........................................ 67 Chart 6 Anna nagar 80 feet road - contribution of each factor to the overall sense of security .................... 103 Chart 7 Contribution of each factor to the overall sense of security ...................................................................... 105

List of tables Table 1 Prospect - refuge ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Table 2 Effect of the time of the day on the variable factors ...................................................................................... 27 Table 3 Effect of the day of the week on the variable factors ..................................................................................... 27 Table 4 Score-finding matrix ............................................................................................................................................... 31 Table 5 Town hall road - consolidated score-finding matrix ...................................................................................... 54 Table 6 Anna nagar 80 feet road - consolidated score-finding matrix .................................................................... 88 Table 7 Contribution of each factor to the overall sense of safety .......................................................................... 106

11

Abstract Safety is a prerequisite in every walk of life and most significantly, at the urban level too. A city is not merely an assemblage of buildings, but an experience with a character of its own.

But for it to be relished, the city must satisfy the basic needs of its users. Amongst the, safety is one and a very crucial one at that. The sense of safety of a user is affected greatly by the urban environment and it in turn influences the physical and psychological well-being of the user himself. Hence this study has been carried out to identify the factors in a mixed use environment of India that trigger fear and to numerically assess them with a specially evolved methodology specific to the Indian context. Through field observations and surveys made at two kinds of mixed use developments at Madurai city of India, these factors and the corresponding effects have been inferred.

12

Aim To identify the criteria in a mixed use development that influence the sense of security of the users of a city and to assess their impact on the urban life and experience.

Objectives 

To identify the factors in the public domain of a city that could influence the sense of security in the users of the city.



To develop a methodology to assess these factors.



To assess the impact and influence of these factors on the psychological safety of the users.



To bring out the key factors that affect urban safety in an Indian mixed use development.

Methodology Stage 1 – Literature study: •

To understand the psychology of fear and how it varies with every kind of user.

•

To understand the famous theories regarding urban safety.

•

To understand mixed use developments.

•

To elaborate the factors that are to be studied in the case examples.

•

To evolve the methodology of assessment.

Stage 2 – Case study on Town hall road, Madurai: •

To observe and document the environmental features of the streets chosen through visual surveys along various times of the day and a week with various pedestrian and vehicular traffic levels.

•

To identify the potential users of the streets chosen.

•

To observe the behavioural patterns of the users in endangering environments.

13

•

To understand the fears of the users through surveys and interviews.

•

To represent the data collected through GIS maps, charts and tables.

Stage 3 – Case study on Anna nagar 80 feet road, Madurai: •

To observe and document the environmental features of the streets chosen through visual surveys along various times of the day and a week with various pedestrian and vehicular traffic levels.

•

To identify the potential users of the streets chosen.

•

To observe the behavioural patterns of the users in endangering environments.

•

To understand the fears of the users through surveys and interviews.

•

To represent the data collected through GIS maps, charts and tables.

Stage 4 – Analysis and Inferences: •

To analyse and bring out the key factors that threaten safety after data analysis and validation.

•

To compare the impact of the factors in both streets and the resultant sense of security.

•

To delineate the effect of each factor in an Indian mixed use development.

Scope and limitations Psychological sense of safety is the only criteria of research and hence all subsidiary criteria are studied only to support the former.

The methodology evolved applies purely to the streets of the Indian context and the case examples and the subsequent inferences made are relating to mixed use precincts within India.

The scope of the study is to analyse the psychological safety that the public domain of the city offers and hence doesn’t deal with the security in the private sector.

14

Social significance Safety is often a frequent discussion at every scale of life. Among every form of safety, urban safety is crucial and is of potential social significance since the public environment is the major scene of crime. Though there are various establishments that try and defend public safety and bring down criminal offences, unless and until people “feel” perfectly safe in the city, every effort would be only superficial.

It is the environment that influences the psychological safety of the people. If the factors in the environment that threaten the safety of people could actually be identified and rectified, the social and urban life of people could be enriched manifold. And hence the study is made.

Outcomes The factors chosen are assessed using the evolved methodology and the potentially unsafe spots in the street fabric are identified. They are validated with user surveys and behavioural mechanisms and the factors that are of major contribution are assorted. Ways by which these could be set right are mused.

1. Introduction The streets of a city are designated to be “public spaces” for they are the spaces which anyone and everyone is free to access. But in reality, the comfort zone with which people roam the public face of the street is something to ponder upon. It is not every day that you hear someone saying that the streets in a city are absolutely “safe” to be in at any time. The crime rate may prove a city to be the safest but there is still fear; the fear of being attacked; the fear of being victimised. This deprivation of the sense of security is often the reason why people feel scared to walk in a street alone; to go out at night; to live and experience their city. What is so scary in a city? That is something worth mulling over, for once this is set right, the city may turn out to be everyone’s haven, in practice.

15

1.1. Sense of security The term security literally means to feel free of danger or injury.

As the cerebral cortex developed in mammals, their level of perceiving danger increased substantially and so did their fear and anxiety. Fear of being attacked or victimised is the root cause for a reduced sense of security in the urban environment, for fear and security and total opposites. Fear may arise out of various reasons. To begin with each individual’s physical, social, psychological and economic aspects all account for fear. Gender, age, disabilities, educational and economic status, previous encounters with assault, cultural background and many such have a significant impact on a person’s level of fear. Some may even go unreasonable. The environment also has a significant impact on the resultant fear.

For instance, lack of lighting is often feared by many and that’s why night time is often considered unsafe. Similarly, deserted streetscapes are dreaded by many. Vandalised streetscapes, graffiti walls and ill-maintained buildings offer a haunted look. There are various such environmental elements that amplify and garnish the inherent fear of the users.

The individual differences would always be the same. But the environment is something that could be altered; and when done can restore the sense of security.

1.1.1. Behavioural changes with fear Behavioural changes are the first evident symptom of the onset of fear. Behavioural changes too vary with gender, age and other such personal criteria. Changes in the walking speed and routes, avoiding certain routes and nodes, moving along a crowd, nervousness, bringing along someone for support, avoiding eye contact with the other people along the street and choosing alternate means of transport rather than walking are some common behaviours people

Figure 1 Behavioural changes with sense

express along the streets in places where they of safety sense danger. Observing these phenomenon would serve the purpose of identifying “insecure hotspots”.

16

1.2. Mixed use developments A Mixed-use development is - in a broad sense - any urban, suburban or village development, or even a single building, that blends a combination

of

residential,

commercial,

cultural, institutional, or industrial uses, where those functions are physically and functionally integrated,

and

that

provides

pedestrian Figure 2 Mixed use development

connections.

Traditionally, human settlements have developed in mixed-use patterns. However, with industrialisation, governmental zoning regulations were introduced to separate different functions, such as manufacturing, from residential areas. But since the 1990s, mixed-use zoning has once again become desirable as the benefits are recognized. These benefits include: 

Greater housing variety and density



Reduced distances between housing, workplaces, retail businesses, and other destinations



More compact development



Stronger neighbourhood character



Pedestrian friendly environments

(Mixed-use development - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2015)

1.3. Madurai – the city and its people Madurai is a major city in the state of Tamil Nadu in southern India. Madurai is the second largest corporation city by area and third largest city by population in Tamil Nadu and the 31st largest urban agglomeration in India. Located on the banks of River Vaigai, Madurai has been a major settlement for two millennia and is one of the oldest continuously

Figure 3 Madurai

17

inhabited cities in the world. The city is believed to be of significant antiquity and has been ruled, at different times, by the Pandyas, Cholas, Madurai Sultanate, Vijayanagar Empire, Madurai Nayaks, Carnatic kingdom, and the British.

The city has a number of historical monuments, with the Meenakshi Amman Temple and Tirumalai Nayak Palace being the most prominent. Also, Madurai is an important industrial and educational hub in South Tamil Nadu.

Figure 4 Madurai - location

(Madurai - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2015)

1.4. The case studies chosen

Figure 5 The case studies chosen

The two mixed use precincts chosen for study are Town hall road and Anna nagar 80’ road. Town hall road is located within the organic historic settlement of the city towards the south of river Vaigai whereas the 80 feet road at Anna nagar is a later evolved planned development towards the north of river Vaigai. Both happen to be mixed use developments but they differ by the kind they are planned, the kind of users and activity pattern.

18

2. Supporting theories 2.1. Prospect – refuge theory Prospect-refuge theory refers to the primitive and adaptive behavior still prevalent in human beings, namely, “to see without being seen”.

- Appleton (1975) It is a general idea that the more you can see in a streetscape, the more you tend to feel safe.

This is why people fear entrapment spots. They fear that the less they can see and the less they can be seen by passers-by, the more is a chance of being attacked. This is the bottom line of this theory.

The level of fear depends on two factors: Prospect – How far ahead and how wide one can view from a point on the street Refuge – How many potential hiding places there are people to jump out from (Modelling fear in an urban environment, 2010)

Table 1 Prospect - refuge

2.2. Broken windows theory "Consider a building with a few broken windows. If the windows are not repaired, the tendency is for vandals to break a few more windows.

Eventually, they may even break into the building, and if it's unoccupied, perhaps become squatters may light fires inside. Or consider a sidewalk.

Some litter accumulates. Soon, more litter accumulates. Eventually, people even start leaving bags of trash from take-out restaurants there or breaking into cars."

- Wilson and Kelling (1982) (Broken windows theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2015) The theory advances the fact that less care over the maintenance of an area repels users from it thereby inviting crime. This theory varies with the context that is chosen and hence an 19

indigenous research is most essential to identify the elements of the street which could be the possible “Broken windows”.

2.3. The theory of new urbanism “We advocate the restructuring of public policy and development practices to support the following principles: neighbourhoods should be diverse in use and population; communities should be designed for the pedestrian and transit as well as the car; cities and towns should be shaped by physically defined and universally accessible public spaces and community institutions; urban places should be framed by architecture and landscape design that celebrate local history, climate, ecology, and building practice” – The Charter of new urbanism (New Urbanism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 2015) The theory of new urbanism brings again the importance of mixed use developments where there is casual surveillance on the street precincts. It advocates the importance of surveillance on the streets as an essential element for the psychological safety of the users.

3. Study methodology Surveys and subsequent research have been carried out to evolve a methodology specific to the context of India. It involves the identification of the factors to be studied, the setting of scores for each, the required field work and the parameters to be studied and documented, the matrix to evaluate the factors, the process of validation and the arriving of the final results.

20

PRE-VISIT STUDY

SITE VISIT

•Identification of the factors •Contextualisation of the Broken windows theory •Preparation of the score-finding matrix

•Understanding the development •Preparation of base map •Plotting of the perspective points •Documentation of the elements considered •Observation of the people's behavioural patterns •Surveys regarding the safety in the development

•Preparation of the maps of the documented data •Filling of the matrix and arriving of the cumulative SEI scores •Ranging of the SEI scores POST-VISIT DATA •Preparation of the SEI gradient map PROCESSING

•Identification of the safe and unsafe zones •Classification of the streets in the developments according to the kind of use and choosing of case examples •Computation of the contribution of each factor in the sense of safety of the INITIAL ANALYSIS chosen examples

•Comparison of the SEI scores and the actual behavioual patterns observed on field and the subsequent surveys taken VALIDATION

FINAL ANALYSIS

•Conclusion of the effect of each factor within each development •Comparison of the effects of each factor between both developments •Inference showing the weightage of each factor in deciding the sense of security

Chart 1 Study methodology – an outline

21

3.1. Pre-visit study 3.1.1. Identification of the factors

FACTORS INFLUENCING SENSE OF SECURITY KIND OF DEVELOPMENT

PROSPECTREFUGE

BROKEN WINDOWS

SURVEILLANCE (NEW URBANISM)

INDIVIDUAL FACTORS

TIME OF THE DAY

DAY OF THE WEEK

ORGANIC

VIEW RANGE (Constant)

STREET ELEMENTS (Constant)

FORMAL SURVEILLANCE (Constant)

GENDER

MORNING

WEEKDAY

PLANNED

REFUGE POINTS (Constant)

STREET LIGHTING (Constant)

INFORMAL SURVEILLANCE (Variable)

AGE

AFTERNOON

WEEKEND

TRAFFIC LEVEL (Variable)

PEOPLE ACTVITY (Variable)

PEOPLE GROUPS (Variable)

EVENING

NIGHT

Chart 2 Factors influencing the sense of security

The factors have been identified through brain storming and significant research on the three theories considered (which have been discussed earlier). Some of these factors are constant and some vary with time.

3.1.1.1. Kind of development The mixed use developments considered are classified into two based on the planning and nature of development. India being a nation with rich history, mostly all of its cities are equipped with both kinds of streets. The categories being organic and planned.

3.1.1.1.1. Organic development An organic development is one that has evolved naturally with the growing needs of the people of the region without any prior planning. It mainly refers to those developments of the past.

3.1.1.1.2. Planned development A planned development is one that has been developed through proper planning by the governmental bodies applying zoning laws and principles. This relates to the recent urban developments.

22

3.1.1.2. Prospect-refuge The view range and refuge points are considered as factors as specified in the Prospectrefuge theory. These both are constant and do not vary with time.

3.1.1.2.1. View range The view range refers to the area of the extents a person with normal eyesight can view from a given point in a street 3.1.1.2.2. Refuge points Refuge points are generally hideouts in a street network that could act as possible entrapment

spots.

They

are

visual

blockages.

Figure 6 Refuge point - an example

3.1.1.3. Broken windows The term ‘Broken windows’ is in general a metaphor to represent the elements of the street that disrupt social order. Hence, all elements in a street that are found to influence the social order are listed and are categorised as street elements, street lighting, traffic levels and people groups.

3.1.1.3.1. Street elements The basic physical elements that comprise a street such as the roads, pavements, sewers and such are considered here. Their state of ill-maintenance and their subsequent effects on the users are studied. These factors are constant with time, however they vary with the nature of the individual (gender and age) 3.1.1.3.2. Street lighting Street lights have a very significant impact on the sense of security for adequate lighting is a pre-requisite in any safety criteria. Nights on the streets are often feared due to many reasons and street lighting is one among them. Inadequate street lighting can deter the sense of security manifold. It is considered constant for the position of the street lights are not subject to change.

3.1.1.3.3. Traffic level The level of traffic is noted. It is found to vary with time. Morning and evening peak hours are found to be with high vehicular traffic levels along the arterial roads due to the studying 23

and working population. Afternoons experience a drop in traffic level. Night time also maintains a fairly high traffic level till 10:00 p.m.

3.1.1.3.4. People groups It is a common spectacle in every street to find people standing as groups. Grouping is a general human tendency. A common gender or a common age or a common locality or a common activity tend to serve as a factor that groups people. However, some groups are found to be beneficial to the sense of security and some are not. Their impacts, hence, have to be studied. The people groups also vary with time.

3.1.1.4. Surveillance (New Urbanism) Surveillance, also commonly called as the ‘eyes on the street’ effect, has a very significant impact on the sense of safety in a city. It is a common belief that a street with rich people activity is safe. This is basically because, the user has full confidence that he/she cannot be attacked in a place where so much people are present. Thus, this boosts the sense of security.

However this too varies with time. It is categories as formal, informal and casual surveillance.

3.1.1.4.1. Informal surveillance It is the surveillance from the buildings abutting the street. It is the reason why a street with vendors or open shops are considered safe. Considering this factor, building facades have been classified into four categories: 1. Open commercial – Shops that are open and have direct sightlines into the street.

These offer a high range of security.

2. Direct residential – Residences that start directly from the street line with compound walls. They are ranged second because the street is directly outside the residence and hence any mishap in the street can invite the people in the residences with ease. Also, most people in such residence, spend their time on the outer verandahs or thinnais thereby improving the sense of security in such streets.

3. Enclosed commercial – Showrooms and such buildings that have high plinths and are enclosed. These do not offer high visibility into the streets. However, the use of this building being of commercial or public value, it invites a lot of users, who inturn make they place unintentionally safe. Hence this is offered the third range.

24

4. Compounded residential - Residences that have compound walls. These prove negative in terms of the sense of security of the abutting street because they do not have any sightlines into the street and any issue on the street would harly be heard to the users inside. Hence, these kinds of buildings are offered a fourth range. Buildings that are abandoned or do not have sightlines into the street are classified into this category.

Figure 7 Informal surveillance – classification

3.1.1.4.2. Formal surveillance This includes the surveillance offered by police men or security guards. This is in general a constant factor.

3.1.1.4.3. People activity (Casual surveillance) The passers-by account for this factor. As in general, the more the number of people on the street, the higher is the sense of safety. This varies significantly with time. This is not just a factor bust also can be used as an evidence to prove for or against the other factors.

25

3.1.1.5. Individual factors The sense of security is initially being decided by the personal nature of the user. It varies with gender and age. There can be many other factors such as disabilities, social status or educational status too.

3.1.1.5.1. Gender The factors that have been discussed above create different impacts among men and women.

Among them, women are found to be more sensitive than men to social and physical disorder. (Wekerle, 1994) “Women’s desertation of certain punlic places in cities is a signal just like the canaries in mine, that the place is in trouble” - William H. Whyte.

Hence, through surveys and field observations, the behavioural patterns of women in the streets considered are noted to serve as evidences for validation.

3.1.1.5.2. Age It is found that fear increases with age, for as we grow older we become aware and sensitive of the environment around us and become vulnerable to the forces that could victimise us.

3.1.1.6. Time of the day The time of the day alters the variable factors discussed above and thereby significantly alters the sense of security. A street that may seem safe in the morning may not seem the same at night due to insufficient street lighting. And hence, observations at four times of a day is required to substantiate this. The four times of the day may be chosen as 

Morning peak hours (8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.)



Afternoon (12:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.)



Evening peak hours (4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.)



Night (8:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.)

26

Variable factors

Morning

Afternoon

Evening

Night

High

Low

High

Moderate

Traffic level People groups

Vary based on the user behaviour and other miscellaneous reasons

Informal

More or less remain the same

surveillance People activity

High

Low

High

Moderate

Table 2 Effect of the time of the day on the variable factors

3.1.1.7. Day of the week Similarly, the day of the week also alters the variable factors and consequently the sense of safety. The days of the week are categories into weekdays and weekends.

Variable factors Traffic level People groups

Weekday

Weekend

High

Low

Vary based on the user behaviour and other miscellaneous reasons

Informal surveillance People activity

High

Low

High

Low

Table 3 Effect of the day of the week on the variable factors

3.1.2. Contextualisation of the broken windows theory The listed elements under the broken windows category were graded and allotted scores through surveys. Surveys were taken among people of varied gender, age and class and from them inferences were made.

27

Figure 8 Broken windows theory - Contextualisation - Ranging

Each of the above element was posed to the person undertaking the survey and they were to rate the element in one among the above five ranges.

The results were interpolated and the cumulative scores for each of the above elements were arrived at.

Chart 3 Broken windows theory - Contextualisation - Initial results

These results were then consolidated into five ranges as follows:

28

Chart 4 Broken Windows theory - Contextualisation - Condensed results

The elements with ranges 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 were awarded the scores of -2, -1, 0, 1 and 2 respectively.

3.1.3. Preparation of the score-finding matrix And thus all these above-discussed factors were categorised under the following nine categories: 1. Prospect Range 2. Refuge 3. Traffic level 4. Street lighting 5. Street elements 6. People groups 7. Informal surveillance 8. Formal surveillance 9. People activity

29

These factors are studied with relation to perspective points that are plotted all along the pedestrian points in the street network. The intervals of the grids is related to the degree of accuracy that is required.

Figure 9 Perspective points

The factors are assessed with range circles. Again, the number of range circles depends on the degree of accuracy required. The farthest range circle is of radius 35 m. These range circles are used to find the magnitude of each factor. For instance, an element in the inner circle will Figure 10 Range circles

have a higher impact that that on the outer circle.

30

Table 4 Score-finding matrix

31

3.2. Site visit 3.2.1. Understanding the development The entire development is understood with relation to the location in the city, the street networks, use pattern of the development, kind of planning and significant landmarks. The arterial roads, feeder roads and residential streets are identified.

3.2.2. Preparation of the base map The base map of the development is prepared using visual surveys and satellite images.

3.2.3. Plotting of the perspective points The perspective points are plotted along the pedestrian routes in the development at an interval of 10 m. The points are staggered to achieve a fair degree of accuracy.

3.2.4. Documentation of the elements considered The location and nature of all the considered elements are documented through visual surveys.

3.2.5. Observation of the people’s behavioural patterns The behavioural patterns of various kinds of the users are observed keenly and noted. This will be useful in the process of validation.

3.2.6. Surveys regarding the safety in the development Surveys are taken in each street to potential users such as the street vendors, passers-by, students, pilgrims, tourists and shoppers. The answers are recorded and may be used in the process of validation.

32

3.3. Post-visit data processing 3.3.1. Preparation of the maps of the documented data The following maps are prepared from the documented data of the elements: 1. Refuge map 2. Broken windows - traffic level map 3. Broken windows - street lighting map 4. Broken windows - street elements 5. Broken windows – people groups 6. Informal surveillance map 7. Formal surveillance map 8. People activity map

3.3.2. Filling of the matrix and the arriving of the cumulative SEI scores The score-finding matrix is then filled with the help of these maps set against the perspective points map done earlier. The cumulative SEI (Street Environment Index) scores are thus computed.

3.3.3. Ranging of the SEI scores The final scores are then found for both the developments, in this case. The highest and the lowest values are then found and the entire range is divided into equal intervals and ranges and appropriate colours are assigned to them.

In the studied development, the highest value was 43 and the lowest value was -95. The entire range was divided into intervals of 10.

33

Figure 11 Ranging the SEI scores

3.3.4. Preparation of the gradient map The final scores and their corresponding ranges are then transferred onto a score map with the perspective points plotted and the map is coloured with each point given the colour assigned to its range value. Thus, the final gradient map is arrived at.

3.4. Initial Analysis 3.4.1. Identification of the safe and unsafe zones From the final gradient map, the safe and unsafe zones in the settlement are evident visually and they are sorted out for analysis.

3.4.2. Classification of the streets in the developments The streets in the developments are then classified into three categories based on the nature of use and connectivity for further analysis. They are: 1. Arterial roads – The streets that act as major connecting roads and cannot be bypassed 34

2. Feeder roads – The streets that branch from the major arterial roads and can be bypassed 3. Residential lanes – The narrow residential streets located within the mixed use developments For each of these three categories, case examples are chosen for study.

3.4.3. Computation of the contribution of each factor in the sense of safety of the chosen examples In each of the chosen case examples, the contribution of each factor is represented through bar charts for a visual understanding.

3.5. Validation The SEI scores and the actual behavioural patterns and the survey results are then compared in each of the case examples chosen. This is called the process of validation. If the results match, then the contribution of each factor is found to be right. If they don’t, then conflicts arise and the factors that have over-acted to cause the conflict must be identified and enunciated. This is a very important point in the course of the study and should not be overlooked.

3.6. Final Analysis 3.6.1. Conclusion of the effect of each factor within each development Thus, within each development, the overall contribution of each factor is computed and concluded.

3.6.2. Comparison of the effects of each factor between both developments Next, the contributions of the factor are compared between both developments are the differences are reasoned.

3.6.3. Inference And finally, the contributions of each factor on the whole is inferred.

35

4. Case study 1 – Town hall road, Madurai 4.1. Site visit 4.1.1. Understanding the development

Figure 12 Town hall road - location map

Town hall road is located within the organic settlement of Madurai. It is a perpendicular street traversing all the concentric streets of the settlement (West Veli street, West Marret street, West Perumal Maistry street, West Masi street, West Avani Moola street and West Chithirai street) and leading axially to the West Gopuram. The development is majorly composed of electrical and mobile shops. There are also an ample amount of lodges.

Residences are found within narrow clusters and lanes. The street is very crowded at all times with a higher proportion of pilgrims and shoppers. Tourists prefer this path to reach the temple because it is the closes to the Railway Station and Periyar Bus stand.

36

4.1.2. Preparation of base map

Figure 13 Town hall road - base map

37

4.1.3. Plotting of the perspective points

Figure 14 Town hall road - perspective points

38

4.2. Post-visit data processing 4.2.1. Documentation maps

Figure 15 Town hall road - refuge map

39

Figure 16 Town hall road - broken windows theory - street elements map

40

Figure 17 Town hall road - broken windows theory - traffic elements map

41

Figure 18 Town hall road - street lighting map

42

Figure 19 Town hall road - broken windows theory - people groups map

43

Figure 20 Town hall road – Informal surveillance map

44

Figure 21 Town hall road - formal surveillance

45

Figure 22 Town hall road - People activity (casual surveillance) map

46

4.2.2. Filling the score-finding matrix

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

Table 5 Town hall road - consolidated score-finding matrix

523 points were set and the SEI scores and their corresponding ranges were found. They were plotted in the map to form the final SEI gradient map.

54

4.2.3. Preparation of SEI gradient map

Figure 23 Town hall road - Final SEI Gradient map

55

4.3. Analysis 4.3.1. Choosing the case examples

Figure 24 Town hall road - Chosen case examples

The 9 chosen case examples are 1. Arterial roads: a. West Chithirai Steet b. West Masi street c. Town hall road d. West marret street 2. Feeder roads: a. Valayalkara street b. Dhanappa Mudali street c. Perumal theppam south lane 3. Residential lanes: a. Lane near west tower street b. Vellalar street 56

4.3.2. The impact of the factors in the case examples 4.3.2.1. Arterial roads: 4.3.2.1.a. West Chithirai street

Figure 25 West Chithirai

Figure 26 West Chithirai street - photograph

street - map

Figure 27 West Chithirai street - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match. The high pedestrian levels foster the sense of safety

57

4.3.2.1.b. West Masi street

Figure 28 West Masi street -

Figure 29 West Masi street - photograph

map

Figure 30 West Masi steet – influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) do not match. The heavily broken pavements have caused the low scores. But being a major arterial road, people do not mind them and use them.

58

4.3.2.1.c. Town hall road

Figure 31 Town hall road - map

Figure 32 Town hall road - photograph

Figure 33 Town hall road – influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match. The open commercial shops offer good surveillance thus boosting the sense of safety.

59

4.3.2.1.d. West Marret street

Figure 34 West Marret

Figure 35 West Marret street - photograph

street - map

Figure 36 West Marret street - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match. There are no open shops in this area. There are just lodges with less surveillance levels. And people activity is also comparatively less. Hence, the low scores.

60

4.3.2.2. Feeder roads 4.3.2.2.a. Valayalkara street

Figure 37 Valayalkara street - map

Figure 38 Valayakara street - photograph

Figure 39 Valayalkara street – influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match. Despite low prospect ranges, the informal surveillance offered by the bangle shops of this region promotes a high sense of security.

61

4.3.2.2.b. Dhanappa Mudhali street

Figure 41 Dhanappa Mudhali street - photograph

Figure 40 Dhanappa Mudhali street - map

Figure 42 Dhanappa Mudhali street - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match. There are no open shops in this area.

There are just lodges with less surveillance levels. And people activity is also comparatively less. Hence, the low scores.

62

4.3.2.2.c. Perumal theppam south street – outer lane

Figure 43 Perumal theppam south street outer lane - map

Figure 44 Perumal theppam south street outer lane - photograph

Figure 45 Perumal theppam south street - outer lane – influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match. This street has just the back wall of the shops facing the inner lane. And on the other side too there are just lodges with low surveillance value. Also, the street has less people activity. Hence the scores are low.

63

Perumal theppam south street – inner lane

Figure 46 Perumal theppam south street inner lane - map

Figure 47 Perumal theppam south street inner lane - photograph

Figure 48 Perumal theppam south street - inner lane – influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match. Despite low prospect ranges, the open markets and shops offer a safe lane. The contrasting features of the outer and inner lanes of the Perumal theppam south lane are to be noted

64

4.3.2.3. Residential lanes 4.3.2.3.a. Lane near West Tower street

Figure 49 Lane near West

Figure 50 Lane near West Tower street -

photograph

Tower street - map

Figure 51 Lane near West Tower street - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) do not match. The residential lane is perfectly guarded by the shops along the West Tower street and hence, the lane is safer than what is represented.

65

4.3.2.3.b. Vellalar street

Figure 52 Vellalar street - map

Figure 53 Vellalar street - photograph

Figure 54 Vellalar street - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match. The residential lane is maintained safe by the direct residential buildings along the street line.

66

4.4. Inference 4.4.1. Contribution of each factor to the overall sense of security

Chart 5 Town hall road – contribution of each factor to the overall sense of security

From the above consolidated bar chart it is found that informal surveillance has the highest impact on the sense of security. It is followed by the people activity (casual surveillance).

On the whole, surveillance has been found to overthrow the effects of the other factors.

4.4.2. The impact of each factor 4.4.2.1. Prospect range The prospect range is found to be low since, the development being organic, the lanes are quite narrow. However the low scores of prospect range have been compensated by the factor of informal surveillance. On the other hand, when the prospect range is high and the informal surveillance is low, the point is scored unsafe and is validated the same way too.

Hence the factor of prospect range is found to have a low impact on the sense of security.

67

4.4.2.2. Refuge Refuge points are found at many locations and most of the narrow lanes cutting off from the main streets can also seem to be refuges. However, the effect of the refuge points is being largely eclipsed by the effect of surveillance. Unless and until it is a very deliberate entrapment spot, people do not seem to mind of it and are kind of used to it. Hence, the refuge points do not seem to deter the sense of security greatly and their effect is very low.

4.4.2.3. Traffic level Traffic congestion has become a way of life in India and the people of Indian origin have adapted to it and have become immune to the effects of traffic congestion. However, foreign tourists who used the street revealed that the traffic levels were a major problem but with the local people it wasn’t much of a threat. Streets without much traffic are welcome and are liked by the people but they also have developed the tendency to bear streets with high traffic. So traffic level doesn’t have a high effect on the sense of security.

4.4.2.4. Street lighting All arterial and feeder roads are well lit. Also, the lights from the shops also add to the value of night lighting. However, the residential lanes lack proper lighting and appear dark in the nights and may cause issues. But none was reported in the surveys. The street lighting has a high effect on the sense of security at nights.

4.4.2.5. Street elements The maintenance of the street elements do not have much of an effect on the sense of security since the people have got used to the unclean conditions. The effect of the street elements have been overpowered by the factors of surveillance. Nevertheless, well maintained street elements and conditions do well to improve the standard of living, public health and the character of the street.

4.4.2.6. People groups People groups seems to have a fairly good impact on the sense of security. Though the factors of surveillance have entirely stole the show, the presence of positive or negative people groups have a significant impact on the behavioural patterns and the residual sense of security of the users.

68

4.4.2.7. Informal surveillance This factor is found to have the highest influence on the sense of security. This development being full of shops and commercial zones, the sense of security prevailing in the area seems to be very high despite low prospect ranges and street elements nature. This factor has been found to outdo all other factors and promote the sense of security. Also if this factor is found to go negative, then they greatly reduce the sense of security despite the other factors proving opposite. It is also noteworthy that the informal surveillance varies with the day of the week i.e., on weekdays all shops are open whereas on weekends, especially on Sundays, most shops tend to be closed. This reduces the sense of security on weekends. However, as far as Town hall road is concerned, most shops are operational all-round the week due to high tourist usage.

4.4.2.8. Formal surveillance This factor does have a good impact on the sense of security. It is not a major problem if it is absent in med use developments, however, their presence can boost the sense of security.

4.4.2.9. People activity (casual surveillance) This factor is also found to have a high contribution towards the sense of security of the area and has the ability to compensate for all the negatives in other factors inclusive of informal surveillance. This is evident from the fact that, in Town hall road, people activity is always high due to the tourists and pilgrims who visit Meenakshi Amman temple and this can compensate for the low informal surveillance during Sundays. However, this factor is variable too and in this case varies greatly with the temple timings. Most importantly afternoons face a drop in the people activity due to the scorching sun and the closed temples.

But the reduced casual surveillance is being compensated by the informal surveillance from the shops nearby. And thus these factors balance each other and also the other low factors and offer good SEI scores.

69

5. Case study 2 – Anna nagar 80 feet road, Madurai 5.1. Site visit 5.1.1. Understanding the development

Figure 55 Anna nagar 80 feet road - location map

Anna nagar is a planned residential settlement that is located towards the north of River Vaigai. The development of this area started only around the 1970s. The 80 feet road is the main arterial road towards the east of the settlement. It, too, was initially a residential street but later on developed into a commercial street due to the high people usage. And thus, the development evolved as a mixed-use precinct. The residential areas are located on either sides of the main 80 feet road. Grid planning has been followed. Parks also have been planned at the centre of residential areas. This road serves as a major transit road for people to reach Anna nagar or to travel elsewhere from it. It has four significant junctions namely – Apollo hospital junction, Golcha complex junction, Suguna stores junction and Ambiga theatre junction (In order from North to South).

70

5.1.2. Preparation of base map

Figure 56 Anna nagar 80 feet road - base map

71

5.1.3. Plotting of the perspective points

Figure 57 Anna nagar 80 feet road - perspective points

72

5.2. Post- visit data processing 5.2.1. Documentation maps

Figure 58 Anna nagar 80 feet road - refuge map

73

Figure 59 Anna nagar 80 feet road - broken windows theory - street elements map

74

Figure 60 Anna nagar 80 feet road - broken windows theory - traffic elements map

75

Figure 61 Anna nagar 80 feet road - street lighting map

76

Figure 62 Anna nagar 80 feet road - broken windows theory - people groups

77

Figure 63 Anna nagar 80 feet road – informal surveillance map

78

Figure 64 Anna nagar 80 feet road - formal surveillance map

79

Figure 65 Anna nagar 80 feet road - people activity (casual surveillance) map

80

4.2.2. Filling the score-finding matrix

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

Table 6 Anna nagar 80 feet road - consolidated score-finding matrix

480 points were set and the SEI scores and their corresponding ranges were found. Three points had been eliminated because they were found later-on to overlap with built elements.

The SEI ranges were then plotted in the map to form the final SEI gradient map.

88

4.2.3. Preparation of SEI gradient map

Figure 66 Anna nagar 80 feet road - final SEI gradient map

89

5.3. Analysis 5.3.1. Choosing the case examples 12 case examples are chosen here.

They are: 1. Arterial roads: a. Apollo hospital junction b. Golcha complex junction c. Suguna store junction d. Anna nagar main road through Suguna stores junction 2.

3.

Feeder roads: a.

Ulavar sandhai road

b.

A cross lane

Residential lanes: a.

New LIG colony

b.

Muthamizh kudiyiruppu

c.

4.

Church street

Parks: a.

Park in the NW sector

b.

Park in the SW sector in front of the church

5.

Also, the nature of the pavements are studied from a point along the 80 feet road

Figure 67 Anna nagar 80 feet road - Chosen case examples

90

5.3.1.1. Arterial roads 5.3.1.1.a. Apollo hospital junction

Figure 68 Apollo hospital

Figure 69 Apollo hospital junction - photograph

junction - map

Figure 70 Apollo hospital junction - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match.

This junction has comparatively very less people activity and informal surveillance. Hence it appears unsafe despite the very high prospect range.

The low street elements score due to the open sewer and bushes also cause the effect.

91

5.3.1.1.b. Golcha complex junction

Figure 71 Golcha complex

Figure 72 Golcha complex junction - photograph

junction - map

Figure 73 Apollo hospital junction - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match.

The low informal surveillance accounts for the drop in scores. However, the point being a junction, people activity is naturally a little high and it tries and compensates the less informal surveillance values. Thus, the junction appears safe only during peak hours when there are people.

92

5.3.1.1.c. Suguna stores junction

Figure 74 Suguna stores

Figure 75 Suguna stores junction - photograph

junction - map

Figure 76 Suguna stores junction - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match.

This junction, being the main bus stop for the entire development, has a lot of people activity all round the clock. Also, due to this reason small shops and vendors who offer informal surveillance have stationed themselves here. Hence this junction appears to be the safest point in this area.

93

5.3.1.1.d. Anna nagar main road through Suguna stores junction

Figure 77 Anna nagar main

Figure 78 Anna nagar main road through Suguna stores

road through Suguna stores

junction - photograph

junction - map

Figure 79 Anna nagar main road through Suguna stores junction - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) do not match. The bar in this main road is of so much trouble as recorded in the surveys from the shopkeepers and passers-by. But the SEI scores portray the factor of informal surveillance over shadowing the effect of the bar (street elements score). But in reality, the bar has far standing effects.

94

5.3.1.2. Feeder roads 5.3.1.2.a. Ulavar sandhai road

Figure 80 Ulavar sandhai

Figure 81 Ulavar sandhai road - photograph

road - map

Figure 82 Ulavar sandhai road - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) do not match. This road is scored low due to low informal surveillance from the compounded residences on one side of the road. However, the high people activity due to the market located here compensates for it and produces a positive sense of safety unlike the scores found.

95

5.3.1.2.b. A cross lane

Figure 83 Anna nagar 80 feet road – a cross

Figure 84 Anna nagar 80 feet road – a cross

lane - map

lane - photograph

Figure 85 Anna nagar 80 feet road – a cross lane - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys match.

Cross lanes such as this have just compounded residences and hence have low surveillance value. The people activity along these streets is also less.

Thus the lack of surveillance has rendered these cross lanes with low SEI scores.

96

5.3.1.3. Residential lanes 5.3.1.3.a. New LIG colony

Figure 86 New LIG colony -

Figure 87 New LIG colony - photograph

map

Figure 88 Ulavar sandhai road - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys match.

The direct residential buildings abutting this lane account for good informal surveillance values with result in a positive SEI score despite low prospect ranges.

97

5.3.1.3.b. Muthamizh kudiyiruppu

Figure 89 Muthamizh

Figure 90 Muthamizh kudiyiruppu - photograph

kudiyiruppu - map

Figure 91 Muthamizh kudiyiruppu - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) do not match. The lane directly faces the bar in Anna nagar main road towards Suguna stores junction. Surveys reveal that the bar is of so much nuisance in their entire street. Hence this street element ‘bar’ has overshadowed the factors of surveillance and has far standing ill effects than computed.

98

5.3.1.3.c. Church street

Figure 92 Church street - map

Figure 93 Church street - photograph

Figure 94 Church street - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys match.

These residential streets have compounded residences and structures like hospitals only which contribute very poorly to the informal surveillance.

The people activity in the zone is moderate. Hence the low SEI scores.

99

5.3.1.4. Parks 5.3.1.4.a. Park in the NW sector

Figure 95 Park in NW sector –

Figure 96 Park in NW sector - photograph

location map



The park is surrounded by bushes on most sides. These bushes have their foliage at eye level thus blocking vision into the park.



There are water tanks and such refuge spaces too.



Thus a profound lack of surveillance is observed in this park.



Also, young men gather here and smoke. Since most parts of the park are concealed from the exterior it is quite possible for any anti-social activity to happen.

Figure 97 Park in NW sector – Plan and



Also the park is quite ill-maintained

section

Validation: Field observations reveal that the park is not under use by the children of the neighbourhood. The lack of surveillance and proper maintenance seem to be the apparent reasons.

100

5.3.1.4.b. Park in the SW sector in front of the church

Figure 98 Park in SW sector -

Figure 99 Park in SW sector - photograph

location map



The park has tall trees around and not bushes. Thus every part of the park is visually connected to the exterior.



The park is in front of the church and hence there is rich people activity.



The park has benches in which middle aged men sit and chat. This improves the casual surveillance factor and the overall SEI.



However, the maintenance could have been better. Nevertheless, the children of the area use the park

Figure 100 Park in SW sector – Plan and

regularly

section

Validation: Field observations reveal that the park is under daily use. Children play cricket there. Middle and old age people sit and watch. It appears safe and is located in the centre of the locality. Ample surveillance and people activity have contributed to the safety that is prevailing.

101

5.3.1.5. Pavements along the 80 feet road

Figure 101 Pavements along

Figure 102 Pavements along the 80 feet road - photograph

the 80 feet road - map

Figure 103 Pavements along the 80 feet road - influence of the factors

Validation: The SEI scores and the actuals (behavioural patterns and surveys) match.

Broken pavements have been rated too fearful by many of the respondents of the Broken windows survey. And it is the reason very the very low SEI scores along the pavements of the 80 feet road. Hence, most people avoid the pavements and use the nearby road side instead.

102

5.4 Inference 5.4.1. Contribution of each factor to the overall sense of security

Chart 6 Anna nagar 80 feet road - contribution of each factor to the overall sense of security

From the above consolidated bar chart it is found that people activity (casual surveillance) has the highest impact on the sense of security. It is followed by the informal surveillance.

On the whole, surveillance has been found to overthrow the effects of the other factors.

4.4.2. The impact of each factor 4.4.2.1. Prospect range The prospect range is found to be high in most parts of the development since it is planned as grids. However their effect on the sense of security is something to be questioned. It is seen in almost all cases that the other factors have shadowed the effect of this factor. Hence it is found to have a low impact on the sense of security.

4.4.2.2. Refuge Refuge points are found along the streets and many such are even found on the pavements.

The users are not much deterred by their presence. They are not found to have much effect on the behaviour of the people for they have learned to adapt to it.

103

4.4.2.3. Traffic level Traffic is high along the 80 feet road. Congestion seems to occur during the peak hours at the junctions. It causes quite some discomfort in the pedestrian circulation. However, the road is a main connecting road and cannot be by-passed. Therefore people kind of get along with it and hence their behavioural patterns have been altered in practice. Thus, the effect of traffic level on the sense of security is fairly low.

4.4.2.4. Street lighting The 80 feet road is lit by central lighting along the median. The light is highly sufficient.

Also, the other feeder lanes and the residential lanes are also well lit. Hence, lighting is not a major issue in this development. Street lighting has a significant impact on the sense of security, especially at nights.

4.4.2.5. Street elements The street elements have a relatively high impact on the sense of security in this development. Pavements are a menace in the 80 feet road. But since the road is a very crucial road, people use the sides of the roads instead. The bushes along the sides of the roads also influence the security.

Bars in this development have been found to have effect comparatively higher than predicted. Hence street elements have a significant impact on the sense of security.

4.4.2.6. People groups People groups have a relatively low impact on the sense of security. The users of the main streets have transit as their main objective and hence they do not seem to feel deterred much about the people groups.

4.4.2.7. Informal surveillance This factor is found to have a high influence on the sense of security. This development has a very low overall informal surveillance value as there are more of enclosed commercial buildings that open shops and more of compounded residences than residences that open directly into the street. This may be one of the reasons why the overall scores are low.

104

4.4.2.8. Formal surveillance This factor does have only a little impact on the sense of security for the 80 feet road being significantly wide enough, the presence of policemen on one side can’t even create much of an effect on the other side of the road. People are more busy and more in a hurry in these streets and they do not seem to bother of a presence of a policeman.

4.4.2.9. People activity (casual surveillance) This factor is found to have the highest impact on the sense of security in the development.

The overall informal surveillance being low, the people activity tries to balance the effect of the other less factors. Hence, in this development places with high people activity have been found to be safe than those with less public usage.

6. Final inferences 6.1. Contribution of each factor to the overall sense of safety

Chart 7 Contribution of each factor to the overall sense of security

Informal surveillance is found to have the highest impact on the sense of security. It is followed by the people activity. And thus, it is found that surveillance is the key factor.

Although the score of prospect range lies a little higher from all processes of validation it is found that street elements contribute a higher deal than the prospect elements. Also among 105

the street elements, bars and pavements have the highest impact. Street lighting has a crucial role when considered the safety at nights. People groups are found to have a fairly high impact too.

Table 7 Contribution of each factor to the overall sense of safety

6.2. The key factors and their effects 6.2.1. Surveillance Surveillance is found to be the most crucial element and hence mixed use developments that promote surveillance are scored safe. This can be done in two ways – by having open commercial zones or by having features such as temples that attract high people crowds.

This factor also has the effect to subdue the ill effects of other factors

6.2.2. Street elements Street elements such as broken pavements or sewers have become the part and parcel of life of every Indian so most seem not to care much of them if the other factors are positive.

However, this ill-maintained elements can be harmful in some circumstances and can even end up fatal. It is hence the responsibility of the governing bodies and the users to maintain their surroundings in a proper way to ensure physical and psychological safety.

Bars have high ill effects on their surroundings and hence they have to located in places where they cause minimal effects.

6.2.3. Street lighting Street lighting is the major factor for safety at night and hence must be properly designed.

Adequate location of street lights and their proper maintenance have vital roles in the sense of security at night.

106

6.3. Comparing the organic and the planned developments The overall scores of Town hall road have been found to be higher than that of Anna nagar.

Even from surveys and interviews with policemen this data has been validated.

“The intense circulation of the people is the key. No thief or any such criminal would dare perform a crime here for they know they would definitely be caught. So no such criminal offence has occurred here and the streets are perfectly safe” - The police on Town hall road “Anna nagar is a relatively unsafe zone in Madurai for everybody is in a rush and no one would bother to see if someone has been hurt or someone is crying for help.”

- The police on Anna nagar Hence it can be concluded beyond doubt that the levels of surveillance have caused the difference in scores between both kinds of developments.

Town hall road has more of commercial zones than Anna nagar as Anna nagar was never meant to a commercial area. Now, the 80 feet road is considered to be commercial but it has only huge showrooms and such. They do not have direct sight access onto the roads and also do not attract high people traffic. Whereas in Town hall road, most of all shops are open and to human scale. Above all that, there is the Meenakshi Amman temple that draws a huge pilgrim population.

In Anna nagar, everyone is in a rush while in Town hall road, people move around and shop with ease. So naturally the casual surveillance by the people in Anna nagar is lesser than that of the people at Town hall road. This is the cause of the manifestation of the impact of the street elements such as bars in Anna nagar. For, there are bars in Town hall road too (in West Perumal Maistry street). But no surveys or observations have revealed panic or discomfort.

“Mixed use developments have always been found to be safer than other kinds of zones of the city. The reason for that in the Indian context has been brought out as ample surveillance.”

107

Bibliography Broken windows theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2015, September 28). Retrieved from

Wikipedia,

the

free

encyclopedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory Madurai - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2015, September 15). Retrieved from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madurai Mixed-use development - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2015, July 9). Retrieved from Wikipedia,

the

free

encyclopedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed-

use_development Modelling fear in an urban environment. (2010). AUNT-SUE Research Symposium (pp. 1011). London: London Metropolitan University.

New Urbanism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2015, September 15). Retrieved from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Urbanism Wekerle, G. R. (1994). Safe cities: Guidelines for Planning, Design and Management. Van Nostrand Reinhold.

108