MA Urban Design Dissertation by kolade Akiyode

HOW CAN URBAN DESIGN BE USED AS A TOOL IN REDUCING THE PERCEPTION OF CRIME IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN LAGOS? Akolade Akiyode Ma Urban Design Cardiff University 2013.

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C U/C U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C U/C U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

Akolade Akiyode C1 239226 Ma Urban Design C P T 8 5 4

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

ABSTRACT This research project explores how the spatial layout and design of residential neighbourhoods in Lagos Metropolis are influencing people’s perception of crime. To understand this, a systematic analysis of the conditions and factors that contribute to crime opportunities was conducted. A study of literature on different situational crime prevention strategies and how they interrelate, served as a basis in isolating specific data needed for this research. Results from the analyses were used to define design strategies that reduce crime risk cues of the built environment. These design strategies, were then used in generating different prototypes of a residential neighbourhood which was identified for an intervention to address its “perceived crime risk status”. The design intervention was based on specific evidence gathered for this project. It does not propose a “one-size-fits-all” solution in mitigating crime opportunities. This due to atypical contextual variables of crime, but can serve as a guidance for the design of residential neighbourhoods in Lagos.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my deepest appreciation to all those who provided me the possibility to complete this dissertation. A special gratitude to my supervisor, Mr. Mike Biddulph, whose contribution and encouragement, helped me to coordinate and successfully complete this dissertation. Furthermore, I would also like to acknowledge with much appreciation the crucial role of Louie Sieh, for her stimulating support and suggestions which helped to form the basis for this research. I would like to express my gratitude towards my parents and members of my family for their support, co-operation and encouragement towards the completion of this dissertation.

DECLARATION CANDIDATE’S ID NUMBER CANDIDATE’S SURNAME

Please circle appropriate value Mr / Miss / Ms / Mrs / Rev / Dr / Other please specify …………………..

CANDIDATE’S FULL FORENAMES DECLARATION This work has not previously been accepted in substance for any degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature for any degree. Signed …………………………………………………………. (candidate)

Date …………………………

STATEMENT 1 This dissertation is being submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of ………………………….…… (insert MA, MSc, MBA, MScD, LLM etc, as appropriate) Signed …………………………………………………………. (candidate)

Date …………………………

STATEMENT 2 This dissertation is the result of my own independent work/investigation, except where otherwise stated. Other sources are acknowledged by footnotes giving explicit references. A Bibliography is appended. Signed …………………………………………………………. (candidate)

Date …………………………

STATEMENT 3 – TO BE COMPLETED WHERE THE SECOND COPY OF THE DISSERTATION IS SUBMITTED IN AN APPROVED ELECTRONIC FORMAT I confirm that the electronic copy is identical to the bound copy of the dissertation Signed …………………………………………………………. (candidate)

Date …………………………

STATEMENT 4 I hereby give consent for my dissertation, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for inter-library loan, and for the title and summary to be made available to outside organisations. Signed …………………………………………………………. (candidate)

Date …………………………

STATEMENT 5 - BAR ON ACCESS APPROVED I hereby give consent for my dissertation, if accepted, to be available for photocopying and for inter-library loans after expiry of a bar on access approved by the Graduate Development Committee. Signed …………………………………………………………. (candidate)

Date …………………………

iii

CARDIFF SCHOOL OF CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING Ethical Approval Form Student Projects (Undergraduate & Taught Masters) For those student projects which module leaders/supervisors feel require further discussion by CPLANâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Ethics Committee (SREC) this form must be completed and submitted at least TWO WEEKS before a SREC meeting to: Ruth Leo, SREC Secretary / email: LeoR@cardiff.ac.uk / Tel Ext: 74462 / Room 2.95 Glamorgan Building).

In the case of dissertations it is the responsibility of the student to submit the form, duly signed by their supervisor, and secure ethical approval prior to any fieldwork commencing. A copy of the signed form should be included by all students with their final dissertation.

Title of Project: How can urban design be used as a tool in reducing the perception of crime in residential areas in Lagos. Name of Student(s): Akolade Akiyode

Name of Supervisor/Module Leader: Mike Biddulph

Degree Programme and Level: Ma Urban Design

Recruitment Procedures: 1 Does your project include children under 16 years of age? 2 Does your project include people with learning or communication difficulties? 3 Does your project include people in custody?

Yes

N/A

x x

x x x

Consent Procedures: 8

Will you tell participants that their participation is voluntary? 9 Will you obtain written consent for participation? 10 If the research is observational, will you ask participants for their consent to being observed? 11 Will you tell participants that they may withdraw from the research at any time and for any reasons? 12 Will you give potential participants a significant period of time to consider participation?

Yes

N/A

x x x x

Possible Harm to Participants:

13 Is there any realistic risk of any participants experiencing either physical or psychological distress or discomfort?

Date: 05-06-2013

4 Is your project likely to include people involved in illegal activities? 5 Does project involve people belonging to a vulnerable group, other than those listed above? 6 Does your project include people who are, or are likely to become your clients or clients of the department in which you work? 7 Does your project include people for whom English / Welsh is not their first language?

Yes

N/A

14 Is there any realistic risk of any x participants experiencing a detriment to their interests as a result of participation? If there are any risks to the participants you must explain in the box on page 5 how you intend to minimise these risks

Data Protection: 15 Will any non-anonymised and/or personalised data be generated and/or stored? 16 Will you have access to documents containing sensitive1 data about living individuals?

Yes

N/A

If â&#x20AC;&#x153;Yesâ&#x20AC;? will you gain the consent of the individuals concerned? If you have checked any shaded area here please expand on page 5 If there are any other potential ethical issues that you think the Committee should consider please explain them in the box on page 5. It is your obligation to bring to the attention of the Committee any ethical issues not covered on this form.

TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract i Acknowledgement ii Declaration Form iii Ethics Form iv

5. CASE STUDIES 17

List of figures vii

5.1. CASE STUDY ONE 17 5.1. CASE STUDY ONE 22 5.1. CASE STUDY ONE 27

1. INTRODUCTION 2

Table of Contents vi

1.1. BACKGROUND 2 1.2. RESEARCH INTEREST 3 1.3. GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE 3 1.4. AIMS OF RESEARCH 3 1.5. RESEARCH JUSTIFICATION 4 1.6. STRUCTURE OF REPORT 4

2. LITERATURE REVIEW 6 2.1. FACTS ABOUT CRIME 6 2.2. FEAR OF CRIME 6 2.3. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND CRIME 6 2.4. CRIME AND THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 6 2.4.1. WHY CRIME PREVENTION AND THE ENVIRONMENT ? 7 2.4.2. ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME THEORIES 7 2.4.3. GATED & ENCLOSED COMMUNITIES? 8 2.5. PRINCIPLES OF SITUATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION 9

3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS 12

4.2.3. SENSE OF COMMUNITY 14 4.2.4. DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES 14 4.2.5. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT 14

6. RESEARCH CONCLUSION

6.1. DESIGN LIMITATION 33

7. DESIGN GUIDLINES 34 8. SITE EVALUTION 38 8.1. POLICY REVIEW 39 8.2. SITE ANALYSIS 40 8.3. BUILDING STRUCTURE 46 8.4. OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS

9. DESIGN EXPLORATION 9.1. DESIGN STRATEGIES 52 9.2. DESIGN PROTOTYPE 1 52 9.3. DESIGN PROTOTYPE 2 57 9.4. DESIGN PROTOTYPE 3 61 9.5. DESIGN PROTOTYPE CONCLUSION 65

4. RESEARCH DESIGN 13

10. DESIGN PROPOSAL 66

4.1. RESEARCH DESIGN 13 4.2. CRIME RISK VARIABLES & MEASUREMENT 14 4.2.1. PERCEPTIONS OF CRIME 14 4.2.2. ACTUAL CRIME RATE 14

11. DESIGN CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY 80

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES fig 1.0: Lagos Marina 1 fig 1.1: Population of Africa’s top Urban agglomerations 2 fig 1.2: Risk factors influencing crime 2 fig 1.3: Lagos Metropolitan area “The Numbers” 2 fig 2.1: Impacts of Urban crime 6 fig 2.2: The Crime triangle 7 fig. 2.3: Aerial view of a planned Gated community in Nigeria 8 fig. 2.4: An example of Neighbourhood enclosure: Privatisation of public access routes. 8 fig 2.5.1: Surveillance Opportunity 10 fig 2.5.2: Territoriality 10 fig 2.5.3: Public-private 10 fig 2.5.4. Concealment and Refuge points 11 fig 2.5.5: Target Hardening 11 fig 4.0: Research Process 13 fig 5.0: Map of Lagos Metropolis showing case study areas 15 fig 5.1: High vitality in case study one 17 fig 5.2: Activity generator case study one 17 fig 5.3: Land use Map of Case study one 17 fig 5.4: road network hierarchy of Case study one 18 fig 5.5: Street section of case study one 18 fig 5.6: Interface analysis Case study one 19 fig 5.7: Spatial heirarchy - Case study one 20 fig 5.8: Urban block interface - Case study one 20 fig 5.9: Low vitality in case study two 22 fig 5.10: Land use Map of Case study two 22 fig 5.11: Road network hierarchy of Case study two 23 fig 5.12: Street section of case study two 23 fig 5.13: Interface analysis - Case study two 24 fig 5.14: Spatial heirarchy Case study two 25 fig 5.15: Urban block interface - Case study two 25 fig 5.16: Land use Map of Case study three 27 fig 5.17: Road network hierarchy of Case study three 28 fig 5.18: Street section of case study three 28 fig 5.19: Interface analysis - case study three 29 fig 5.20: Spatial heirarchy Case study three 30

fig 5.21: Urban block interface - Case study three 30 fig 6.0: Comparison Crime risk assessment for case studies 32 fig 6.1: Comparison of 32 fig 7.0: Building setback 34 fig 7.1: Street and building interface design 34 fig 7.2: Thoughtful Building grouping 34 fig 7.3: Juxtaposition of spatial programs 35 fig 7.4: Defined public paths 35 fig 7.5: traffic pattern 35 fig 8.0: Site location 38 fig 8.1: Ikeja model city 38 fig 8.2: Aerial view of existing settlement 40 fig 8.3: Figure ground 41 fig 8.4: Land-use Map 41 fig 8.5: Vehicular and Pedestrian traffic study 42 fig 8.6: Public and private spaces 43 fig 8.7: Urban bloack edge study 43 fig 8.9: Isovist study 1 44 fig 8.10: Isovist study 2 44 fig 8.11: Isovist study 3 45 fig 8.12: Street section 45 fig 8.13: Indicative floor plans for sector 1 46 fig 8.14: Indicative floor plan for Tenement buildings in sector 1 46 fig 8.15: Indicative floor plans for sector 2 47 fig 8.16: Indicative floor plan for detached buildings in sector 2 47 fig 8.17: Street inventory study 48 fig 8.18: Street illumination study 48 fig 8.19: Opportunities and constraints map 49 fig 8.20: Crime risk assessment intervention site 50 fig 9.1: Design strategies 52 fig 9.2: Layout Design option 1 53 fig 9.3: Artsist’s Impression Design option 1 54 fig 9.4: Land use study - Design option 1 55 fig 9.5: Movement study - Design option 1 55 fig 9.6: Street view - Design option 1 56 fig 9.7: Aerial view - Design option 1 56

vii

fig 9.8: Layout Design option 2 57 fig 9.9: Artsist’s Impression Design option 2 58 fig 9.10: Land use study - Design option 2 59 fig 9.11: Movement study - Design option 2 59 fig 9.12: Street view - Design option 2 60 fig 9.13: Aerial view - Design option 2 60 fig 9.14: Layout Design option 3 61 fig 9.15: Artsist’s Impression Design option 3 62 fig 9.16: Land use study - Design option 3 63 fig 9.17: Movement study - Design option 3 63 fig 9.18: Street view - Design option 3 64 fig 9.19: Aerial view - Design option 3 64 fig 10.1: Landuse diagram 68 fig 10.2: Proposed layout 69 fig 10.3. Artist’s impression - View along retrofitted sector 2 71 fig 10.5 . Foliage location to maximise surveillance 71 fig 10.5 . Foliage location to maximise surveillance 71 fig. 10.6 Artist’s impression - Dwellings overlooking communal park 71 fig. 10.7 Artist’s impression - Terrace dwellings arranged to avoid dead edges 72 fig. 10.8 Longitudinal Section - Terrace dwellings arranged to avoid dead edges 72 fig.10.9. Palisade fence 73 fig.10.9. Concertina wire top treatment of fence 73 fig. 10.10; Artist’s impression - Dwellings overlooking communal park 73 fig10.11: Longitudinal Section - Mixed-use building 73 fig. 10.12: Artist’s impression - Aerial View 1 74 fig10.13: Street Section 74 fig10.14: Street Section 74 fig10.15: Street Section 75 fig. 10.16: Artist’s impression - Western entrance to the site along the mixed-use corridor 75 fig. 10.17: Artist’s impression - Eastern entrance to the site strategically grouping buildings to depict access control 75 fig. 10.18: Artist’s impression - Aerial View 2 76 fig. 10.19: Street Lighting plan 77 fig. 10.20: Street Lighting strategy 77

viii

Table 5.0: Summary of case study analyses Table 5.1: Crime risk assessment - Case study one Table 5.2: Crime risk assessment - Case study two Table 5.3: Crime risk assessment Case study three

16 21 26 31

CONTENTS 1.1. BACKGROUND

1.2. RESEARCH INTEREST

1.3. GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE

1.4. AIMS OF RESEARCH

1.5. RESEARCH JUSTIFICATION

1.6. STRUCTURE OF REPORT

IMAGE FILL PAGE

fig 1.0: Lagos Marina

chapter

I ntroduction

1.1. BACKGROUND Fear of crime is a psychological perception that often bears little relationship with reality. It can be influenced by certain risk factors of public spaces that encourage criminal victimisation. In recent years, the urban crime phenomenon has increased worldwide at a rate which has surpassed that of urbanization as observed by Vanderschueren (1996 cited by Agbola, 1997). He suggests that cities with highly urbanised populations are more susceptible to crime. There are very few reliable data on crime rates in Lagos (fig.1.3) to compare with similar urban centres in Africa to validate this statement. But on a cursory observation, there seems to be a recurring trend that these cities illustrated in fig.1.1. have high rates of crime. The prevalence of crime and the fear of crime within the Lagos Metropolis is a major factor that affects the quality of life, socio-economic stability and sustainable development of Lagos as reported by Alemika and Chukuma (2005).

13.5m 11.0m Cairo

>20.0m 17.5m 8.0m 4.8m

Lagos

Poor urban planning, design & management

effective means of reducing crime than relying on the conventional target hardening approaches adopted by the security industry, examples like; physical fortresses, strengthening doors, windows and locks.The general consensus from these researches gives pointers that certain risk factors which enable the perpetration of crimes can be reduced if the environment is planned, designed and managed appropriately.

Youthful population growth & youth unemployment

LAGOS METROPOLITAN AREA

2 1 /hr 8 % 85% 28% 17% 6 7 % 36.8% 12% 20,000 2 3 % 2 1 % 37%

metropolitan area’s land coverage of Lagos

5.6m 4.4m

annual population growth

new inhabitants

Alexandria

15.0m 8.7m

Social & cultural factors

Poverty & inequality

Urbanization & city size

Kinshasa

of the population of Lagos state live in Metropolitan Lagos

of crimes are robbery

fear being victims of crimes

Luanda

RISK FACTORS INFLUENCING CRIME URBANISED POPULATION PROJECTIONS

fig 1.1: Population of Africa’s top Urban agglomerations

There are certain risk factors whose interactions are believed to influence the occurrence of crime’s concentration in specific areas within a city, although these are generally known, they are complex and not completely understood. Stollard (1991) acknowledged the importance in considering these factors illustrated in fig.1.2. which might influence crime in residential areas such as local levels of unemployment, the mix of tenancies, and the lack of availability of social amenities.

2025 2010

fig 1.2: Risk factors influencing crime

The relationship between the occurrence of crime and spatial layout of the environment in which it occurs is a widely discussed and researched topic internationally. Poyner (2006) observed that evidence has emerged from reputable criminological research that the design and layout of the environment might be a more

of crimes are property theft

of Nigeria’s urban population live in Lagos

rate of crime in 2011

persons per square km

experienced crime from 2011 to 2012

demography data source : LASG (2013)

rate of crime in 2012

crime data source : Alemika and Chukwuma (2013)

fig 1.3: Lagos Metropolitan area “The Numbers”

The rapid rate of urbanization of Lagos has caused a huge infrastructure deficit contributing to an increased breakdown of law and order. The physical environment’s role in this can be explained by Wilson and Kelling (1982), whose “broken window theory” suggests that the proper maintenance and monitoring the urban environment in a well-ordered condition may stop vandalism and its escalation into more serious crimes. It suggests that in places that are not well maintained, there is an elevated perception of the fear of crime, which creates a social pattern that affects the social fabric of the community, leaving its inhabitants feeling disconnected from their environment. Kruger and Landman (2003) also gave credence to this, explaining that the physical environment plays a significant role in influencing perceptions of safety. Certain places can impart a feeling of safety, while others can induce fear, even in areas where crime rates are low. 1.2. RESEARCH INTEREST From personal observations, the most common existing approach to crime prevention in Lagos involves the application of situational strategies involving fortification of buildings and other construction strategies stated earlier. Although some of these measures have reduced the incidence of crime, they seem to have some negative implications on the environment. Studies by Agbola (1997) observed that most occurrences of crimes in Lagos are committed within residential units, this is why the most noticeable efforts for crime prevention are in residential buildings. Typical residential units are surrounded by high fences and do not interact with adjacent streets. On a larger scale, communities have extended this fortification to their neighbourhoods, through the barrication of public rights of way, creating an unfriendly environment with empty isolated streets devoid of social activities. In contrast to these existing conditions, Crowe (2000) states the application of crime prevention techniques should make communities more attractive and more neighbourly. “The Architecture of fear” quoting the title of Agbola’s book, seems to be the norm for the design of the urban residential environment of Lagos.

1.3. GAPS IN KNOWLEDGE There is a need to tailor and adapt crime prevention strategies to the context of individual regions or localities. Most case studies on the successful implementation of situational crime prevention strategies are based on European and American contexts. Replication of these strategies to contrasting locations with different socio-cultural orientations and housing typologies, do not yield the same results. As a precursor, in the 1990’s South Africa attempted to replicate a number of approaches to policing and prevention that had been effective in the United Kingdom or the United States without success (UNODC, 2010). The challenges faced from the implementation of these projects were summarised by Pelser (2002) as: 1. Policy related: which highlighted a wide disjuncture between policy and practice, a disjuncture that was attributable to the general failure of policy to take into account the actual requirements for its implementation. 2. Making multi-agency strategies work: those of consultation, partnerships and coordination. 3. Matching the right solution to the crime problem, including the role of research and evaluation in the crime prevention process. The existing literature on urban crime and violence regarding Lagos covers mainly the nature of crime and analyses of empirical data, with little or no relation to the potential effect the design of the physical environment has on this phenomenon and the quality of the environment. There is a need to evaluate the effects the design has on crime.

1.4. AIMS OF RESEARCH

This research aims to identify and analyse what planning, design and building construction techniques are being applied in residential areas across different socio-economic dimensions to mitigate crime and what the associated costs and effects these measures have on the quality of the residential environments in Lagos.

The design based research project will seek to provide an evidence based framework of solutions and suggest design measures for creating high quality sustainable urban residential environments, by exploring pragmatic ways of designing out the vulnerability to crime in Lagos based on knowledge from existing crime prevention design principles, and other associated fields of studies with the aim of reducing the perception of crime amongst its inhabitants.

1.5. RESEARCH JUSTIFICATION

1.6. STRUCTURE OF REPORT

The occurrence of crime is a phenomenon which cannot be ignored, a survey by Agbola in 1996, found that most households in Lagos spent a significant amount of their income in addressing issues of security and also having a significantly immeasurable social cost on the society. On the governmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s part, the most conventional and most pervasive approach in addressing urban safety and security is through the criminal justice system, which is a palliative measure executed only after a crime has occurred. As the popular idiom states, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Prevention is better than cureâ&#x20AC;? Are there other ways to addressing this issue? Yes! How? By proffering evidence based design initiatives driven by a research of crime prevention strategies and on careful understanding of the local context. The conclusions from the completed research can also serve as a means of creating awareness and serve as a guidance to the relevant governmental parastatals in making policies for development and planning applications.

The next chapter gives a perspective on the historical roots of situational crime prevention and some broad complementary ideas which provide context to the relevant principles that are employed for this research project. There is no single correct solution to the question of how to design and manage our built environments. The evaluation of case studies considers each place in its context. A crime risk assessment is conducted in detail, to analyse ways we have been designing parts of our towns and cities and identifying some questions and problem areas for delivering safer environments. A development proposal for an identified intervention site is undertaken, which applies the principles derived from the evaluation of the three case study areas, to achieve a residential environment which eliminates potential crime risk factors.

CONTENTS 2.1. FACTS ABOUT CRIME 2.2. FEAR OF CRIME 2.3. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND CRIME 2.4. CRIME AND THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT 2.5. PRINCIPLES OF SITUATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION 3.1. RESEARCH QUESTIONS 4.1. RESEARCH DESIGN

4.2. CRIME RISK VARIABLES & MEASUREMENT

5.1. CASE STUDY 1

5.2. CASE STUDY 2

5.3. CASE STUDY 3

6.1. RESEARCH CONCLUSION

IMAGE FILL PAGE

fig 2.0: Victoria island lagos

chapter

literature RE VI E W

2.1. FACTS ABOUT CRIME

2.2. FEAR OF CRIME

The impacts of crime are multidimensional. Apart from physical harm like injury and death, victims of crime and violence also suffer long-lasting psychological trauma and continuously live with the fear of crime. At the national level, crime and violence are impediments to foreign investment, contributing to capital flight and brain drain, and hindering international tourism. At the local level, crime and violence result in the stigmatization of neighbourhoods or even entire sections of the city. Such areas become ‘no-go’ zones and eventually lose out in terms of investment or provision of infrastructure and public services. (UN-HABITAT, 2007).

The perception of safety and insecurity is a major factor affecting the way dwellers of urban areas interact with their environment. There are usually inaccurate perceptions of the levels of crime by the public. Although actual crime rates have been decreasing in recent history, fear of crime is increasing. Literature and empirical findings show that people often express a high level of the fear of crime even when the objective probability of their victimization is low, a phenomenon that has been referred to as the ‘paradox of fear’ (Alemika and Chukwuma, 2004). From a public opinion survey conducted by UN-HABITAT (1997), 70 per cent of respondents in a city-wide survey of Lagos were fearful of being victims of crime, while 90 per cent were fearful of the prospect of being killed in a criminal attack. Although the fear of crime can be considered as psychological, its widespread occurrence can be taken as a precursor for the need to combat it. Wilson-Doenges (2000) wrote that fear of crime has just as real consequences as actual crime. Hartnagel (1979) remarked on opinions earlier voiced by McIntyre of the significance of how fear of crime restricted social interaction between people, making the community less safe than it otherwise might be.

Victimisation

nd Cohesion al a

Socio-economic

2.3. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND CRIME

and ury , Inj ath

Forc welf e

conomic produc De E d tivi an a n t d n e e M i m r g rati ty a place Social cap on is it

FRAMING THE IMPACTS OF URBAN CRIME

fig 2.1: Impacts of Urban crime

According to Scheider et al (2012) there is a general belief that crime is likely to escalate when economic conditions deteriorate, but he states that there is little empirical evidence to support this claim. The trends of crime in relation to economic conditions are subject to great deal of variation to local circumstances. 2.4. CRIME AND THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT There is, a considerable body of research investigating the effect of the built environment on crime and the fear of crime. Before examining them, there is a need to understand the role of the environment in crime prevention and to be aware of the basic elements of a criminal activity. The crime triangle (fig.2.2) offers an easy way to visualize and understand basic elements of criminal activities, it is a derivative of the “routine activity theory” developed by Felson and Cohen (1979).This theory states in the absence of effective controls, offenders will prey upon attractive targets. Crime cannot be explained simply by explaining criminal disposition, but by how

off

vic

tim

crime location/environment Case studies To understand the role of the environment plays in crime’s occurrence.

n a l fa c o i t to a u r t

rc ep

tio n

such dispositions interact with situational factors that favour crime in the occurrence of a criminal act (Clarke, 1997).

fig 2.2: The Crime triangle

The crime triangle indicates that three factors must exist in order to have a crime: 1. an offender, 2. a victim/target, and 3. A location. Lacking any one of these, a crime will not occur. Implying that in the absence of effective controls, offenders will prey upon attractive targets. For a crime to occur, a motivated offender must be in the same place as an attractive target. For property crimes the target is a thing or an object. For personal crimes the target is a person. Just as the occurrence of crime depends on the presence and interaction between one of these factors, so does crime prevention involve a response to one or more of these elements. (Kruger et al, 2001).

2.4.1. WHY CRIME PREVENTION AND THE ENVIRONMENT ? The environment can play a significant role in influencing perceptions of safety. Certain environments can impart a feeling of safety, while others can induce fear, even in areas where levels of crime are not high (Kruger et al, 2001). The focus here is on the form and character of the built environment, because of its great significance as it is the local setting of a crime. Jeffery (1977) observed that the limited success of both social policy and criminal justice measures in deterring the behavioral patterns of crime offenders informed the need to address other factors which are necessary for a crime to occur. “Situational” approach to crime prevention or “crime prevention through environmental design” (CPTED) has emerged as an approach in controlling the menace of crime emcompassing a broader set of techniques which introduce systematic environmental changes to reduce the opportunity of these crimes from occurring. They are a set of preventive strategies, rather than strategies which seek to detect or sanction crime offenders.

2.4.2. ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME THEORIES These theories are based on research across different fields of study, which simulate the impact of the built environment on crime, thus forming the basis of crime prevetion through environmental design. • Jane Jacobs (1961) in promoting open and permeable environments, focused on diversity of land use, arguing that neighborhoods accommodating different spatial functions, like residential, commercial, institutional, and leisure, may be safer than single functional areas. These multi-functional areas attract a continual flow of people throughout the day and evening, ensuring informal surveillance and highlighting how strangers passing through spaces, as well as inhabitants, are part of the natural policing mechanism. While stating that in contrast, criminal activity is likely to occur in places that are quiet and deserted (Schweitzer et al, 1999). • Research by Newman (1972) as a means of reducing crime in urban areas, culminated in the propagation of the ideas of “defensible space”. It dealt with the design of housing developments to reduce anonymity, increase of surveillance and reducing escape routes. This supported closed and impermeable environments, in which inhabitants are the only natural police, and the fundamental mechanism is that residents recognize strangers as intruders and challenge them.

The defensible space perspective has been criticised because it ignores the social aspect of crime prevention, with some researchers stating that when there is a strong sense of community among residents, the physical aspects of the space may be more effective in deterring crime than when the residents do not know and trust one another (Schweitzer et al, 1999). • Wilson and Kelling (1982) “broken window” introduced earlier in chapter one, states that neighborhoods exhibiting signs of neglect and decay, characterised by uncared-for building exteriors and environment, are evidence that residents of the area feel vulnerable and have begun to withdraw from community involvement and upkeep. These physical indicators tend to serve as a signal to would-be criminals that residents are not likely to respond to criminal activity, making the area less risky for criminal activity. The physical deterioration also results in a greater fear of crime among the residents. Increased fear of crime results in greater withdrawal and diminution of the sense of community, which then makes crime even more likely. The desirability of defensible or accessible space is a controversial question. In reference to the works of Jane Jacobs and Oscar Newman. Conceptually, Newman’s ‘defensible space’ ideas are often assumed to be a key theoretical basis for the emergence of gated communities, linking the prevention of urban decay to gating as a device that gives social control to residents over their environment (Ilesanmi, 2012). 2.4.3. GATED & ENCLOSED COMMUNITIES? Although there is no unanimously agreed definition, Landman (2002) defines gated communities as a generic term that includes enclosed neighbourhoods that have controlled access through gates or booms across existing roads, and security villages and complexes, including lifestyle communities. They include both new housing developments and older residential areas that are retrofitted (illustrated in figs. 2.3 and 2.4 respectively). In most instances the perimeter of the retrofitted enclosed suburb is closed off by the erection of high walls, although the majority seem to use existing walls and fences as a cost saving measure, resulting in the boundaries of such enclosed suburbs being inadequately secured making the inhabitants still vulnerable to crime risks (Naude, 2003). The expansion of these gated enclaves is influenced by both structutal and subjective causes defined by Roitman ( 2010 cited by Ilesanmi, 2012). The structural causes relate to: (1) globalisation of the economy, which leads to increased urban social inequalities advancing social polarisation; and (2) more specific concerns about the withdrawal of the state from the provision of basic services, including security, leading to a rise in urban violence and privatisation of security. The subjective causes result from individuals’ desires, interests, perspectives and opportunities, namely increased fear of crime; a search for a better lifestyle; desire for a sense of community; a search for social homogeneity; and aspirations for higher social status amongst

fig. 2.3: Aerial view of a planned Gated community in Nigeria

fig. 2.4: An example of Neighbourhood enclosure: Privatisation of public access routes.

other factors. These variables have led to an increased growth of gated communities in the Lagos. In some instances, there have been observed positive and negative spatial implications. Landman (2006) identified these physical issues caused as; integration and accessibility, equity and efficiency. â&#x20AC;˘ INTEGRATION AND ACCESSIBILITY: Enclosed neighbourhoods, contribute to the privatisation of public space and often the opportunities and facilities contained within. They have a major impact on urban traffic and movement patterns, especially where there is a large concentration of enclosed neighbourhoods. There are forced displacements of vehicles to make use of only the main arterials, which increases traffic congestion and travel time. Pedestrians and cyclists also have to negotiate these busy arterials, since the lower order streets have been barricaded. This situation does not only increase the vulnerability, but also levels of discomfort (Landman, 2006). â&#x20AC;˘ EQUITY: By restricting (and prohibiting) access to large parts of urban areas, neighbourhood closures reduce and negate many urban activities and constrain many aspects of urban life for a number of people. Many opportunities previously generated are lost due to the privatisation (in practice) of former public spaces and amenities (Landman, 2006). â&#x20AC;˘ EFFICIENCY: It refers to the effective performance of cities, especially with regards to their functioning and management. While some enclosed neighbourhoods may not present a great problem when considered in isolation, the problem escalates when considering these neighbourhoods in a larger context. Therefore, while a single enclosure may not have a significant impact on issues such as traffic and other movement patterns, several enclosures may indeed have, because of the ripple effect as well as the fact that many are not suited to road closures because of their physical layout and position within the entire traffic network system (Landman, 2006).

2.5. PRINCIPLES OF SITUATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION Pelser (2002) stated that predicting criminal activity is complex, difficult and ultimately, dependent on several contested theories. Even when a theory may be to some degree correct in some of its hypotheses, there can be no guarantee that the right measures will be recommended to address the issue, or that the measures will be acceptable to the decision makers who are required to implement them or, if they are, that the measures will actually be implemented. Stollard (1991) recognised the various existing dissensions over the appropriate design options to employ in order to deter crime from the numerous criminology and design theories, and deduced six common principles (listed below) which he believed were in common agreement to most of the essential and relevant theories. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Surveillace Territoriality Structure of public and private space Activity Physical protection Management and maintenance

Bearing these limitations in mind, this research project will base its evaluation of the characteristics of the built environment on these principles. An explanation of these principles is given in the following pages.

PRINCIPLES OF SITUATIONAL CRIME PREVENTION

2.5.1. SURVEILLANCE

fig 2.5.1: Surveillance Opportunity

2.5.2. TERRITORIALITY & OWNERSHIP

Source: Stollard(1991)

It involves natural or passive surveillance of both dwellings and surrounding public spaces like car parking spaces, foot paths, access points, communty facilities. Oppurtunist crime is likely to be reduced if the potential offender feels there is someone watching.

fig 2.5.2: Territoriality

2.5.3. STRUCTURE OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SPACES

Source: Stollard(1991)

It is linked with surveillance with the idea that people identify with, watch over and protect spaces they regard as their personal space. Here again, intruders are easily conspicuous. Poyner (1983) describes it as the sub-division and zoning of communal space in and around residential buildings to promote proprietary attributes among residents. Poyner (1983), like Newman (1980), argued for the creation of homogeneous neighbourhoods by combining residents who have certain commom sociological characteristics i.e a “community of interest”.

fig 2.5.3: Public-private

Source: Building Futures

It advocates for the strict and proper organisation and differentiation of the spatial heirachy of spaces. This organisation prevents the increasing tendency of creating public and private spaces which are not easy to distinguish, which encourages privatisation of public spaces. This privatised public spaces tend to create “urban deserts”.

2.5.4. POTENTIAL HIDING PLACES - ACTIVITY

2.5.5. TARGET HARDENING - PHYSICAL PROTECTION

2.5.6. MANAGEMENT & MAINTENANCE This involves two aspects, first the importance of daily management of the neighbourhood and secondly the inclusion of management in the design process.

fig 2.5.4. Concealment and Refuge points

Source: Stollard(1991) fig 2.5.5: Target Hardening

This concerns the importance of eliminating potential hiding places were intruders might lurk undetected and commit acts of crimes unobserved. It corroborates with Jay Appletonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (1975) prospect refuge theory.

Source: Stollard(1991)

It involves the use of strategies to make it harder for a crime to be committed and reducing the gains of crime. Its application aims to increase the efforts that offenders must expend in the committing a crime and is the most long-established and traditional approach to crime prevention. It is directed at denying or limiting access to a crime target through the use of physical fortification such as fences, gates, locks, electronic alarms and security patrols.

Research Q

uestion

chapter

3 The study examines the relationship of the built environment to crime and the fear of crime in residential neighborhoods in Lagos metropolitan areas, controlling for other relevant demographic and social variables. The research questions are as follows: 1. What is the relationship of the built environment to crime and the fear of crime in residential neighborhoods in Lagos? 2. How does the built environment compare to the social and demographic characteristics of a neighborhood in predicting crime and the fear of crime? 3. How effective are the existing crime prevention methods available and are they causing any effects on the sense of community? 4. How can urban design be used as a tool in reducing the perception of crime in residential neighbourhoods in Lagos?

Research D

esign

chapter

4.1. RESEARCH DESIGN

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The first step in the methodological approach to this research was the identification of existing literature, how the different schools of thought interrelate, and what combination of principles identified are transferable into achieving the desired outcome of the design project.

situational crime prevention principles

SITE SELECTION

Data was collected to analyse and compare existing conditions with the use of case studies. Attributes of sustainable communities that are particularly relevant to crime prevention formed the focus of data collected. This included:

INTERVIEWS & QUESTIONNAIRES

qualitative data collection & analysis

â&#x20AC;˘ Collection of data about residents perception of crime in case study areas using questionnaires and interview surveys.

Research

Derivation of design principles which serve as means of reducing opportunities for crimes based on the evidence deduced from the data analysis.

CONTEXTUAL EVALUATION OF DESIGN AREA

physical surveys

CASE STUDY EVALUATION

â&#x20AC;˘ Physical analyses of the situational conditions that permit or facilitate the commission of the crimes in case study areas with the use of maps, photographs and sketches.

RESEARCH CONCLUSION

PRIORITISATION design prototyping

DESIGN PROPOSAL

Design

CONCLUSION fig 4.0: Research Process

4.2. CRIME RISK VARIABLES & MEASUREMENT 4.2.1. PERCEPTIONS OF CRIME

4.2.5. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

Schweitzer (1999) on assesing fear of crime, suggested the use of multiple indicator models. For this research, questionnaires were used as indicators in assessing residents perception of crime in the case study areas. The perceived crime level of the neighbourhood was measured through survey parameters which targeted residents perception from micro to macro spatial levels i.e from their individual dwellings, to their street and then to their neighbourhood. I sought to assess if there were any variances between how residents perceived crime during the day and at night. I also enquired about the effectiveness of existing security measures being employed to combat crime across the earlier established spatial levels. The level of residents’ perception of crime was computed by summing the standardized item scores for each study area.

The physical characteristics of the environment that permit or facilitate the occurrence of crimes were analysed on a two tier basis, which included direct observation by the reseacher and via the use of questionnaires.

4.2.2. ACTUAL CRIME RATE Site specific crime data were not available for this research. 4.2.3. SENSE OF COMMUNITY The sense-of-community used in this study was composed of questions relating to the degree of connection, support, and belonging that exists among the residents. An indication of their response is indicated on a five-point scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. 4.2.4. DEMOGRAPHIC VARIABLES The demographic variables were self-reported by each respondent for his or her household.

The template used to execute this analysis is an adaptation of attributes of a safer place (Home Office, 2004). It inquired about the following parameters of the environment: • SURVEILLANCE 1. Are opportunities for surveillance from the subject and adjacent buildings maximised? 2. Have efforts been made to eliminate ‘inactive’ frontages and corners? 3. Are parked cars highly visible but secure? 4. Is the standard of lighting and its maintenance regime adequate and is it resistant to vandalism and damage? Is it well-designed and well-sited? • TERRITORIALITY 1. What are the consequences of the number and nature of road connections? 2. Do all routes lead to somewhere people want to go? Are all routes necessary? 3. Do routes provide potential offenders with ready and unnoticed access to potential targets? 4. Are routes for different users segregated when they could be integrated? 5. Is it easy to understand how to travel through the area?

• SPATIAL STRUCTURE 1. Are the boundaries between public, communal and private space signified in the most appropriate manner, be it a physical barrier or a psychological barriers such as changes in paving, surface texture/colour, landscaping and signage? • ACTIVITY: places where the level of human activity is appropriate to the location and creates a reduced risk of crime and a sense of safety at all times. 1. Are mixed uses successfully integrated with one another? • PHYSICAL PROTECTION 1. What are the ‘target hardening’ principles being applied? 2. Has the potentially negative visual impact of crime prevention measures been addressed and, where these cannot be ameliorated by good design, have the advantages been weighed against their adverse impacts? • MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE 1. Are appropriate facilities management systems in place? Does the design and layout support these? 2. Are users, businesses and residents involved in management?

chapter

Case Studies Locations

NIGERIA

Agidingbi, IKEJA Low socio-economic profile

In order to study crime and the fear of crime in the city, 3 sites were selected. These selected sites layouts reasonably represent the available variations of residential layouts within the Lagos metropolitan area presently. The task is to identify if the layout and design patterns and features are related to crime. The selection criteria was also based on spatial and residential patterns of victimization, to determine urban crime prevention responses at different socio-economic levels within the Lagos metropolis. These contrasting socio-economic classes employ different strategies for the mitigation of criminal activities.

M. Johnson Crescent

SURULERE

Medium socio-economic profile

Osbourne Foreshore,

IKOYI

High socio-economic profile

10km

Odo Street,

OBALENDE Low socio-economic profile

fig 5.0: Map of Lagos Metropolis showing case study areas

Table 5.0: Summary of case study analyses

SUMMARY

LOCATION STUDY AREA ECONOMIC PROFILE

Modupe Johnson crescent,Surulere

4600sqm

Medium income

Y IALIT ITOR TERR

MA MAI NAGEME NTEN NT ANC E

IVITY ACT

SP STR A T IA UCT L URE

High income Low density Residential area

LOCATION STUDY AREA ECONOMIC PROFILE

Odo street, Obalende

4400sqm

Low income High density Residential area

From the research findings, inhabitants of this study area expressed a low perception of crime. Factors influencing the low perception rates can be related to the design of the physical environment. Being a gated community the focus on security is paramount and is heavily invested in, with the use of private security guards, CCTV etc. There are also several features of the physical environment which influence the low perception of crime, but these measures are not sustainable to the general population. It also exhibits the same shortcoming witnessed in the medium income case study stated above. Its residents have minimal public social interaction due to the absence of “functional” communal spaces. From the research findings, inhabitants of this study area expressed a very low perception of crime. The nature of the physical environment allows for high levels of social interaction, territoriality and surveillance. High densities, dilapidated environs, high vitality, high permeability, demographic heterogeneity, low physical protection are factors which in most cases serve as precursors to high levels of crime, but they do not create any negative consequences in this area as expressed by its inhabitants. But will non-residents feel safe within this environment? I strongly doubt it! This might be a factor which deters potential crime offenders from this neighbourhood.

Y IALIT ITOR R R E T

MA MAI NAGEME NTEN NT ANC E

IVITY ACT

SP STR A T IA UCT L URE PHYSICA L PROTECTION

ECONOMIC PROFILE

5200sqm

SURVEILLANC E

STUDY AREA

Osbourne Foreshore extate, Ikoyi

Y IALIT ITOR R R E T

MA MAI NAGEME NTEN NT ANC E

IVITY ACT

SP STR A T IA UCT L URE PHYSICA L PROTECTION

LOCATION

SURVEILLANC E

PHYSICA L PROTECTION

Medium density Residential area

From the research findings, inhabitants of this study area expressed the highest perception of crime. Factors influencing the high perception rates can be related to the design of the physical environment. The structure of the neighbourhood and physical fortification do not permit surveillance and territoriality of the public realm. There is also an ineffective attempt to enclose the community, with the erection of barriers obstructing public thoroughfare. The existing measures appear to have further alienated its inhabitants, resulting in minimal social interaction.

SURVEILLANC E

NOTES

SATELLITE IMAGERY

CASE STUDY

O N E 5.1

1:500

The study area area is characterised as a low income residential area. It has a high vitality (fig. 5.1), the activity generators being the spatial functions (small scale businesses) of the buildings frontages.

0% Recreational 8% Retail 25% Workshops 65% Residential

â&#x20AC;˘ Is vitality always a goog thing? Eventhough the vitality generated by the nature of the landuses and the resulting level of human activity appear to be quite intense for a typical residential area, these variables do not seem to cause any conflicts with the lifestyles of the inhabitants of this neighbourhood.

LAND-USE MAP

fig 5.1: High vitality in case study one

fig 5.2: Activity generator case study one

fig 5.3: Land use Map of Case study one

CASE STUDY 1

NOTES

scale 1:500

• The area is serviced by a grid road network. These roads range from 4.5m to 5m in width, with no segregation between vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

BR BR

• Cars are allowed to park on the street around the clock.

arterial road vehicular & pedestrian

BUS STOP

• Pedestrian traffic dominates the pattern of movement.

distributor road vehicular & pedestrian

property boundary

SIZES INDICATE VARYING VOLUMES & FREQUENCIES

property boundary

street parking

BUS STOP

surveillance opportunities from within dwellings and a retail units

road boundary

fig 5.5: Street section of case study one

surveillance opportunities from within dwelling

property boundary

surveillance opportunities from within dwellings and a retail units

BUS STOP

property boundary

road boundary

street parking

road boundary

• The layout pattern of the roads and urban block structure do not create any potential refuge points.

Semi-public property setback space

No surveillance opportunities from within dwelling fig 5.4: road network hierarchy of Case study one Public side walk

s o f s w a s

local road network No vehicular & pedestrian

BUS STOP

1. the high pedestrian traffic flow on roads with no segragation between vehicles and pedestrians. 2. on-street parking on the roads with narrow widths which serve as bottlenecks to vehicular flows.

narrow road width + street parking = traffic calming

bridge underpass

Semi-public property setback space

Public side walk

Semi-public property setback space

bridge overpass

• There is a very low flow of vehicular traffic within the boundaries of the study area, eventhough there are no physical barriers prohibiting public thoroughfare. This is a unique scenario compared with similar locations within close proximity to arterial roads that have high rates of traffic congestion in Lagos. This low flow of vehicular traffic is due to the traffic calming mechanisms which are assumed to be a combination of:

road boundary

property boundary scale 1:250

CASE STUDY 1

NOTES

“The lack of clear zoning, has pushed the labour market to occupy available spaces along road embarkments and on the boundary of private properties”. koolhaas (2000)

• The typical buildings consists of residential units with retail or workshop units attached to the frontages, essentially being “live+work” units. This seems to have fostered a sense of territoriality and control amongst its inhabitants.

BUILDING LIN E

PROPERTY INT ERFACE B

OUNDARY

• There are no evidences of physical fortification of residential units and the neighbourhood to prevent crime.

private space

• The street is actively engaged by activities of the adjacent buiding’s frontages creating opportunities for both passive and active surveillance, grossly reducing potential crime risk cues.

public space

4.7M

semi-private space

2.2M

fig 5.6: Interface analysis Case study one

CASE STUDY 1

NOTES

SPATIAL HIERARCHY

• The public spaces available in the study area are the road networks. They function as communal spaces for the residents, with activities like football matches and parties hosted on them on weekends.

U/C

• The public and private spaces are seperated by a fuzzy semi-private boundary extending from the dwelling frontage to the edge of the road defined by a gutter.

private space

• The private spaces are limited to the the perimeter of each individual dwelling. • There are no definitive plot demarcations, forming a densely clustered urban block structure.

public space

private space

U/C

private semi-private space semi-private space

public private

U/C

fig 5.7: Spatial heirarchy - Case study one

U/C

STREET INTERFACE

U/C

• The street interface is predominantly active. • There are few obstructions preventing surveillance of subjects on the streets from adjacent buildings. • Cars parked on the street are highly visible and safe. • There are a few working street lights. Functional street lighting source is from the diffusion of light rays from internally illuminated dwellings.

active interface fig 5.8: Urban block interface - Case study

inactive interface

interface structure

CRIME RISK VARIABLES AND MEASUREMENTS

CASE STUDY 1

SURVEILLANC E

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Street lighting

IVITY ACT

SURVEILLANCE

PHYSICA L PROTECTION

SP STR A T IA UCT L URE

Surveillance opportunity Car parking

• cars are parked on the street, no provision for parking within property boundary

Refuge points

• no observed points of refuge.

Permeability

• study area is very permeable to public thoroughfare at all times of the day

Integrated traffic flows

• pedestrian and vehicular traffic are not segregated. • vehicular traffic flow is calmed by pedestrian activity • road network is adequately structured to handle traffic thoroughfare tranversing site

Frontage/Interface activity

Y IALIT ITOR R R E T

MA MAI NAGEME NTEN NT ANC E

OBSERVATIONS • the streets are illuminated at night from reflections from interior lights of buildings. • street lights are not functional . • where there are functional, power supply is erratic. • predominantly tailors’ workshops,with a few grocery and food stores. • not well maintained, but interface actively engages street • good surveillance from high vitality on the street

Road hierachy

Table 5.1: Crime risk assessment - Case study one

PHYSICAL PROTECTION

ACTIVITY MANAGEMENT & MAINTENANCE

**** ***** **** ***** ***** ***** **** *****

Legibility

• people can see which are the important or appropriate routes to take • they are less likely to become lost and wander into out-of-the-way places less likely to be overlooked

Building design

• buildings are predominantly detached bungalows “brazilian houses”, characterised by numerous tenement flats arranged along a corridor with shared common facilities located at the rear of the houses. • grid pattern road network • buildings occupy the full boundaries of the property

Perimeter fence

• None

Remodeling for security

• burglary proof (steel bars) on shop fronts. • most of the residential quarters have not been modified to address security issues

* **

Compatibility of uses

• Workshop, retail and residential uses do not seem to conflict

Tenure

• tenures are predominantly rented

Space heirarchy

• The only public spaces available are the roads • Private space

Maintenance

• The neighbourhood is poorly maintained

Management

• neighbourhood association present and functional

Sense of community

• heterogenous demography, but there is a sense of community

TERRITORIALITY

SPATIAL STRUCTURE

RATING

Layout structure

***

**** *** * * *** **** 21

CASE STUDY

U/C

T W O

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

5.2

U/C

LAND-USE MAP

1:500

U/C

• The study area area is characterised as a medium income residential area.

0% Recreation

• It has a low vitality. The “potential” activity generators are retail units and schools. They do not generate much activity.

15% Retail 15% Educational 65% Residential

U/C U/C

U/C

fig 5.9: Low vitality in case study two

U/C U/C

U/C

fig 5.10: Land use Map of Case study two

U/C

CASE STUDY 2

NOTES

arterial road vehicular & pedestrian

• It is situated along a crescent connected to a major distributor road.

bridge overpass

Public side walk

• There are no barriers to check pedestrian movement and activities. Residents interviewed mentioned that unrestricted access to pedestrians is an issue that needs to be checked. Pedestrians pose the highest threat to vandalising cars parked on its deserted streets. • There is a low vehicular traffic flow road boundary through the area during working hours, but there is a visible increment in traffic flow causing slight congestions during rush hours. This can be attributed to it being a working class neighbourhood and its residents use private vehicles as the predominant mode of transportation to work.

distributor road vehicular & pedestrian

No surveillance opportunities from within dwelling

Semi-public property setback space

• Cars are allowed to park on the street, but are perceived to be unsafe by residents.

Semi-public property setback space

surveillance opportunities from ancillary local road network structure vehicular & pedestrian which serves as a retail unit or security post

bridge underpass

BUS STOP

SIZES INDICATE VARYING VOLUMES & FREQUENCIES

BUS STOP

street parking

property boundary

surveillance opportunities from within dwellings and a retail units

property boundary

surveillance opportunities from within dwellings and a retail units

road boundary

property boundary

street parking

Semi-public property setback space

• The internal road’s width ranges from 6m to 6.5m.

BUS STOP

low surveillance + low vitality = Urban desert

property boundary

road boundary

property boundary

road boundary

property boundary

fig 5.11: Road network hierarchy of Case study two

No surveillance opportunities from within dwelling

property boundary fig 5.12: Street section of case study two

road boundary

CUL DE SAC

property boundary

road boundary

surveillance opportunities from within dwelling

property boundary scale 1:250

CASE STUDY 2

NOTES

• The street is devoid of human activity and have low surveillance levels. There are no functional street lights. • There are strong attempts at physical fortification of the residential units. Property “plots“ have fences constructed of CMU blocks, topped with barbed wire, shards of glass. A security gate is used to cross this threshold to access individual dwellings.

Anti-scale top treatment of security fences

BUILDING LIN E

PROPERTY INT ERFACE B

private space semi-public space public space

6.2M fig 5.13: Interface analysis - Case study two

public space

2.2M

2.5M

private space

OUNDARY

CASE STUDY 2

NOTES

SPATIAL HIERARCHY

U/C

• The structure of the neighbourhood indicates that a sense of ownership does not extend to the public relam.

road closure

• The crescent is closed off by gates to restrict movement of vehicles. These barriers to movement are active only at certain periods at night. They do not function during the day.

priva ublic

te sp

ace

spac

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

private space

U/C

public space

road closure

U/C

public

private

fig 5.14: Spatial heirarchy Case study two U/C

STREET INTERFACE U/C

• The street interface is predominantly inactive . U/C

U/C

• The perimeter fences of plots serve as obstructions preventing surveillance of subjects on the streets from adjacent buildings. • There are a few working street lights. Individual dwellings have security lights installed to illuminate just their residences

active interface

inactive interface

interface structure

fig 5.15: Urban block interface - Case study two

CRIME RISK VARIABLES AND MEASUREMENTS

CASE STUDY 2 ASSESSMENT CRITERIA SURVEILLANC E

Street lighting Frontage/Interface activity LITY ORIA T I R TER

MA MAI NAGEME NTEN NT ANC E

Surveillance opportunity Car parking IVITY ACT

PHYSICA L PROTECTION

SP STR A T IA UCT L URE

SURVEILLANCE

Refuge points Permeability Integrated traffic flows

Table 5.2: Crime risk assessment - Case study two

Road hierachy

ACTIVITY

MANAGEMENT & MAINTENANCE

** *

• study area is relatively permeable to public thoroughfare at certain times of the day • pedestrian and vehicular traffic are not segregated.

**** **** **** *****

Legibility

Building design

• buildings are predominantly detached and have defined property boundaries.

Layout structure

• crescent road network with connected arteries • buildings tend to comply with planning regulations and have setbacks from the boundaries of the property

Perimeter fence

• high perimeter fence, top treated with barb wires to prevent scaling.

Remodeling for security

• burglary proof on all openings in houses. • buildings have been modified to tackle security concerns.

Compatibility of uses

• no conflict

Tenure

• tenures are a mixture of both rented tenancy and owner occupied buildings

Space heirarchy

• The only public spaces available are the roads • Private space and public space have well defined boundaries

Maintenance

• The neighbourhood is poorly maintained

Management

• Neighbourhood association are non-functional

Sense of community

• Homogenous demography, but there is no sense of community

SPATIAL STRUCTURE

RATING

• street lights not functional . • where there are functional ones, power supply to them is erratic. • some residences have security posts with security guards which double as tuck shops/retail units • solid wall fence with no activity attached in most dwellings creating dead frontages • Poor surveillance from houses due to impervious interface with the street • short sight lines due to the curvature of the road layout • cars are allowed to park on the street but are not safe. • residents park within property boundary • several potential points of refuge.

• road network is adequately structured to handle traffic thoroughfare tranversing site • people can see which are the important or appropriate routes to take • There is a possibility to wander into out-of-the-way places less likely to be overlooked

TERRITORIALITY

PHYSICAL PROTECTION

OBSERVATIONS

* * *

***** **** *** *** ***** **** ** ** ***** *

CASE STUDY

THREE

U/C

5.3

U/C

U/C U/C

• The study area is located in a planned gated estate situated along a major arterial road in a high brow part of the city. • It is a strictly residential development with no retail facilities.

LAND-USE MAP

1:500 U/C

U/C

• Estate managers maintain the estate providing private security and other related services.

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

RUI

U/C

3% Recreation

U/C

RUI

U/C U/C U/C

RUI U/C U/C RUI

U/C

RUI

U/C

0% Retail 0% Workshops 95% Residentia

U/C

RUI

U/C

fig 5.16: Land use Map of Case study three

U/C U/C

No surveillance opportunities from within dwelling

• The roads are 7metres in width flanked by road boundary 1.5metres wide sidewalks.

property boundary

Semi-public property setback

Semi-public property setba

Public side walk

Semi-public property setba

NOTES

No surveillance opportunities from within dwelling

opportunities from ancillary structure which serves as a retail unit or security post CASE STUDY 3

arterial road vehicular & pedestrian

property boundary

road boundary

bridge overpass

• Pedestrian activity is minimal within the neighbourhood.

distributor road vehicular & pedestrian

• Public vehicular and pedestrian traffic thoroughfare is restricted. • Typical building structure consists of fully detached buildings with individual security posts for personal security guards.

road boundary

property boundary

surveillance opportunities from within dwellings and a retail units

property boundary

bridge underpass

street parking

• Cars are not allowed to park on the street.

road boundary

local road network vehicular & pedestrian

property SIZES boundary INDICATE VARYING VOLUMES & FREQUENCIES BUS STOP

3 BR

No surveillance opportunities from within dwelling

high surveillance + Public access control = Urban desert

property boundary

road boundary

CUL DE SAC

BR BR

property boundary

BUS STOP

property boundary

road boundary

surveillance opportunities from within dwelling

property boundary

fig 5.18: Street section of case study three

Semi-private property setback space

Public side walk

surveillance opportunities from within dwellings & security post

Semi-private property setback space

fig 5.17: Road network hierarchy of Case study three

surveillance opportunities from within dwellings & security post

road boundary scale 1:250

property boundary

CASE STUDY 3

BUILDIN

DWELLING SECURITY LIGHTING complimenting street light

G LINE

SREET LIGHTING SIGNAGES - NO PARKING ON STREET A constant reminder of law & order

PROPERTY INTERFA CE BOUND

ARY

7.0M

private space

7.0M

semi-private space public space

public space

fig 5.19: Interface analysis - case study three

Anti-scale top treatment of security fences • The street has high levels of surveillance with the use of CCTV and security patrols. The streets are devoid of human activity at most times of the day, but beecome slightly animated on weekends e.g dog walks, people jogging e.t.c. • There are working street lights. Some property edges allow for surveillance from within the house. Individual dwellings also have security lights installed to illuminate the street. CCTV

Visually permeable gates - encourages visibility

U/C

CASE STUDY 3

NOTES • The structure of the neighbourhood indicates that a sense of ownership and territoriality does not extend to the public relam. Privacy is contained within boundaries of individual dwelling plots. • There is a communal space/outdoor recreational facility which is fenced off and only accessible by residents.

SPATIAL HIERARCHY

U/C

p semi

U/C

rivat

-priv

e spa

ate s

pace

U/C

semi-ppublic riv privatate e

U/C

build ing b ound ary plot bou road ndary bou ndar y road bou ndar plot y bou ndar build y ing b ound ary priemi-

RUI

vate

recre a spac tional e U/C

fig 5.20: Spatial heirarchy Case study

U/C

road closure

U/C

STREET INTERFACE • The street interface is predominantly inactive. • The fences do not serve as obstructions preventing surveillance of subjects on the streets from adjacent buildings.

active interface fig 5.21: Urban block interface - Case study three

inactive interface

interface structure

CRIME RISK VARIABLES AND MEASUREMENTS SURVEILLANC E

CASE STUDY 3

Y IALIT ITOR TERR

MA MAI NAGEME NTEN NT ANC E

IVITY ACT

OBSERVATIONS

Street lighting

• street lights are functional .

Frontage/Interface activity

Car parking

• front gardens • perimeter fence is permeable • security patrol • CCTV • some properties have landscape features which obstruct surveillance • cars are not allowed to park on the street

Refuge points

• some observed points of refuge on side fences.

Permeability

• study area is not permeable to public thoroughfare

Integrated traffic flows

• pedestrian and vehicular traffic are segregated.

Road hierachy Legibility

• road network is adequately structured to handle traffic thoroughfare tranversing site • people can see which are the important or appropriate routes to take • they are less likely to become lost and wander into out-of-the-way places less likely to be overlooked

Building design

• buildings are predominantly detached and have defined property boundaries.

Layout structure

• tree road network with connected arteries • buildings tend to comply with planning regulations and have setbacks from the boundaries of the property

Perimeter fence

• perimeter fence with see through fronts

Remodeling for security

• The residential quarters have been designed to address security issues

Compatibility of uses

• no conflict

Tenure

• tenures are predominantly owner occupied

Space heirarchy

• There is public park available but its location is not centralised • There is a well defined spatial heirarchy

Maintenance

• The neighbourhood is well maintained

Management

• neighbourhood association present and functional

Sense of community

• homogenous demography, but there is no sense of community

Surveillance opportunity

SURVEILLANCE

PHYSICA L PROTECTION

SP STR A T IA UCT L URE

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

Table 5.3: Crime risk assessment Case study three

TERRITORIALITY SPATIAL STRUCTURE PHYSICAL PROTECTION

ACTIVITY MANAGEMENT & MAINTENANCE

RATING

***** *** **** *** *** **** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** **** ***** ***** **** *** ***** ***** *

Research C

onclusions

chapter

From the results of research undertaken, this section seeks to answer my research questions:

1. The design of the built environment plays a significant role in defining peoples perception of safety in Lagos. Inhabitants of the medium income case study area experienced the highest peception of crime. This perception correlated with the results from the crime risk assessment which identifies its physical environment as the most susceptible to criminal activities.

1. What is the relationship of the built environment to crime and the fear of crime in residential neighborhoods in Lagos? 2. How does the built environment compare to the social and demographic characteristics of a neighborhood in predicting crime and the fear of crime?

2. Social and demographic characteristics of neighborhoods did not give any cues to predicting the fear of crime amongst its inhabitants. The research was conducted with only residents from the selected study areas, and the same results might not be applicable to predicting visitors perceptions of crime in these study areas.

3. How effective are the existing crime prevention methods available and are they causing any effects on the sense of community?

3. Existing methods are not very effective, and have negative consequences on the sense of community. It has created a heightened sense of seclusion in the medium and high income study areas. 4. This can be achieved by application of relevant design principles to serve as catalysts in the reduction of potential risk factors posed by the physical environment that enable the occurrence of crime in neighbourhoods, which results in a reduced perception of crime.

SURVEILLANCE

4. How can urban design be used as a tool in reducing the perception of crime in residential neighbourhoods in Lagos?

high

Y IALIT R O T I TERR

MA MAI NAGEME NTEN NT ANC E

CASE STUDY 3

medium

CASE STUDY 1 IVITY ACT

PHYSICAL PROTECTION

SP STR A T IA UCT L URE

fig 6.0: Comparison Crime risk assessment for case studies

CASE STUDY 2 low CASE STUDY 1 - low income area CASE STUDY 2 - medium income area CASE STUDY 3 - high income area

perception of crime fig 6.1: Comparison of

sense of community

socio-eco variables

built environment

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS Traditionally, the motivators of crime have been associated with negative socio-economic and demographic dynamics. Other factors also include the natural eco-system of neighbourhoods and shift in social capital and economic resources. A detailed account of these variables are not fully integrated in this research. However, an effort is made by selecting the investigated areas from predominantly different socio-economic classes. The research did not take into account non-residents of the selected case study areas perception of safety. Residents might have different perceptions from non-residents of their neighbourhoods.

chapter

Design Guidelines This section encapsulates the design guidelines derived from the evaluation of three case studies in chapter 5. These prescriptive design parameters suggest the contextual physical variables that will serve to increase the perception of safety for residential neighbourhoods in Lagos.

Modify building setback requirements

stree t inte rface reduc dista tion o nce f prop erty l ine se tback

fig 7.0: Building setback

Use visually Permeable landscape & security features

• Statutory set back distances and requirements makes the creation of active frontages difficult. • Where applicable, property edges should interact with the street.

• Property fortification and trees should not obstruct surveillance.

Creating visual connectivity

physical fortification

• Orientation of buildings and streets should allow for clear sightlines and eliminate refuge points and dead edges.

• Achieve thoughtful building grouping without resorting to complete physical fortification.

Landscape elements installed to minimise obstruction

use of visually permeable fences where applicable fig 7.1: Street and building interface

• Use of symbolic barriers instead of real in some instances.

DWELLING GROUPING

fig 7.2: Thoughtful Building grouping

• The use of appropriate mix of land use activities to create activity.

• Mechanisms for creating boundaries which define hierarchy of spaces e.g change of material, levels, etc

RESIDENTIAL

• Elimination of desire lines for public shortcut through the site, restricting unwarranted trespassing. • Building entrances should located for easy surveillance.

OFFICE

RETAIL/ WORKSHOP

fig 7.3: Juxtaposing of spatial programs

Provide street lighting • Illumination of public spaces to aid surveilllance at night.

Provide management & maintenance • Strive to achieve a community of interests • Maintenance of facilities and infrastructure to prevent dilapidation

fig 7.4: Defined public paths

Create integrated movement flow patterns • Vehicular and pedestrian traffic movement patterns integrated to eliminate unecessary and isolated footpaths. • The layout should be designed to achieve double loaded streets with buildings fronting streets.

PEDESTRIAN VEHICLES

DWELLING

RESIDENTIAL

DEFINED PATHS THROUGH NEIGHBOURHOOD

• Reduction of ambiguity between public and private areas.

• Juxtaposition of safe and functional facilities.

DWELLING

• Design spaces to achieve clear functional uses to prevent space grabbing by illegal inhabitants.

Manage points of entry & restrict movement

Create Mixed-use spatial functions

RESIDENTIAL

Create proper spatial heirarchical structure

PEDESTRIAN VEHICLES fig 7.5: traffic pattern

G S

N A

Design Brief

The creation of a high quality sustainable urban residential environment in an existing low income neighbourhood in the Lagos metropolis, with the use of situational crime prevention principles as an alternative or to compliment to the present strategies being employed to mitigate the proliferation of crime in the neighbourhood.

chapter

Site Evaluation

INTERVENTION

S I T E In the selection of an intervention site, a bias for a location which exhibited a low socio-economic status was sought. The preference for this typology of physical setting is because, these areas are typically marginalised and have consequently not fully embraced any fundamental framework for mitigating crime, compared to the example of “gated estates” in more affluent areas. They are also areas which have the stigma of being “no go” areas with a high prevalence of antisocial activities.

CASE STUDY T W O Medium socio-economic profile

The intervention site is located at “Agidingbi” along the borders of the Central business district in Ikeja, Lagos. It is a community of predominantly low income dwellers situated within close proximity to a medium income neighbourhood.

CASE STUDY THREE

High socio-economic profile

10km

CASE STUDY O N E Low socio-economic 38

fig 8.0: Site location

profile

1 residential

U/C

2 institutional

8.1

U/C

ted mix designa

U/C U/C

3 industrial 4 commercial

U/C

6m front setback for residential development from property plot boundary

The Ikeja model city plan is the document which has been adopted by the Lagos state Government to serve as a guide for development around the intervention site.

U/C

BR U/C

Maximum 10 floors

r corrido

6m front setback for residential development from property plot boundary

U/C

The land-use pattern around the intervention site is categorised into institutional, residential, commercial, industrial, recreational, circulation and wet land.

U/C

along corridor

The document chronicles the challenges of this area to include, among others:

U/C U/C

U/C

• • • •

Agglomeration of traditional developments Sporadic change of use and illegal conversion Growth of urban slums and blighted neighbourhoods Encroachment on drainage alignment, gorges, canals, stream setbacks • Traffic congestion on major roads; and, • Emerging urban land uses like event centres, eateries, shopping plazas, private schools, places of worship, petrol filling stations and office complexes.

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C U/C U/C U/C

U/C

Key initiatives proposed to address these trends which affect the development site include:

U/C U/C U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

4 U/C

• Definition of alignment/embankment of gorges in order to enhance their value and prevent erosion and squatter settlements • Revitalisation and upgrading of the traditional core settlements through urban renewal programmes • Increase in density in order to accommodate the expected population growth within the Study Area for the plan period.

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

Policy Review

U/C

ed use

9m front setback for commercial development from property plot boundary

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

Ikeja model city plan 2010-2020

U/C U/C

U/C

fig 8.1: Ikeja model city

U/C

8.2

Site Analysis fig 8.2: Aerial view of existing settlement

SECTOR 1 Very low income character area: Traditional village settlement

SECTOR 2 Low-income character area

U/C

U/C U/C U/C U/C

U/C

NOTES

U/C

1:500

• The design intervention site has a fragmented fabric. The vicinity is almost fully built-up. Housing layouts are of both close and open patterns. The eastern part (sector 2) of the development site consists mainly of detached row houses, while the western part (sector 1) consists of traditional Brazilian architypal buildings with a layout depicting a no planning structure.

FIGURE GROUND

fig 8.3:

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

0% Recreation 2% Office 5% Retail 0% Educational 85% Residential U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

• The buildings on the western sector indicate that there have been slight modifications to the original layout adopted by the original settlers in the area. Illegal structures have infiltrated most of the spaces which defined the boundaries of individual dwellings.

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

fig 8.4:

U/C U/C

U/C

LAND-USE MAP

U/C U/C

U/C

• The site is enveloped by industrial and institutional developments.

0% Recreation

U/C U/C U/C U/C

5% Retail 0% Educational 85% Residential

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

NOTES

U/C U/C U/C U/C

U/C

arterial road vehicular & pedestrian

U/C

â&#x20AC;˘ There is a high level of pedestrian permeability through sector 1, with minimal vehicular activity penetrating its narrow roads and footpaths.

U/C

bridge overpass

U/C

â&#x20AC;˘ There is a high level of vehicular traffic activity in sector 2. This is as a result of public thoroughfare, using the road as a shortcut to during traffic congestions.

distributor road vehicular & pedestrian

BUS STOP

bridge underpass U/C U/C U/C

U/C

local road network vehicular & pedestrian

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

BUS STOP

U/C

SIZES INDICATE VARYING VOLUMES & FREQUENCIES

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C BUS STOP

U/C

BUS STOP

U/C U/C U/C U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

fig 8.5: Vehicular and Pedestrian traffic study

U/C

U/C U/C

NOTES • The structure of the neighbourhood indicates that a sense of ownership does not extend to the public relam in sector 2. Privacy is contained within boundaries of individual dwelling plots. • In sector 1 public and private spaces overlap and is hardly distinguishable.

U/C

fig 8.6:

PUBLIC & PRIVATE SPACES

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

dary building boun ry plot bounda ary road bound

U/C

ary road bound ry plot bounda

public

semi-private private

U/C

dary building boun

U/C

fig 8.7:

URBAN BLOCK EDGE STUDY

• The street interface is predominantly inactive and of poor quality, with illegal makeshift structures eroding property boundaries. • Cars parked on the street in sector 2 are considered to be unsafe. • There are a few working street lights in sector 2 and none in sector 1.

active interface

inactive interface

interface structure

U/C

• Sight lines are clear and unobstructed.

line of sight

t line of sigh point of concealment U/C

U/C

fig 8.9: Isovist study 1

• Sight line is obstructed by the curvature of the road. • Concealment opportunities are reduced by the width of the road. U/C

U/C U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C U/C U/C U/C

lin

U/C

f si

line of sight

gh t U/C

U/C

point of concealment

U/C

t line of sigh point of concealment

U/C

fig 8.10: Isovist study 2

44 U/C

U/C

U/C U/C

NOTES

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

â&#x20AC;˘ Sight lines are obstructed by the misalignment of buildings edges. U/C

U/C

point of concealment

lin

sig

U/C

point of concealment

â&#x20AC;˘ The narrow widths of the roads and paths creates a tunnel vision effect. This constricted field of vision hinders surveillance.

U/C

t f sigh

line o

â&#x20AC;˘ There are several concealment and refuge opportunities.

U/C

line of sight

point of concealment

U/C

road boundary

No surveillance opportunities from within dwelling

property boundary

fig 8.12: Street section

Semi-public property setback space

Public side walk

Semi-public property setback space

fig 8.11: Isovist study 3

surveillance opportunities from ancillary structure which serves as a retail unit or security post

road boundary

property boundary

45 surveillance opportunities

surveillance opportunities

DWELLING ENTRANC

U/C

8.3

Building Structure

U/C

REAR EXIT

TO COMMUNAL SPACE

BACKYARD

• The unit of property is a derivative from the Yoruba compound. The compound is a collective property and consisting of an assembly of dwellings arranged in close physical proximity. It does not conform to a strict typology, it represents instead a loosely bounded space wherein a group of interests coexists side by side and in agreement. It is collectively owned.

TOI TOI TOI TOI & & & & SHO SHO SHO SHO

KITCHEN

DWELLING

STREET

DWELLING ENTRANCE

KITCHEN

CIRCULATION

BUILDING ENTRANCE

DWELLING

fig 8.14: Indicative floor plan for Tenement buildings in sector 1

fig 8.13: Indicative floor plans for sector 1

• The residential base is supported by a few small scale businesses. Rooms are built to accomodate more people, and the fission of these new units contributes to compounding and an increment of building programs , minimising exterior space.

U/C

U/C U/C U/C U/C

U/C

DWELLING ENTRANCES

COMMON ENTRANCE TO DWELLINGS

PERIMETER FENCE REPRESENTING PLOT BOUNDARY

U/C

PLOT ENTRANCE

STREET U/C

fig 8.16: Indicative floor plan for detached buildings in sector 2

fig 8.15: Indicative floor plans for sector 2 U/C

• Lands are held by private individuals for a tenure of 99 years and a certificate of occupancy is issued by the state government to this effect. • Physical delimitation is achieved by construction of fences around property lines. • The property line is considered a legal division of land allocation to individual owners

fig 8.17:

• The streets have minimal tree cover.

STREET INVENTORY STUDY

• There are few utility poles (telephone and power) criss-crossing the street. • They do not have any consequences on crime.

trees

• Power supply is erratic for the few functioning street lights in the study area. • The street lights are powered by an alternative source provided by diesel generators, which is the contribution of a hotel located on the street.

pole post

schrubs

utility powerpole

manhole

fig 8.18:

U/C

STREET ILLUMINATION STUDY

U/C U/C U/C

• This is an innovative way of providing certain services needed in a neighbourhood, by encouraging businesses to share resources as a means of fulfilling social/corporate responsibility to their host communities.

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

lightpole lamp

U/C

8.4

Opportunities & Constraints U/C

LEGEND

U/C U/C

U/C

• Regeneration and renovation to create a uniform and distinctive character for the whole site.

U/C

upgrade of infrastructure U/C

• Creation of safe and secure community by reduction of potential crime risk factors.

U/C

hybrid programs

U/C U/C U/C

integration of traffic flow

• Minimise traffic congestion. U/C

Retail frontages

U/C U/C

• Increase passive and active surveillance opportunities.

U/C

recreational spaces & public amenity

U/C

• Provision of desirable and functional public spaces. U/C

• Clearly distinguished public and private spaces to encourage continuity and enclosure.

access control- redirect traffic flow U/C

U/C

visual connectivity

• Create diversity and adaptability opportunities U/C U/C U/C

• Poor surveillance opportunities caused by layout structure

inactive property interfaces

U/C

• Inactive property interface and street edges

illegal structures U/C

U/C

• Poor street lighting

relocation of inhabitants

U/C

• Relocation of local inhabitants of the regenerated sectors

noise pollution from road U/C

• Statutory physical development control restrictions for new developments

U/C

traffic thoroughfare U/C

no parking spaces

• Relocation of Places of worship.

U/C

• Numerous narrow pedestrian paths that enables entrapment and concealment.

traffic bottleneck

U/C

• Illegible movement pedestrian movement pattern.

U/C

obstruction of sight lines entrapment & concealment spaces

U/C

• Illegal building structures and poor infrastructure. U/C

fig 8.19: Opportunities and constraints map

U/C

SECTOR 1

Conclusion

SURVEILLANCE

8.5

SECTOR 2

LITY A I R ITO TERR

MA MAI NAGEME NTEN NT ANC E The potential for retrofitting sector 1 to improve both its environmental quality and the perception of safety is limited, however there is significant potential to improve it by regenerating the area. All buildings here are of low habitable quality and will be demolished.

The existing edges of sector 2 are of poor quality featuring misaligned and illegal structures. These unresponsive edges can be improved by retrofitting, by removing the negative effects of concealment and in some cases retrofitting the facade to improve the quality of the area.

IVITY ACT

PHYSICAL PROTECTION

SP STR A T IA UCT L URE

fig 8.20: Crime risk assessment intervention site

CHAPTER

9. Design exploration

U/C U/C

U/C U/C U/C U/C

9.1

U/C

Design Strategies U/C

PHYSICAL FORTIFICATION

U/C

• Provide “smart” target hardening features

U/C

DEMOLISION & REDEVELOPMENT

SURVEILLANCE

Provide adequate street light Create Passive and natural surveillance opportunities Eliminate refuge points Create clear and unobstructed sight lines

Create activity generators Provide traffic calming measures Provide appropriate car parking Provide movement predictors & legibility

COMMUNITY

• Create public amenity space • Integrate management and maintenance opportunities

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

STRE E H T N O S E EY

TOTAL REDEVELOPMENT U/C

U/C

SPATIAL HEIRARCHY

• • • •

RFACE

REET INTE PGRADED ST

NEW COMMUNAL SPACE

REINTEGRATION OF ORIGINAL HABITANTS

MOVEMENT STRUCTURE

U/C

PRIVATE

SEMI-PUBLIC

PUBLIC

U/C

TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT

CO RET RRI AIL DO R

U/C

URBAN REPAIR

• Regeneration & Renovations of dilapidated areas • Retrofitting of dilapidated areas

RETROFITTING ACCESS CHECK POINTS

• • • •

U/C

PRIVATE

SEMI-PUBLIC

PHYSICAL FORTIFICATION U/C

TERRITORILITY

• Define spatial boundaries adequately U/C

fig 9.1: Design strategies U/C

U/C

52 U/C

U/C

9.2

Design Prototype 1

â&#x20AC;¢ THE TERRACE

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

fig 9.2: Layout Design option 1

53 U/C

access point

building edge creates an impermeable boundary

cre cre

ter ate

sur

vei

lla

ort

itie

rac

ous

ate

sur

veil

lanc

e op

por

overlooked communal space tun

itie

r pe

r ete

u ec

rit

en yf

fig 9.3: Artsistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Impression Design option 1

access point

U/C

fig 9.4: LAND USE STUDY DESIGN OPTION 1

U/C U/C

• It incorporates mixed-use programs at the frontages of buildings situated along the mixed-use corridor.

U/C

commercial frontages on ground floor located on mixed-use corridor

• Resettlement of a percentage of the original inhabitants of sector 1.

Place of worship (church)

row houses new developments

retrofitted residential developments U/C

flexible spaces

new residential developments U/C

• Alignment of building frontages of sector 2, with the introduction of structures which accomodate flexible spatial programs (either small scale businesses or workshops).

U/C U/C

U/C

public communal space

tages

fron on property

retrofitted residential developments

U/C

Place of worship (mosque) ground floor

terrace houses dwellings for resettled inhabitants

U/C

commercial

U/C

residential

U/C

office

flexible (retail/workshops)

place of worship

U/C

fig 9.5: MOVEMENT STUDY DESIGN OPTION 1 U/C

• Restructured vehicular movement pattern to reduce public thoroughfare.

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

hicle one wayouve U/C traffic t

U/C

ing strictfa barrierthre re public orough

U/C

internal pedestrian

external pedestrian

U/C

vehicular movement

fig 9.6: STREET VIEW- DESIGN OPTION

• Passive surveillance of public spaces from within dwellings is achieved with the use of palisade fences. • Reduction of setback distance of building frontage with the street edges. • Clearly defined spatial hierarchy

fig 66: AERIAL VIEW- DESIGN OPTION

• Physical fortification is achieved by the layout of houses which form impermeable edges. • Single aspect terrace buildings in sector 1 are not favourable for ventilation.

U/C

9.3

Design Prototype 2

â&#x20AC;¢ THE PARADE

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

fig 9.8: Layout plan Design option 2

57 U/C

place of worship

cre

apartment buildings with Small scale business on ground floor

det ate

sur

vei

lla

ort

itie

ach

overlooked communal space

hou

ses

i per fig 9.9: Artsistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Impression Design option 2

controlled access point

s ter

t uri

controlled access point

en yf

road closure pedestrian onlyaccess

U/C

fig 9.10: LAND USE STUDY DESIGN OPTION 2

• It incorporates mixed-use programs at the frontages of buildings situated along the mixed-use corridor.

U/C

Place of worship (mosque) commercial frontages on ground floor located on mixed-use corridor

• Alignment of building frontages of sector 2, with the introduction of structures which accomodate flexible spatial programs (small scale businesses, workshops, utility etc).

U/C U/C

Place of worship (church) retrofitted residential developments

new residential developments

U/C

flexible spaces

tages

fron on property

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

retrofitted residential developments

U/C

row houses new residential developments

U/C

commercial

residential

U/C

office

flexible (retail/workshops)

place of worship

U/C

fig 9.11: MOVEMENT STUDY DESIGN OPTION 2 U/C

• Internal vehicular traffic connection is restricted between sector 1 and sector 2. A mechanism to discourage public vehicular thoroughfare and congestion within the site.

U/C

U/C U/C

U/C

g strictintio barrierlare ec n vehicu r conn

U/C

internal pedestrian

external pedestrian

U/C

vehicular movement

fig 9.12: STREET VIEW DESIGN OPTION

â&#x20AC;˘ Dwellings are oriented to maximise surveillance opportunities and eliminate potential refuge points.

fig 9.13: AERIAL VIEW DESIGN OPTION

â&#x20AC;˘ Detached row houses are the predominant typology used in the regeneration of sector 1. This fits the contexts of existing buildings in sector 2.

U/C

9.4

Design Prototype 3

â&#x20AC;¢ THE AVENUE

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

fig 9.14: Layout plan Design option 3

61 U/C

controlled access point apartment buildings

commercial development e apartm

cr ea

te su

tac

eil

lan

gs buildin

ace terr se

uses

terr

po rtu nit ies

fig 9.15: Artsistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Impression Design option 3

overlooked communal space

rim

ete

ity

fen

ous ce h

tac

U/C

fig 9.16: LAND USE STUDY DESIGN OPTION 3 U/C

• It creates a commercial core along the designated mixeduse corridor.

U/C

Place of worship (mosque)

• Residential buildings are also situated along the corridor.

U/C

row houses new developments retrofitted residential developments U/C

row houses new developments

public communal space

flexible spaces

tages

fron on property

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

retrofitted residential developments

U/C

commercial core new residential developments

U/C

commercial

U/C

residential

U/C

office

flexible (retail/workshops)

place of worship

U/C

fig 9.17: MOVEMENT STUDY DESIGN OPTION 3

• An enclosed community is created by the total restriction of public thoroughfare through the site with the erection of gates at entrance points.

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

gate restricting public thoroughfare

U/C

gate restricting public thoroughfare U/C

U/C

internal pedestrian

external pedestrian

U/C

vehicular movement

FRONT FRONT FRONT FRONT BACK FRONT

BACK FRONT

FRONT BACK FRONT BACK ROAD

FRONT FRONT

• Terrace buildings are oriented to maximise surveillance opportunities and eliminate potential refuge points.

fig 9.18: AERIAL VIEW DESIGN OPTION

• Public communal space is overlooked by all dwellings.

fig 9.19: STREET VIEW DESIGN OPTION

9.5

Design Prototyping

â&#x20AC;˘ CONCLUSION & FINDINGS

Two fundamental strategies were explored in developing the design prototypes, they were: 1. Retrofit sector 2, to work with existing buildings and features. 2. Regenerate sector 1, by demolishing dilapidated buildings and redevelop them. All three prototypes attempted to respond to the task of achieving a safer neighbourhood. But as with solving all design problems, there were negative implications encountered in finding a solution. The Terrace (prototype 1) and the Parade (prototype 2) are still viable design options, but for the purpose of this research, the Avenue (prototype 3) responded to the risk cues in reference to the criteria set out earlier in the research, with the least negative consequences. Prototype 3 will be developed further as the preferred design option in the next chapter. Some positive elements from the other prototypes will be incoporated to the new layout scheme.

CHAPTER

10. Design Proposal A synergism of the design guidelines generated from this research to reinforce the sense of security and community in the neighborhood.

landuse proposal RESIDENTIAL existing detached buildings

FLEXIBLE USES small scale retail & workshops

UTILITY BUILDING PLACE OF WORSHIP

RESIDENTIAL

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION

terrace buildings

RESIDENTIAL COMMUNAL PARK

new detached buildings

RESIDENTIAL

EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION

apartments located above offices

RESIDENTIAL apartments located above offices

OFFICES ground&first floors

RESIDENTIAL apartments facing communal park

fig 10.1: Landuse diagram

RETAIL ground&first floors

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

N 0

10 20

100

120Metres

U/C

68 fig 10.2: Proposed layout

U/C

fig 10.2: Indicative ground floor layout plan

10 20

60 60metres 69

scale 1:250

Pedestrian sidewalk

Sect i o n 1

Semi-private property setback space

• Reduction of setback distance of building frontage with the street edges.

property boundary

structure suitable for small scale commercial programs serve as activity generators

road boundary

property boundary fig 10.3. Artist’s impression - View along retrofitted sector 2 scale 1:250

visual

onparksintrgeet building entrance back yard

nobs

conne

ctivity

ce in

2 to

oper

pr t and

building entrance

erfa y int

or sect

te u crea

ight

ed s ruct

e stre f o t n back yardalignmebuilding entrance

back yard

t tree on-srking pa

x°

>1.5m

scale 1:250

fig 10.4. Lines of sight along internal road network

70 street parking

road boundary

semi-public communal space

fig 10.5 . Foliage location to maximise surveillance

fig. 10.6 Artist’s impression - Dwellings overlooking communal park

Semi-private property setback space

scale 1:250

Private space

property setback zone

Public side walk

structure suitable for small scale commercial programs serve as activity generators

fig. 10.7 Artistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s impression - Terrace dwellings arranged to avoid dead edges

road boundary

property boundary

road boundary

property boundary

scale 1:250

property setback zone

Public side walk

Semi-public property setback space

Orientating dwellings entrances to minimise the occurrence of dead edges.

Pedestrian sidewalk

Sect i o n 2

property boundary

back yard

building entrance

back yard

building entrance

back yard

building entrance

back yard

fig. 10.8 Longitudinal Section - Terrace dwellings arranged to avoid dead edges

RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL

RESIDENTIAL

scale 1:250

road boundary

property boundary

Pedestrian sidewalk

Semi-private property setback space

scale 1:250

Private space

Public side walk

Section 3

property setback zone

Semi-public property setback space

â&#x20AC;˘ Passive surveillance of public spaces from within dwellings is achieved with the use of palisade fences.

property boundary

structure suitable for small scale commercial programs serve as activity generators

road boundary

property boundary

fig.10.9. Concertina wire road boundary top treatment of fence

scale 1:250

property setback zone

Public side walk

fig.10.9. Palisade fence

property boundary

back yard

building entrance

back yard

building entrance

fig. 10.10; impression overlooking communal park back yard Artistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s building entrance- Dwellings back yard

scale 1:250

RESIDENTIAL

Public side walk

RESIDENTIAL

RETAIL

RESIDENTIAL

RETAIL

RESIDENTIAL

property boundary

street parking

road boundary

semi-public communal space fig10.11: Longitudinal Section - Mixed-use building

i-private space

scale 1:250 scale 1:250

y setback space

road boundary

RESIDENTIAL

building entrance

oriented to maximise surveillance opportunities and eliminate potential refuge points.

back yard

building entrance

Public side walk

Sect i o n 4 Dwellings are buildingâ&#x20AC;˘ entrance back yard

Private space

road boundary

scale 1:250

yard

property setback zone

Public side walk

property boundary

scale 1:250

back yard

property boundary

property bounda

property setback zone

road boundary

Public side walk

property boundary

structure suitable for small scale commercial programs serve as activity generators

Semi-public property setback spac

Pedestrian sidewal

Semi-private prope

scale 1:250

road boundary

property boundary

back yard

building entrance

back yard

scale 1:250

RESIDENTIAL

road boundary

semi-public communal space

fig. 10.12: Artistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s impression - Aerial View 1

scale 1:250

property boundary property boundary fig10.13: Street Section

street parking

road boundary

Public side walk

RETAIL

RESIDENTIAL

RETAIL

RESIDENTIAL

property boundary

street parking

road boundary

semi-p

scale 1:250

Semi-private space

Semi-private property setback space

Semi-private space

road boundary

RESIDENTIAL

Publicproperty road boundary boundary Public side walk side walk

property boundary

Semi-private space

street parking

RESIDENTIAL

street road boundary parking

street parking

property boundary

fig10.14: Street Section

property bou

road boundary

property boundary

back yard

building entrance

back yard

building entrance

back ya

RESIDENTIAL

road boundary

Section 5

Public side walk

RESIDENTIAL

RETAIL

RESIDENTIAL

RETAIL

RESIDENTIAL

property boundary

street parking

road boundary

semi-public communal space

Entrance features used to reinforce a sense of privacy. Discouraging unwanted trespassing. Public road boundary Public side walk side walk

Semi-private space

scale 1:250

street road boundary parking

property boundary

street parking

scale 1:250

property boundary

fig. 10.16: Artistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s impression - Western entrance to the site along the mixed-use

fig10.15: Street Section

road boundary

property boundary

Pedestrian sidewalk

Semi-private property setback space

scale 1:250

Private space

property setback zone

Public side walk

Semi-public property setback space

property boundary

structure suitable for small scale commercial programs serve as activity generators

road boundary

property boundary

side walk

rty setback zone

fig. 10.17: Artistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s impression - Eastern entrance to the site strategically grouping buildings to depict access control scale 1:250

street parking

fig. 10.18: Artistâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s impression - Aerial View 2

U/C

Street lighting strategy

U/C

U/C U/C U/C

U/C

fig. 10.19: Street Lighting plan

U/C

street fig. 10.20: Street Lighting strategy

small units front adjoining dwellings entrances

street light located betwween entrances to aid surveillance at night dwelling entrance

Edge Study

SEMI-PRIVATE PROPERTY SETBACK PUBLIC SIDE WALK AD

ACCESS RO

PLOT ENTRANCE

VISUALLY PERMEABLE EDGE

FLEXIBLE USE

(SMALL SCALE BUSINESS, SECURITY POST, UTILITY)

fig. 10.21: Property Edge study

The design intervention is based on specific data gathered for this project. It does not propose a “one-size-fitsall” solution in mitigating crime opportunities. This is due to contextual variables, but can serve as a guidance in the design of residential neighbourhoods in Lagos. For this intervention to be succcessful, it incoporated elements of the design principles derived from the research to form a symbiotic relationship. A significant test for the validity of the design proposal will involve altering buildings and grounds of existing housing projects for the purpose of conducting “before and after studies”, as Newman performed for his study of of residential developments in New York. Due to time constraints and scarce funding, these physical modifications were not feasible. Therefore, there is no guarantee that the outcomes of this research would yield positive results if executed as a real life project.

Design C

onclusions

chapter

Bibliography Agbola, T., 1997. The architecture of fear: Urban design and construction response to urban violence in Lagos, Nigeria. Ibadan: IFRA Alemika, E., Chukwuma, I., 2005. Criminal Victimisation and Fear of Crime in Lagos Metropolis, Nigeria. Lagos : CLEEN Foundation.

Koolhaas, R., Boeri, S., Kwinter, S., Tazi, N., & Obrist, H. (2000). Mutations : Rem Koolhaas, Harvard Project on the City ; Stefano Boeri, Multiplicity ; Sanford Kwinter ; Nadia Tazi, Hans Ulrich Obrist. Barcelona: ACTAR

BJS Bureau Of Justice Statistics [online] Available at: http://www.bjs.gov/index. cfm?ty=tdtp&tid=3 [Accessed: 30 April, 2012]

Kruger, T., Landman., K., Liebermann, S. 2001. Designing safer places: A manual for crime prevention through planning and design. Pretoria: The South African Police Service and the CSIR.

Crowe, T., 2000. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design. 2nd ed. Boston, Mass.: Butterworth-Heinemann.

LANDMAN, K., 2006. Privatising public space in post-apartheid South African cities through neighbourhood enclosures.GeoJournal, 66(1-2), pp. 133-146.

Clarke, R.V., 1997. Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies. Albany, NY: Harrow and Heston .

Landman, K., Schönteich, M., 2002. URBAN FORTRESSES: Gated communities as a reaction to crime. African Security Review 11(4) [online] Available at: http://www.issafrica.org/pubs/ ASR/11No4/Landman.pdf [Accessed: 28 June, 2013]

Cohen, L.E., Felson, M., 1979. “Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach. American Sociological Review 44: 588-608 Crouch, S. et al, 1999. Design for Secure Residential Environments: A Technical Handbook. Essex: Addison-Wesley Longman Ellin, N., 2001. Thresholds of Fear: Embracing the Urban Shadow. Urban Studies, Vol. 38, Nos 5–6, 869–883, [online] Available at: http://usj.sagepub.com/content/38/5-6/869 [Accessed: 30 December, 2012] Fabiyi, O.O., 2008. Space Theft or Space Transfer: The Nature of Crime-Induced Spatial Partitioning and Control in Enclosed Neighborhoods in Ibadan and Johannesburg. Space and Culture, Vol. 11, No. 4, 361-382 [Online] Available at: http://sac.sagepub.com/content/11/4/361 [Accessed: 1 January, 2013]

Jeffery, C.R., 1977. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. . (Second Edition). Beverly Hills,CA: Sage.

Moon, D., Walker, A., Murphy, R., Flatley, J., Parfrement-Hopkins, J., 2009 Perceptions of crime and anti-social behaviour: Findings from the 2008/09 British Crime Survey [Online] Available at : http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20100528142817/rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/ pdfs09/hosb1709.pdf [Accessed: 25 April, 2013] Naude, B., 2003. “The effectiveness of Public Road Closures in Suburban Areas as a Crime Reduction Measure”, Security Focus, July, pp. 34-36 Newman, O., 1972. Defensible Space: People and Design in the violent city. London: Architectural Press Pelser, E, ed., Crime Prevention Partnerships: Lessons from Practice (Pretoria, Institute of Security Studies, 2002).

Hartnagel, T.F., 1979. The Perception and Fear of Crime: Implication for Neighbourhood Cohesion, Social Activity, and Community Effect. [online] Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=9c449d5a-a386-40dc-bc89-a45c9c457de1%40sessionmgr11 2&vid=2&hid=118 [Accessed: 28 May, 2013]

Poyner, B., 1983. Design against Crime: Beyond defensible space. London: Architectural Press.

Home office. 2004. Safer Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention. Office of the deputy Prime Minister

Schneider, R.H., Kitchen, T., 2002. Planning for Crime Prevention: A Transatlantic Perspective. London ; New York: Routledge

Ilesanmi, A., 2012. The roots and fruits of gated communities in Lagos, Nigeria: Social sustainability or segregation? Sustainable Futures: Architecture and Urbanism in the Global South. Kampala, Uganda

Schweitzer, J.H., Kim, J.W., Mackin, J.R., 1999. The Impact of the Built Environment on Crime and Fear of Crime in Urban Neighborhoods. [Online] Available at: http://www.npcresearch. com/Files/IBEC.pdf [Accessed: 30 July, 2013]

Jacobs, J. (1961). Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York

Stollard, P., 1991. Crime Prevention Through Housing Design. London: Chapman and Hall

Poyner, B., 2006. Crime-Free Housing in the 21st Century. London: UCL Jill Dando Institute of Crime Science

UN-Habitat, 2006. Urbanisation: Facts and Figures [Online] Available at: https://docs.google. com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.unhabitat.org%2Fmediacentre%2Fdocuments%2Fbackgr ounder5.doc [Accessed: 10 June, 2013] UN-HABITAT, 2008. Country Programme Document - Nigeria. [Online] Available at: <www. unhabitat.org/pmss/getElectronicVersion.aspx?nr=2703&alt=1‎> [Accessed: 21 March, 2013] UN-HABITAT, 2007. Enhancing Urban Safety and Security: Global Report on Human Settlements [Online] Available at http://www.unhabitat.org/grhs/2007 [Accessed: 21 March, 2013] UNODC, 2010. Handbook on the crime prevention guidelines Making them work . [Online] Available at < http://www.unodc.org/documents/justice-and-prison-reform/crimeprevention/10-52410_Guidelines_eBook.pdf > [Accessed: 21 March, 2013] Wilson-Doenges, G., 2000. An Exploration of Sense of Community and Fear of Crime in Gated Communities. Environment and Behavior 32: 597-611, [Online] Available at http://eab.sagepub.com/content/32/5/597.full.pdf+html [Accessed: 21 May, 2013] Wilson J.Q and Kelling G.L . “BROKEN WINDOWS: The police and neighborhood safety” (PDF). Retrieved 2007-09-03. (HTML version)

fig. 1.0 Lagos Marina. [Photograph] In possession of: Babz Bamiro photography fig. 2.0 Victoria Island. [Photograph] In possession of: Babz Bamiro photography fig 2.5.3: Public-private Building futures < http://www.hertslink.org/buildingfutures/safety/princcrime/public/> [Accessed: 21 July, 2013] fig.10.9 Palisade fence <http://www.fencing-systems.co.uk/palisade-fence/> [Accessed: 29 August, 2013] fig.10.9. Concertina wire top treatment of fence <http://www.steellong.cn/high/utp/wz1480_1. jpg> [Accessed: 29 August, 2013]

Akolade Akiyode C1 2 3 9 226 Ma Urban Design C P T 8 5 4 82