An investigation into the social segregation of young people in inner- city social housing. by Lizzi Twells

An investigation into the social

segregation of young people in inner- city social housing Elizabeth Parkinson ARCH409 MArch year 1 Tutor: Katharine Willis

Elizabeth Parkinson MArch Year 1 Urban Theories and Methodologies Tutor- Katherine Willis

How does the social housing of Union Street help (or hinder) the social interactions of unemployed young people and their ability to mix with others? An investigation into the social segregation of young people in inner- city social housing.

Contents Abstract

Introduction

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework

Methodology

Defining areas of study

Results 12 Further research- data 14 Discussion and implications for policy and urban design and Results analysis

List of References List Illustrations Bibliography Appendix

19 20 21 22

Abstract This report investigates the levels of social segregation experienced by local young people in inner city pockets of social housing. The study has been carried out in such a way that the same study could be applied to other areas of the UK. The report looks at where young people are going to, who their friends are and methods of communication to prove that young people in this area are socially segregated and therefore promote the improvement of their situation. With the looming development of Millbay docks, the area has the potential to do something different for its residents. The study will provide a basic insight into their lives in order to suggest improvements to the area. The young unemployed are probably the most vulnerable group in Stonehouse, certainly because they are the adults of the future. The area is dominated by the surrounding housing which is the setting for their activities. Using the first social urban theorists as precedent and social network analysis as the method the report seeks to clarify what makes local young people mix with others and leave their homes to experience everyday â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;cultural processes,â&#x20AC;&#x2122; (Byrne 2009) vital to human well being.

Introduction Social interactions are an important part of life. Relationships formed through life can lead to good or bad things and the people we choose to communicate with often shape who you are. This study looks at the social conditions of young people in inner-city social housing. Cities all over the country have these types of housing. Crime, unemployment and low quality of life are the focus of studies carried out in these areas by charities such as the Joseph Roundtree Foundation. Studies into this area therefore could potentially hold the key to improving the problems through a different approach to ‘streets in the sky.’ Health and wellbeing is something all humans should be entitled to. Included in this are aspects of selfsufficiency and particularly socialising with other humans. This study uses Union street, Plymouth as its focus because of the high levels of unemployment, deprivation and addiction. Figures for the area prove that the people that live here are not self sufficient (Plymouth’s economic review 2012) but details of socialising are not so obvious or easy to uncover. The assumptions made are that young people who live on Union street are social excluded and isolated. This study will identify if this is true and to what extent. Possible contributing factors are access to public space, difficulty in mixing with other blocks, leaving the house and mixing with people from different backgrounds. The areas referred to above are often the result of extensive bombing in World War II which still leaves its mark on modern society. Low cost, high-rise homes were quickly and cheaply constructed but were also seen as clearing the streets to provide more green space. Socially the new designs were deemed to have failed soon after. People who could afford to moved and what remained were the very poorest members of the community. Housing has been chosen as a spacial grounding to the investigation because unemployed people inevitably spend most of their time at home and therefor would be the most important typology to investigate. The housing within the area of study is pre-war, high rise housing North of Union street, Plymouth. The housing is owned and maintained by the council, unlike many which are now owned by the housing association (see figure 1 page 13). The blocks house a large number of inhabitants in low standard accommodation that is unlikely to be vastly improved or replaced because of the cost of replacing and rehoming its inhabitants. Although gentrification is a possibility after the imminent development of Millbay docks, the high rise, poor quality housing makes it unlikely. They are more likely to remain as they are nowa pocket of deprivation; a ghetto. The area sits in the poorest part of the ward, namely St Peter and The Waterfront and is now one of the poorest areas in the UK with double the amount of unemployed people as the rest of the city (Plymouth’s economic review 2012). The study looks at how spatial form and social networks drive segregation not just of the rich and poor but also especially the young poor and how the architecture enforced on these people reinforces this and their use of the spaces offered to them. Segregation is explored not only in the built form but also in terms of technology and policy. Through analysing social connections, movements and methods of communication through questionnaires, interviews and observations the study will identify a more detailed picture of the young unemployed’s life. The focus group used will be ‘not in employment, education or training’ (NEET’s) in order to define a particular group of young people. The term was coined by the government to categories the young unemployed and although the term itself creates stigma and separation it is useful in this context to focus the study. This group have been chosen for the study because they are perceived to be a very vulnerable group. Plymouth’s official percentage of NEET’s that are 16 or 17 years old is 7.8% with unknowns at 3.1%. This very low compared to other UK cities. 2.9% of Plymouth’s population is on full job seekers allowance (JSA), compared to the national average of 4.2%. However although the figure for Plymouth as a whole is very low because they are in concentrated pockets the figure feels much higher. There are many who are in low paid and part time jobs. 28% of people on JSA are classified as ‘long term.’ St Peter and the Waterfront has by far the most unemployed (in many cases double the amount of other wards) and far more 18- 24 year old’s and those classed as long term. (Plymouth’s economic review 2012). Half the population of St. 7

Peter and The Waterfront is unemployed and half don’t own a car. History and policy directly effects these peoples lives, with a large proportion of them living on the poverty line. The literature chosen has been selected because they studied, in detail, the people and the effect city scale planning has on them. They also ended up being guidance to planners and designers.

Literature review and historical political context Interaction in Cities I have used Jane Jacobs and William Whyte for reference because they were among the first to look at people in the city from the peoples perspective and using this as a tool for design. Jane Jacobs was a pioneer in the way theorists look at cities. Focussing on the people she identified the subtle elements that make a good community. Some relevant points she makes include the preference of pedestrians and cyclists over cars, that cities should be complex and untidy. Encouraging interaction at street level creates vibrance and ‘eyes on the street.’ Jacobs also help to campaign against the removal of deprived areas, although often in doing this she assisted gentrification. Applying Jacobs opinion to the area focused on in this study, firstly by building multistory blocks of housing the connection from the houses to the street is lost. The ground floor windows are to high to see out when sat on a sofa and therefore the ‘eyes on the street’ are lost. The lack of mixed use in the area could also be seen as an issue. With residents only there at certain times of the day the area feels empty and unsafe. Residents also appear to walk onto Union Street as soon as possible, rather than walk down their own street. The area is, however pedestrianised as a ‘homezone’. Prioritising cars does make the area feel safer in terms of traffic, unlike union street, but contributes to making the place feel even emptier. William Whyte wrote about the importance of face to face interaction in cities. He valued meeting places, convenient places to sit, watch, talk. He also noted that where the place is is ultimately linked to its success. The investigation will identify where people who live in Stonehouse meet friends, how they arrange it and how often. Whyte wrote that the social life in public spaces contributes fundamentally to the quality of life of individuals and society (Whyte 1988). He suggested that we have a moral responsibility to create physical places that facilitate civic engagement and community interaction. He also advocated for a new way of designing public spaces – one that was bottom-up, not top-down. Using his approach, design should start with a thorough understanding of the way people use spaces, and the way they would like to use spaces. Whyte noted that people vote with their feet – they use spaces that are easy to use, that are comfortable. They don’t use the spaces that are not. Using Whyte as a method he suggested that through observation and by talking to people, we can learn a great deal about what people want in public spaces and can put this knowledge to work in creating places that shape livable communities. We should therefore enter spaces without theoretical or aesthetical biases, and “look hard, with a clean, clear mind, and then look again – and believe what you see.” (Project for making public spaces) David Byre writes of the difference between social exclusion and poverty as they don’t often go hand in hand. He cites Madanipour et al. as a definitions of segregation: ‘Social exclusion is defined as a multi- dimensional process, in which various forms of exclusion are combined: participation in decision making and political processes, access to employment and material resources, and integration into common cultural processes. When combined, they create acute forms of exclusion that find a spatial manifestation in particular neighbourhoods.’ This text defines social segregation in the context which is studied in this report. He focuses on the unemployed young people and their experience of mixing, technology, and social mobility. ‘Social Exclusion presents a deeply political and, to use Byrne’s own phrase, ‘unashamedly old-fashioned’ approach to understanding how ‘social exclusion derives from inequality . . . [from] a postindustrial social 8

order dominated by globalizing capital and the super-class associated with that globalizing capital’ (p. 182).’ ‘His discussion here of youth experiences of exclusion is enhanced, for instance, by recent research by Ross Fergusson on the instability and flux of ‘school to work careers’. Byrne rightly rolls up findings like these into a broader critique of the futility of policy approaches to the problems of young people ‘not in education, employment and training’ that rely — as they do — on rigid, snapshot categorizations of the excluded/ included.’ (David Byrne 2005) The quotes above highlights some of the issues with the focus group NEET’s and our system of saving/ cleansing areas deemed a ‘problem’. This method clearly isn’t perfect and is generally causing more counter problems than solutions. Therefore alternatives should be considered. The Government has already decided NEET’s are excluded, that’s why they are the focus of this report. Reports suggesting changes to already identified ‘problems’ are more readily received and speak a recognised language. The language referred to is explained in the following section. Policy and Government figures This section has been included because categorising people is part of the problem. In order to establish a political and theoretical context the recurrent themes to the study are; Segregation, politically on purpose and even the term NEET’s which I have used through out segregates these people from ‘normal’ society. Government funded reports and politics feature in this section along with spaces; providing a link to policy and the use of spaces by people where architecture plays a more prominent role; Youth; with a growing number of young people who are unemployed this issue is nationwide. Youths are directly linked to segregation and use of space which leads to quotes from sociological sources. The sub group which the government have separated NEET’s into are; Undecided NEET – The don’t know what they want to do and are generally dissatisfied with life; Sustained NEET- Low grades, negative attitude to school; Open to learning NEET- most likely to get a job, higher grades, more positive attitude (Plymouth city council and Partners). There are a large number of reports on ‘understanding NEET’s’. Some speak of social exclusion often leading to police involvement, drug use and mental health problems. Although it is important to understand the classifications and terminology that the government uses to refer to these young people it appears create a negative stigma for the people involved. Their locality and the environment of their locality enhance this segregation. Another, relatively recent dimension to social seclusion is linked to social networking sites. NEET’s could be further reluctant to leave their homes due to digital communication with the outside world (Arun Marsh 2009). Our society does not openly acknowledge how vital face-to-face communication is and the architecture in the area demonstrates this. The decisions by the council about the architecture in the area are also heavily influenced by this approach. The relevance of social interactions on housing satisfaction by Esperanza Vera-Toscano Æ and Victoria Ateca-Amestoythe argues that social interaction in the area lived in is increased with satisfaction about where you live. Satisfaction is effected in the UK often by whether you own your house or live in an area where most people own their house and you rent.

Methodology Connections between individuals and patterns of everyday life will be gathered and analysed. Observing, as a singular method will not fully uncover the subject because it is a passive method. However it is still important to the study because the data is taken from completely natural and uninfluenced behaviour. Discussions and interviews will also be conducted to allow information to be gathered that cannot be sourced from observation. By carrying out the interviews before the observation the data from these interviews will also help to identify the best areas to observe. This study will be an informed empirical study using social network analysis as a method. The three sites that will be studied will be Peel Street (shown in orange), St Mary Street (shown in purple) and The park on Union place (shown in yellow) (see map adjacent). The most relevant time to observe is going to and from work times and evenings. This should allow observation of both working and unemployed young people. Homelessness, prostitution, abuse, hate crimes and drugs are all to present. Because of the intense need for help in this area there is a sizeable network of support groups, hostels and charities in the area. In order to gather accurate information it will be through this network that the study gathers its data. The preliminary investigation was carried out in the areas described and also the surrounding area. Initial observations noted were that there is a distinct lack of seating, green and socialising space. The closest park was primarily aimed at young children and was used well. There is also a ball games area, which I observed youths using. The youth support officer explained that the area is used often by charities for deprived young people. There were several unexpected points noted; to the back of the flats several had shared balconies, which appeared to be very well used. They where inhabited fully by the residents that had put benches, buckets, washing, plants and chalk drawings decorated the walls. When the observation was carried out it was very cold outside but several people where sat talking to each other. This presented a new problem to the investigation- these balconies where semi private spaces and without invitation inside they where inaccessible, without shouting up. It was also noted that the people that live in these flats do not often leave their comfort zone and communicate through the displays in their windows. This impression was confirmed by the community support officer. Because the streets where relatively empty I chose to interview people that entered the Oasis cafe on food bank days. The questionnaires were designed to identify if the residents of Stonehouse really were (or not) interacting with people and architecture outside of their flat. In order to assess evidence it will be imperative to talk to local people. The location decided on was the Oasis cafĂŠ on Adelaide Street (marked in green on map adjacent) that is the Food bank distributor for the whole of Plymouth. They give a maximum of 4 vouchers per year to people in immediate need. Observations The observations made in Stonehouse will include; the general appearance of the people present, young, old, type of clothing; the activity they a doing, groups, duration of stay, time and smart phone use. This helped me to generally assess the area in order to establish the best way to gather the information needed. Questionnaires and Interviews The informal discussions and interviews with different members of the community will include; charities, members of the community, government mentors and government enforcement officers. I used Social networking analysis methods for my refined framework for questionnaires and in the way I collated the information. This method was chosen because although observations gives a recording of uninfluenced behaviour it is influenced by the recorders views and opinions. Questionnaires allows a more unbiast analysis of the participants. The questions asked focused on social mobility, physical mobility and mix of friendship groups. Additional questions were asked regarding social networking, media and connections to neighbours. 10

Defining areas of study Spatially the area this study focuses on is defined by Union Street to the South and the naval hospital to the North (see map below). These are both physical barriers. Union Street is a busy main road into Plymouth which is noisy and difficult to cross. The five metre high blank wall surrounds the Naval hospital. This gives the area a feeling of exclusion, rejection and even entrapment. The housing stock is almost all low cost flats or very small terrace style houses (see figure 2). They appear to be generally not very well maintained although during every investigation visit maintenance work appeared to be being carried out on the council owned blocks. There are however several well established, large trees and some small grassed areas around the flats. The childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s park is central to the lower density area, although the backs of the houses face it. The play area is in good condition is clean. There is also some carefully created wall art in the area. The area has a feeling of being well observed by people in the surrounding houses.

A D

Front cover: Sourced from Digimaps 2013 Showing area of study and key spaces described in text. Letters A- G are refering to the pictures on page 13.

Results Trial Observations/ Initial findings of trial observations A community worker told me that the local unemployed generally have problems with finding the confidence to leave their estate walls or even their flat. Part of her job was to find way of encouraging them to leave and improve the quality of life for their children. This indicated that the best way to record their behaviour was to visit a location that they had to go to because there were not very many using outdoor spaces. Initial observations of the area identified issues with my method. The area was relatively quiet most of the time. Therefore first thoughts of interviewing on the street where not going to gather enough results. My observations showed most pedestrians in the area where present in work hours and between the ages of 30-45. They were, however completely outnumbered by government workers with name badges and clip boards. Each site visit there where between 5 and 10 workers recorded, totalling at least 70% of the people I encountered. This in turn lead to some informal interviews regarding social connectivity in the area. The overall view was that residents struggled with self esteem issues and leaving their homes was difficult. Knowledge of changes in the benefit system and how to manage finances are key difficulties faced. The initial investigations involved talking to people on the street about their experiences of the area in an informal manner (see appendix 2). This gave me some idea of the kinds of issues the wider area of Stonehouse had. These talks usually became focused on the unemployed because of the high number of council blocks to the North of Union street.

Trial Questionnaires and Interviews At the first visit there was a focus on people that use Stonehouse specifically and on reflection the questions were too general to get the detail that needed to be able to compare. The second visit was on a Friday, which the manager said was always the busiest. This time only young people from Stonehouse where interviewed. The trial interviews where successful in terms of testing the process and the approach. Questions where to broad and this caused vague answers which where difficult to compare. The detailed questions provided by social network analysis give very specific answers and allow direct comparison. There where a range of female and male young people interviewed all living in Stonehouse. They had been living in the area for a range of times- there whole lives to 5 months. They where asked the specific spaces that they spent time. One had visited Devonport park in the last week (the questionnaire was carried out in December so this should be considered), 1 had been to the pub seven times that week, the rest non, They had all been to shops regularly, almost all every day, all had not been to any cafĂŠ apart from the food bank, one had been to a church, none had been swimming, one had been to a school 5 times that week. They all stated they had Facebook although only 2 had a smart phone and no-one had the internet. Two out of the five had no family in the area. They all stated they did not enjoy school (see maps for mapping of each participant- appendix 6, see appendix 5 for full answers).

Trial Movement traces The movement traces identified what was expected. On a week to week basis locals who are unemployed rarely travel further than a 20 minute walk from where they live. They appear to stick to simple routines and almost all visited a convenience shop every day. The trials where useful in familiarising myself with the area and its residents. It allowed me to identify the most appropriate line of questioning to focus on social segregation through social networking.

Figure 2: Authors own photographs. Letters A-G identify their location on map - pg 11 13

1 Occupation require no education of college level occupations only

Generally the participants didn’t know a wide range of occupations. The participant is in red the occupations are in blue. Note all the occupations known are level 1 or 21 occupations. Occupants that listed family as their closest friends knew less people.

Local people didn’t know very many people and of the people they did know, they almost always lived in the immediate area. The diagram below shows participant in red, male connections in blue and female connections in pink. The closer the dot is to the centre the closer they live and feel to the participant.

Analysis of results

The questionnaires showed that young people in the area of Stonehouse don’t know many people, don’t move far from the area and don’t have very many people they consider to be close to them. The housing doesn’t have amenities within it- only along Union street which causes all foot traffic to congregate there. Further useful research would be to map the whole community and the inter relationships. The small study completed in this report highlights there is a problem and further research needs to be done in order to make changes.

Further research

2 3

The charts below show how often the participants visit certain places within a month. The place that was consistently high was fast food restaurants. Cafe were mostly high and bars were generally popular.

The participants when to the same places every week. Some more than others. All in the local area.

Discussion and implications for policy and urban design and Results analysis My results show that the unemployed young people of this area of Union Street are socially excluded and isolated because of their lack of access and use of public space. They don’t mix with very many people and those they do mix with come from the immediate area. The majority don’t leave the house very often, possibly due to lack of free things to do, and they generally do not have a varied mix of friends. The housing setting in Stonehouse (and Devonport) was created by the mass destruction of the area in World War II. Historically Millbay was a thriving industrial centre. The small but very dense housing that existed on the site would have housed low income workers (see figure 3). When the area was heavily bombed in World War II (see figure 4) its communities where gutted and new high rise flat where constructed. When compared the area is now much more sparse than it was. The balcony blocks that I discuss later are on the site of ‘Stonehouse Market.’ Access routes where mostly retained but reduced in size. Its density gradually decreased from 1900 (see figure 5) to present, assisted by The War. Historically council houses have housed families that worked but could not afford to rent privately (Paul Cheshire 2007). This allowed for a vibrant mix of people, professions and attitudes, ensuring a secure sense of community, like the communities described by jane jacobs. In modern times families that work can afford to not live in council houses and because of poor maintenance and a bad reputation they preferred to live somewhere else. This leaves only the poorest members of the community living together in these ‘ghettos.’ This could be due to the setting they live in. Stonehouse’s neighbour, Deovnport has a similar economic situation but a different type of housing is having a positive effect on its community. Pembroke estate was designed along side its residents and is run by the community and is in Devonport. It was one of the worst estates in Plymouth and, although it isn’t perfect it has improved drastically in terms of resident satisfaction and ‘feeling safe’. The estate uses changes in and around housing to help social issues. For instance the estate is now run by the community and has been since 1991. The residents took control by securing government funding to update the estate. It is now a quiet and clean place to live (Pembroke community website). Transferring a sense of ownership is a tried and teste method of improving a system. Social interaction with different groups of people would help confidence in interaction. Interaction and mobility is increased by the amount of people you list a friends. Implications point to co op housing as a spacial aid to social interaction. Considerations towards chance meetings, decrease in exits and entrances. A tested change, although not commonly in the UK, is the Co op model of housing. A sense of ownership helps these organisations become a success but also the design process and the layout of the homes. The only common form of housing in the UK that encourages socialising is for the elderly. More focus needs to be given to the social life of everyone, regardless of age. Social sustainability is a phrase coined by Amartya Sen outlines it as follows: -Equity - the community provides equitable opportunities and outcomes for all its members, particularly the poorest and most vulnerable members of the community -Diversity - the community promotes and encourages diversity -Interconnected/Social cohesions - the community provides processes, systems and structures that promote connectedness within and outside the community at the formal, informal and institutional level -Quality of life - the community ensures that basic needs are met and fosters a good quality of life for all members at the individual, group and community level (e.g. health, housing, education, employment. Using Byrnes quote from earlier in the text,‘Social exclusion is defined as a multi- dimensional process, in which various forms of exclusion are combined: participation in decision making and political processes, access to employment and material resources, and integration into common cultural processes. When combined, they create acute forms of exclusion that find a spatial manifestation in particular neighbourhoods.’ This study focused on the ‘access to employment and material resources’ and ‘integration into common 16

Figure 3: The area of study today, sourced from Digimaps 2013

Figure 4: The area of study in 1950, sourced from Digimaps 2013

Figure 5: The area of study in 1900, sourced from Digimaps 2013

cultural process’ to investigate social segregation. The housing within the area is isolated from the cultural processes Byrne describes. Because the housing is zoned there are no cultural processes in the area, no industry, no interaction and no experiential qualities to it. A way to remedy this could be to integrate essential-to-living processes back into their’s (and everybody’s) immediate surroundings. The current abstraction from these processes is causing an unnatural disconnection with human processes. These processes would produce jobs, locally produced commodities and necessities and create a point of interest. Of the few places the participants ventured to from their homes were for food or communications (vital necessities). This would indicate that food and communication is the only things that actually forces people out of their homes to interact with the outside world. If this is the case industries like brewing, growing food, rearing animals, processing milk, processing waste and generating power would bring them out to observe, buy and potentially work. Because the main place the participants visited was the supermarket this is their only chance to communicate with the outside world. This would explain why they had so little people they considered themselves close to. Interactions and stimulation is minimal in supermarkets. Some went to pubs, one of the only places left on our high streets for communication, so they obviously seek socialising. One of the questions in the report showed the participants didn’t travel very far from there home. This isn’t a problem if they are getting everything they need from the area they live. However this isn’t the case in Stonehouse. If each local area had everything we needed communities and interactions would be stronger. Considering the high density area they live in the participants had hardly any friends. The culture that is being created is one where people don’t interact frequently. Improvements to the area should be ones that actively encourage mixing and interaction through architecture.

References Byrne, David (2005, second edition): Social Exclusion second edition. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Taken from review written by Robert MacDonald, University of Teesside 2006 Page 10 Cheshire, Paul (2007), ‘Segregated neighbourhoods and mixed communities: A critical analysis,’ The Joseph Roundtree foundation, Page 3 Esperanza Vera-Toscano Æ Victoria Ateca-Amestoy 2007, ‘The relevance of social interactions on housing satisfaction’ Marsh, Arun 2009, ‘Tackling the problem of NEET’s’ Page 7 Pembroke street community website, http://www.devonportonline.co.uk/millennium_devonport/living/ community/pembroke-street/pembroke_street.aspx Plymouth City Council and its partners’ plan for Raising the aspirations, increasing the participation, raising the achievement of children and young people aged 11- 19+, Detail Action Plans 1st April 2012- 31st August 2013 Plymouth’s Economic Review Issue 3: March 2013 page 14 by Plymouth Growth Board Project for making public spaces (unknown date): http://www.pps.org/reference/what_is_placemaking/

Sen, A, Identity and Violence: The illusion of destiny (London: Penguin, 2006). Whyte, W (1988). Rediscovering the Centre. Doubleday

Images Digimaps 2013 Pages 11 and 17 Google Maps 2013 Page 15 All other images authors own

Bibliography Castells, Manuel. 2000. “The Space of Flows”. Chapter 6 in The Rise of the Network Society: Economy, Society and Culture. Blackwell Publishing. Gehl, Jan, Life Between Buildings, Using Public Space (Copenhagen: The Danish Architectural Press, 2006) Jacobs, J (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961) New York: Random House. Lynch, Kevin, The Image of the City (Cambridge Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1960). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spatial_network_analysis_software Simmel, G “The Metropolis and Mental Life” (1903). WILLIAMS, R.J. (2004) The Anxious City, Routledge, London. Whyte, W (1988). Rediscovering the Centre. Doubleday

Appendix Interviews Social network analysis questionnaires Draft Mapping of intervieweeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s day to day routes Interactions with architecture by Elise Wilkes- Brand 2013 Activity/ traffic recording by Author 2013 Public and community uses by Andy Hills

Interview with Community support officer Female Late 20’s early 30’s. What is your role? Part of a regeneration team for the 5 most deprived areas of Plymouth. Can give fines but generally avoid it. Focus on community engagement and working with schools. What problems do you encounter? High levels of unemployment Very high drug and alcohol abuse Cramped properties-‐ bad living conditions Rubbish High density Fly tipping Gang families/ blocks – dominating and intimidating What good things do you encounter? Generally happy people Sense of community Close to city centre Busiest times of the day? Early – very quiet Lunch times and evenings busy Evenings locals use union street Technology based communication? Aiming for digital inclusion-‐ trailed in Gloucester Court, where they provide communal computers and internet access. The need a library A lot of residence have smart phones but no internet-‐ social networking but not skills they need for work People don’t want to travel If they do travel it is walking mainly There is a high demand for health care centres in the area. If the problem was ignored it would still be present and even with the regeneration at Millbay the problem will still exist (gentrification wont occur as far as the flats) within existing areas of extreme poverty. There is a large contrast on very well off and very deprived. 23

Interviews Friday 13th December 2013 Participant: Male, roughly 26, lives in Stonehouse Where do you live? King Street, Stonehouse How long have you lived in the area? Whole life Which of these places have you been to this week? Park? 0 Pub? 7: The eagle, Reflex, Walkabout, union rooms, Two Trees, Jesters, Maxines Shop? 5: Poundland, Premier stores Café? 1- Oasis Cafe Church? 0 Swimming? 0 School? 0 Do you have Facebook? Yes Do you have a smart phone? Yes Do you have the internet at home? No Do any other members of your family live in the area? All in Plymouth Which school did you go to? St Bonifords College, Crownhill Did you enjoy school? No 28

Appendix 6 - Draft Mapping of intervieweeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s day to day routes

Male 26

Male 22

Male and Female about 25 68

Female 23

Female 19 69

Interviews and Videos