Sunday, 11 April 2010

The high life

Playground Bishkek
Diane Dyson draws attention to what looks like a cracking report on the social impact of high rise housing for children and families.

'The geographies of children residing in public high rise housing were dominated by local, designated play spaces. Conversely, the geographies of children residing in private high housing covered not only a larger territorial range but a wider variety of purpose built play spaces as well as public transport and commercial spaces.'

'We found public housing children with high levels of independent mobility but a small territorial range, and private housing children with low to average levels of independent mobility, but lacking in the critical mass of other children and social infrastructure that would make them feel part of their new high rise communities. This is not a problem of high rise housing in central cities. This is a failure of planning to consider the needs of children and families.'

Vertical living kids: creating supportive high rise environments for children in Melbourne, Australia.

11 Apr 2010 13:51:49 | Space and place

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
Big Society is being watched David Wilcox has blogged more on the Big Society Network, which describes itself as 'an organisation being set up by frustrated citizens for frustrated citizens, to help everyone achieve change in their local area.' Our aim is to not only create the largest co-operative or mutual in Britain, but to create a mutual that is Britain. Every citizen can be a shareholder, contribute, receive help and rewards. Call me old-fashioned, but I think there's a difference between a network and an organisation, which is kinda significant. Either that's been thought about and is being disregarded, or it hasn't been thought about. If I'm reluctant to trust the network it's because it seems to be an organisation with an agenda, and the agenda doesn't appear to include values and principles that in my view are essential to community development: inclusion and social justice, for instance. If the response is, 'no, the members set the agenda, so join in and help shape it' then it begs all sorts of questions such as why there are no proposals to strengthen the existing community sector networks (er, we call this 'bottom-up' - it's just a bit if jargon we use, you'll get used to it chaps). At least the Brown government recognised this, albeit in its central-controlling way. Any self-respecting community activist can smell a hidden agenda from well beyond their own territory: they will be suspicious of the Big Society Network perhaps not because it has an expressed agenda just yet but because it's a centralised construct coming from a philanthropic tradition. A post on ConservativeHome notes the possibility of 'the politicisation of community activists' under the Big Society umbrella, which apparently has also occurred to the Taxpayers Alliance. Is it possible that these people have been immersed for so long in a cakestall-mafia version of the voluntary sector that the prospect of voluntary action having a political dimension is a bit of a shock? Here's a suggestion: start from the recognition that community action is fundamentally, insecapably political, and get used to it. Attempts to depoliticise it will be self-defeating and may lead to a revival of confrontational radicalism. I welcome the Big Society thinking from the tories because it might just force us to think about the politics of communty action after a couple of decades when that really hasn't been paid much attention. Julian Dobson has it about right I reckon: If we want community activity that won't frighten the horses and will leave most of society pretty much as it is, and will give you social action without having to worry about social justice, this kind of set-up may be a good bet. Those who want more substantial change may well find themselves suffocated in such a network.
PREVIOUS POST
Walk on You notice Kev, he's a big fella - burly, bald and tattooed. He has a background in serious drugs and gangs, which he wants to tell me about. When you come into the community centre he offers you a cup of tea and a cake, 'how d'you like it?' Kev sat in with the street reps who were talking about how to recruit others by having some meetings in the evening and not just the day-time. It's an age-old problem only partly helped by new technologies. Most of those present don't like to be out nights, not round here. They feel vulnerable and they start talking about the young people who gather round the shops at the end there. No-one says anything negative about the kids, just that they're intimidating, and there seem to be other vague factors. The idea of a walking bus is revived - grow your own intimidating group. Where would it start, cos you lot're over there but we're all up this end aren't we? The conversation's lively but going nowhere. Kev puts his hand up. I don't mind being out if people'll trust me, and I'll come to your house first, then we'll come onto you alright? Sorted, locally.

Kevin Harris

Search

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments