Técnicas e Instrumentos de Recolección de Datos

A case-study of Mark Hall North as a typical neighbourhood unit can provide several useful lessons when considering the continuing viability of the New Town Idea as a model for future urban development in Britain in accordance with the Government‟s stated objective of creating „safe‟ environments. As the first built neighbourhood in Harlow, this residential area is a quintessential product of the New Town philosophy and manifests several of its most fundamental ideals. Examining the impact of its design, therefore, upon the experience of crime can help assess its „success‟ or otherwise as a sustainable community that future developers may want to consider.

An initial examination of the relevant crime statistics for Mark Hall North does not offer much encouragement. Like the rest of Harlow, the neighbourhood has a crime rate comparable if not worse than other urban environments that did not emerge through the application of any „grand‟ planning vision. Detailed Crime figures for Mark Hall North are, however, unavailable. Instead the Essex Police record crime by „beats‟ within the town which usually cover more than one neighbourhood. The relevant „beat‟ for Mark Hall North also includes three other „wards‟ each of which corresponds to two neighbourhood units. The figures for 2001, as an example, show a crime rate consistently high in comparison to other areas of the town (see Box 4) and even higher in relation to Essex as a whole. The collation of data, however, makes it difficult to assess the degree to which this crime rate relates to issues of environmental design – a point compounded by the fact that official figures only register crimes known to and recorded by the police rather than all that actually occurs. Given that two of the wards included within the same Beat as Mark Hall North lie adjacent to the town‟s central shopping area and its greater opportunities for crime may bias the overall figures and suggest a „crime profile‟ for the neighbourhood that is not accurate. The Essex Police‟s „Crime Map‟ (available on-line)31_{, however, is more specific and makes data available}

for the ward that encompasses Mark Hall North and that is most distant from the town centre. Together the crime rate for this ward in comparison to the Essex area as a whole is described as „Above Average‟. How much of this is due to crimes that typically occur within public space is uncertain although the rate of „anti-social behaviour‟ – an offense category covering misdemeanours that are usually „public‟ in character – is one standard deviation point above the mean for Essex. Although considerable caution is necessary when interpreting these figures it seems reasonable, then, to conclude that the original design aspirations for Mark Hall North as a place where strong community attachment should inhibit „disorder‟ remain significantly unmet.

Beat G11C

Netteswell and Mark Hall

No. % of Crime1 Beat Rank (out of 8) All Crime 1,578 21.7 1 Burglary in Dwelling 66 20.1 2

Burglary other than in Dwelling 102 21.7 1

Theft from Motor Vehicle 141 24.0 1

Theft & Taking Motor Vehicle 81 21.8 1

Vehicle Interference 43 32.3 1

Theft of Pedal Cycle 35 27.6 1

Shoplifting 114 20.2 2

Criminal Damage 392 22.9 1

Offences against the Person 248 19.2 2

Robbery 17 26.6 1

Rape 3 15.8 2

Indecent assault on a female 7 17.1 2

Woundings etc. 78 19.4 3

Box 4: Crimes in Nettweswell and Mark Hall Beat

Any assessment of the design of Mark Hall North as an instrument of crime prevention must take account of these figures. To claim, however, that design is directly responsible for the area's 'disappointing' crime rate is highly debatable: a host of other social and economic factors are, no doubt, equally if not more significant. Yet, regardless of what causes crime the apparent failure of Mark Hall North to inhibit its occurrence indicates a 'failure' in terms of the original and utopian ambitions of its designers.

But this apparently reasonable conclusion may miss an even more significant point – one that only becomes apparent by adopting a Humanistic perspective. After finishing each interview with a sample of Mark Hall North‟s residents I usually revealed that my research was focused upon crime in Harlow. Statistical evidence, I mentioned, suggested a comparatively high crime rate for their neighbourhood. Consistently, the response was one of surprise. The following excerpt typifies this reaction:

“Really? I didn‟t know that. I mean, I know round here has its troubles but I thought it was OK. Like, I thought it would be over the other side of the town. You know, round Staple Tye

...over that way. I always thought that‟s where most of the trouble was...round here always seems quiet. Kids sometimes get up to a bit of mischief but nothing much...not really crime. Yeah, I‟m a bit surprised really. You sure”? (From transcript of Interview Five)

No, I‟m not sure. But, such statements of surprise are, in themselves important. Regardless of how high the crime rate actually is, nearly all the residents of Mark Hall North with whom I spoke do not regard it as a major problem. Repeatedly, they expressed few reservations about moving through the area and were not deterred by the possibility of criminal victimisation. The one exception was a male pensioner who felt the neighbourhood had gone „downhill‟ since he and his wife had moved there forty three years previously. While happy to walk the area at any time of day, he stated his reluctance to allow his partner such freedom „unaccompanied‟. Yet, such feelings were not reciprocated: his wife declared an equal lack of fear regarding crime. Like other residents, both did not regard the neighbourhood as „especially‟ dangerous and certainly safer than the typical London neighbourhood. This, it seems, is a significant finding for if the surprise expressed above is typical then it is possible that the design of Mark North as a neighbourhood unit has had some positive effect even if its impact on the occurrence of crime is apparently minor.

Much criminological discussion insists upon regarding „fear of crime‟ as a significant problem even if it does not equate to actual crime rates. Even if the actual threat is low, any perception that crime is high within a neighbourhood is liable to reduce the quality of life of its residents. A pensioner who remains indoors rather than venture into public space through fear of crime experiences a „problem‟ regardless of how „realistic‟ his or her perceptions. This point is, without doubt, correct. But, it also applies in reverse – we must also take seriously any declaration of „low‟ fear‟ even if actual crime rates are comparatively high and attend to its possible reasons. Thus, in assessing the possible impact of Mark Hall North's design upon the experience of crime two related issues appear to demand particular attention: (a) the apparently high crime rate in comparison to other urban areas and; (b) the apparent low of fear it arouses amongst its residents.

My research suggests one key factor, the understanding of which can help explain both issues. This factor derives from the residents of Mark Hall North common experience of „insideness‟ in relation to the neighbourhood in which they live and the attachment they have towards it. Often, for example, they describe it as „better‟ than both the typical London environment and other neighbourhoods within Harlow. The ample greenery and plentiful open spaces are regarded as a particular source of pride and something which visitors from „outside‟ will often comment favorably upon.

“Everyone I know who visits me in Harlow say…I can‟t believe…I think when you leave you get used to it but…I can‟t believe the amount of green space in Harlow…You wouldn‟t believe you were in a New Town…that you weren‟t further out from London because there is so much green space and it‟s lovely”. (From Transcript of Interview Twelve).

The greenery and general appearance of Mark Hall North, my research findings consistently show, is something most residents appreciate and it is something that gives the neighbourhood an identity which they recognise as distinctive. 'Inside' is a place of verdure and a 'pleasant' environment to live in contrast to many urban environments 'outside' that are regarded as dull and dingy. Nobody, with whom I spoke, thought the 'big' city environment was a preferable environment to their own. Yet, neither did anybody regard it as their 'ideal' environment. Most, given the resources, stated their desire to live in a 'properly' rural area. Mark Hall North is experienced as an 'inside' but not one without problems.

Such statements of „insideness‟, moreover, suggest that most residents of Mark North do possess a „hierarchy of loyalties‟ commensurate with the town‟s design intentions. The source of „trouble‟ when it does occur within the area, for example, is understood as coming from „outside‟. Several residents spoke, for example, of drug peddlers travelling from London by train, making illicit transactions close to the station and especially within the near-by park or Town- Centre, before returning to their place of origin. A few residents also spoke of

nuisance behaviour during the evening and night-time hours within some of Mark Hall North‟s „open spaces‟, especially the „parkland‟ fronting St Mary at Latton‟s church and a small playground at the centre of the Glebelands Housing Group. But, yet again, the assumption is that those responsible are not residents of the neighbourhood itself – but teenagers from „elsewhere‟, for example, purchasing alcohol from „The Stow‟ and finding space within the neighbourhood to consume it where they can evade the attention of local police.

“We get visitors who come over to the Park here...generally they come from other areas. And if they cause problems it‟s because they don‟t live in this area and so they don‟t appreciate it. [What sort of problems do you think they cause?] Well breaking bottles on cycle tracks. Using the kiddies play area. Leaving litter. You know they come from the other side of town you know...It‟s not the people who live here that do that”. (From Transcript of interview Fifteen)

Most of my interviewees acknowledge that some anti-social behaviour is the fault of people living within Harlow. But, again, most of these, they maintain, live on the „other side of town‟ and rarely come from their own neighbourhood. One particular part of Harlow – the neighbourhoods surrounding the Staple Tye shopping precinct - is regularly mentioned as the chief problem with many residents declaring it a „no-go‟ area.

“A lot of the…the ones over by Staple Tye…they look like army barracks…and……they give off a vibe. They don‟t…A lot happens there because of the way they are designed.…you‟ve got the alleyways. You‟ve got all the underpasses. Whereas if you go into Mark Hall North it‟s completely different. So obviously that‟s much more spaced out.…Much nicer …nicer atmosphere....if you go to a lot of the estates over in Staple Tye…their so... you can actually see someone having their breakfast. That‟s the way they have been designed…a lot of alleyways…a lot of walkways that seem very intrusive”. (From Transcript of Interview Twelve).

“Generally you get more trouble up in that area... the north er the south part of Harlow. There‟s lots of things that tend to attract er the wrong type of people or people I wouldn‟t like to live next door to”. (From transcript of Interview Five)

Indeed, so strong is this belief that „South‟ Harlow has become something of a symbolic antithesis that defines their identification with their own neighbourhood: the „outside‟ that defines Mark Hall North as an „inside‟. Place is not only meaningful because of what it is but also because of what people believe it is not.

So adamant are these statements that „trouble‟ is a problem that arrives from „Outside‟ that I thought it useful to briefly investigate one of these „external‟ places from where it supposedly derives and compare it to Mark Hall North. To this purpose I went to Bishopsfield, Housing Group in the heart of South Harlow, which many of my Mark Hall North interviewees regard as the epitome of danger – a place, they felt, lacking any community spirit where personal attack is always a pervasive threat. Yet, after conducting a few interviews I found that many of Bishopsfield‟s residents take as much pride in their neighbourhood as its detractor‟s from Mark Hall North take in their own. Indeed, such expressions of pride are, if anything, greater.

Built in 1966, several years after the construction of Mark Hall North, Bishopsfield won many prizes for its architectural design (by the then young and soon to be famous, Michael Neylan) and gained considerable international acclaim drawing many visitors from far afield. Initially, it was the innovative character of Bishopsfield‟s architecture that led „outsiders‟ to appraise it positively – one that, at first glance, appears to draw more inspiration from the ultra-modernistic „Internationalist‟ movement from which Radiant City designs emerged than any style in harmony with the New Town Idea. Yet, such appearances are deceptive for, despites its avant-garde appearance, the Housing Group conforms, in the main, to the Neighbourhood Unit Principle. A number of lanes radiate from a central hub like spokes on a bicycle wheel.

Aligning each of these spokes are doorways to residential 'terrace' homes offering little clue as to what lies behind. The pathways are relatively narrow, supposedly reminiscent of a Spanish village although the building materials and uniformity characterising the frontage of these homes is thoroughly modernistic in appearance rather than what might be described as 'Traditional Iberian'. Built on a slope, each spoke converges on the hub at the estate's highest point. This 'hub' is roughly semi-circular with further residential apartments on its periphery built over a subterranean garage area that serves much of the neighbourhood's parking needs. Fronting these homes and also over the garage is a fairly wide concrete concourse dotted with trees, statues and stairways leading to the areas below. From behind, these same homes peer over the radiating lanes beneath and towards surrounding grassland and shrubbery.

Largely owing to this distinctive design, Bishopsfield has retained a core community with many of its members declaring a strong commitment to the

Fig 8 - Design Outline of Bishopsfield

neighbourhood. Indeed, today Bishopsfield boasts something of an active middle-class and quasi-bohemian population, many of whom were original residents of the estate. Members of this group are proud of their area and choose to remain even though they possess the means to live elsewhere. One ex-schoolteacher, with whom I spoke, consciously sought accommodation in

Bishopsfield because of its architectural 'peculiarity'. Partially, such attachment derives from the interior design of the buildings in which living areas gather around and open onto small garden courtyards providing something akin to the Garden-City ideal in microcosm. In conversation with several other residents of Bishopsfield, many expressed delight in these garden courtyards and the light they shed upon the interior of their homes. Annually, a number of residents 'open' their gardens to outside visitors in a further display of local pride. Nevertheless, most of these same residents also appraise highly the neighbourhood as a whole and openly advocate the aesthetic value of its architectural design. To some extent, a community 'spirit' prevails because of and not despite its rather negative reputation with 'outsiders' – a point that echoes the defense of Harlow by its residents in general against what they regard as its 'unfair' image. Sporadically, very active and vocal Residents Association stage festivals, recalling similar events in Bishopsfield's early history, with music and other performances occurring on the concrete concourse. Indeed, from casual observations on my visits to the neighbourhood, there was always plentiful activity occurring on this concourse – children playing, women chatting on doorsteps, men repairing vehicles down below – to suggest a fairly vibrant community atmosphere. At no point did I feel in any danger and neither, apparently, do its residents. One pensioner expressed such feelings of security by declaring her willingness to 'walk dogs at midnight' – a phrase that echoed the same lack of concern regarding crime made by residents of Mark Hall North.

Why, then, do the residents of Mark Hall North typically consider this neighbourhood with such antipathy? The answer, I believe, sheds light on the character of their own neighbourhood attachment and also the 'problems' it experiences. From „outside‟ the design of Bishopsfield may encourage negative assessments. The design certainly makes the Housing Group a distinct and recognisable place – somewhere that stands apart and above from its surroundings. Visitors know immediately when they are within the Housing Group and where its boundaries lie. This distinctiveness (or, „legibility‟) induces, however, two responses. Situated upon a hill-slope with its uppermost buildings seemingly surveying the surroundings below, Bishopsfield possibly has, in the

eyes of many „outsiders‟, a formidably imposing, even menacing image. Compounding this image are the compact lanes converging towards the centre suggesting an impenetrably dark interior. From the perspective of „Defensible Space Theory‟32_{, Bishopsfield supplies numerous examples of poor visual} security. Inside, there are few windows or other means of surveillance that look out upon the pedestrian walkways and there are many hidden „nooks‟ offering the opportunity for „offender-concealment‟. The subterranean garage area curves around the central hub creating several blind-spots and a separation from the daily activities that might provide „eyes on the street‟. Even the very prominence of the buildings prevents Bishopsfield blending in with its surrounding milieu as per Newman‟s recommendations33_{. Yet, simultaneously,} the same architecture provides its residents with a means of identification allowing a strong community attachment to arise that may well negate its points of weak defensible space. The design, which, despite appearances, firmly adopts the New Town Idea, seems to allow as much „inside‟ attachment as that of Mark Hall North.

Why does the design of Mark Hall North foster similar expressions of „insideness‟? Certainly, the establishment of clear boundaries might help although several residents I interviewed appeared uncertain that they exist. All acknowledge Mark Hall North as a distinct „place‟ and are happy to designate it by name. But, their identification of an „inside‟ relies more upon interior features than any particular boundary line. The boundary, as I shall shortly discuss, exerts another and perhaps more negative influence. It is the interior neighbourhood design that mainly fosters place attachment. No single feature stands out, yet several contribute to the neighborhood‟s interior identity.

32

In chapters Ten and Eleven I discuss Defensible Space Theory in greater detail.

33 The poor 'outside' reputation of Bishopsfield, however, derives as much from its history as its architectural style. During the 1970s problems with heating led many of its original residents to leave. Vacant properties were, then, often taken up by the local council to rehouse certain families with known problems. The classic vicious spiral of a 'sink estate' then ensued and, for a time, the neighbourhood did experience a real increase in crime and anti-social behaviour. But local community initiatives have largely overcome these problems and it is now unfair to regard