Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Hi Barry,


Firstly thanks for all your hard work on Peckham Rye station, it's really turned a corner over the last year, it looks so much better.


My query relates to the part of the station I know you don't have direct control over. The area and shops outside the front are still maintained to a very poor standard. This is sad as it detracts from your work that has been put into the station and means no matter how good the station gets people will still see the station in a bad light.


The main symbol of this for me is the broken windows in the buildings, there is a report from the US that details the social impact of broken windows, you can read it here: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/198203/broken-windows


or an extract:


'In a 1982 Atlantic Monthly article titled "Broken Windows," James Q.

Wilson and George Kelling argued that disorder in a community, if left

uncorrected, undercuts residents' own efforts to maintain their homes

and neighborhoods and control unruly behavior. "If a window in a

building is broken and left unrepaired," they wrote, "all the rest of

the windows will soon be broken. . . . One unrepaired window is a

signal that no one cares, so breaking more windows costs nothing. . .

. Untended property becomes fair game for people out for fun or

plunder."


'If disorder goes unchecked, a vicious cycle begins. First, it kindles

a fear of crime among residents, who respond by staying behind locked

doors. Their involvement in the neighborhood declines; people begin to

ignore rowdy and threatening behavior in public. They cease to

exercise social regulation over little things like litter on the

street, loitering strangers, or truant schoolchildren. When

law-abiding eyes stop watching the streets, the social order breaks

down and criminals move in.


'"Stable neighborhoods can change in a few months to jungles," declare

Wilson and Kelling. Disorder also can have dire economic consequences.

Shoppers will shun an area they perceive as being "out of control."

One study analyzing crime in 30 different areas found that the level

of disorder of a neighborhood -- more than such factors as income

level, resident turnover, or racial makeup -- was the best indicator

of an area's lack of safety.'


There are several broken windows around the site (for example the blue building at the front next to the dentist) and I think fixing them would go along way to restoring a sense of order. I was wondering whether it is possible for you to enquire whether the property owners, Spacia could see their way to having these repaired and bringing the general standard of upkeep in those buildings to a satisfactory level.


Cheers


Simon

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/9061-broken-windows/
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Surprised at how many people take the 'oooh it's great it got approved, something is better than nothing' view. This is exactly Southwark council's approach, pandering to greedy developers for the absolute bare minimum of social and affordable housing. It's exactly why, under their leadership, only a fraction of social and affordable housing has been built in the borough - weirdly Mccash chose to highlight their own failures in his 'near unprecedented' (yet unbiased 😆) submission. All the objectors i have met support redevelopment, to benefit those in need of homes and the community - not change it forever. The council could and should be bolder, demand twice the social and affordable housing in these schemes, and not concede to 8 storeys of unneeded student bedsits. If it is a question of viability, publically disclose the business plan to prove how impossible it might be to turn a profit. Once the thing is built these sites can never be used for social or affordable housing. The council blows every opportunity, every time. Its pathetic. Developers admitted the scale was, in this instance, not required for viability. The student movements data seemed completely made up. The claim that 'students are taking up private rentals' was backed up with no data. There is empty student housing on denmark hill, needs to be fixed up but it's there already built. The council allows developers years to build cosy relationships with planners such that the final decision is a formality - substantiated objections are dismissed with wooly words and BS. Key meetings and consultations are scheduled deliberately to garner minimal engagement or objection. Local councillors, who we fund, ignore their constituents concerns. Those councillors that dare waiver in the predetermination are slapped down. Not very democratic. They've removed management and accountability by having no nomination agreement with any of the 'many london universities needing accommodation' - these direct lets MAKE MORE MONEY. A privately run firm will supposedly ensure everyone that those living there is actually a student and adheres to any conduct guidelines. There's no separation to residents - especially to ones on their own development. Could go on... We'll see how many of the 53 social/affordable units that we're all so happy to have approved actually get built. 
    • I am looking for 1 unit which is working for £50 cash. Thank you
    • Can’t recommend the company enough, great service. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...