Discussion:
New Urbanism and Crime
(too old to reply)
George Conklin
2007-05-28 21:15:34 UTC
Permalink
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village, an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.

Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.

Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.


====

Built in 1992, Southern Village is Chapel Hill's first "mixed-use
community." It was designed to be more like an established neighborhood
instead of a subdivision. Houses, apartments and townhouses surround a
market area that includes a grocery store, church, movie theater, office
space and retail shops, and children can walk or bike to an elementary
school there.

More than 3,000 people now live there, according to promotional materials on
Southern Village's Web site.

But Southern Village's movie theater and pizza and coffee shops make the
town square on the southern end of town a popular hangout for high
schoolers. And more secluded woods are close enough for some of those kids
to find privacy to experiment with drugs and alcohol, among other
activities, Chapel Hill Police Capt. Chris Blue said.

In the past couple of years, residents and merchants have complained that
congregations of unattended students have often created a ruckus: They've
fought, painted graffiti and headed into the nearby woods to drink alcohol.

In response, Chapel Hill police ramped up their presence last summer to
discourage the kids from gathering too much, trying to enforce a 9 p.m.
"drop-off" limit for teens. Merchants used wristbands to identify those who
came to watch an outdoor movie to try to discern between the ones who were
just hanging out from the ones there for entertainment.

"We had some success reaching out to parents and telling them of ... the
potential danger kids face being dropped off down there," Blue said.

Police also opened a police substation about two years ago behind the movie
theater. Community police officers keep business hours there, though the
substation's not always occupied.

This summer, expect another police campaign aimed at parents who might drop
off their kids and leave them at Southern Village unattended

------

Oh well, what do ignoranct architects know of real human behavior? Zilch.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-28 22:38:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village, an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself. By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime. To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
2007-05-28 23:15:10 UTC
Permalink
On May 28, 5:38 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village, an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself. By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime. To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
No, I agree with George on this one.
Issolated areas are prone to more crime because it is much eaiser to
commit a crime without
getting cought.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-29 01:29:34 UTC
Permalink
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 5:38 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself. By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime. To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
No, I agree with George on this one.
Issolated areas are prone to more crime because it is much eaiser to
commit a crime without
getting cought.
Let's just put everyone in prison. That will create spaces that make crime
much more difficult.
Joe the Aroma
2007-05-29 01:40:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 5:38 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself.
By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime. To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
No, I agree with George on this one.
Issolated areas are prone to more crime because it is much eaiser to
commit a crime without
getting cought.
Let's just put everyone in prison. That will create spaces that make
crime much more difficult.
The problem is due to insufficient planning... planners haven't designated
enough zones "high crime zones" and therefor the demand is outpacing supply.
;)
George Conklin
2007-05-29 12:03:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Joe the Aroma
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 5:38 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
Post by Joe the Aroma
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself.
By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime.
To
Post by Joe the Aroma
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
No, I agree with George on this one.
Issolated areas are prone to more crime because it is much eaiser to
commit a crime without
getting cought.
Let's just put everyone in prison. That will create spaces that make
crime much more difficult.
The problem is due to insufficient planning... planners haven't designated
enough zones "high crime zones" and therefor the demand is outpacing supply.
;)
Cute, but bad design brings out bad behavior. It is even worse whent he
designers come along with excuses like people can use such uncontrolled
space to get to know each other better. They do, but the behavior is not
exactly legal.
George Conklin
2007-05-29 12:02:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 5:38 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be
costly
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself.
By
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime.
To
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
No, I agree with George on this one.
Issolated areas are prone to more crime because it is much eaiser to
commit a crime without
getting cought.
Let's just put everyone in prison. That will create spaces that make crime
much more difficult.
What is happening is that bad urban design encourages otherwise good people
to behave badly. It is like throwing $100 bills on the street and asking
people not to pick them up.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-29 14:07:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 5:38 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a
nuisance.
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be
costly
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself.
By
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime.
To
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
No, I agree with George on this one.
Issolated areas are prone to more crime because it is much eaiser to
commit a crime without
getting cought.
Let's just put everyone in prison. That will create spaces that make
crime
Post by Amy Blankenship
much more difficult.
What is happening is that bad urban design encourages otherwise good people
to behave badly. It is like throwing $100 bills on the street and asking
people not to pick them up.
Right, and a prison would prevent this kind of behavior. By design.
Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
2007-05-29 14:00:10 UTC
Permalink
On May 28, 8:29 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 5:38 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself. By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime. To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
No, I agree with George on this one.
Issolated areas are prone to more crime because it is much eaiser to
commit a crime without
getting cought.
Let's just put everyone in prison. That will create spaces that make crime
much more difficult.
Amy, you need to realize that people will
not stop commiting crimes unless their is an outright chance that
they will get caught. And even then people will still commit them.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-29 14:09:06 UTC
Permalink
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 8:29 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 5:38 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be
costly
to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself.
By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime.
To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
No, I agree with George on this one.
Issolated areas are prone to more crime because it is much eaiser to
commit a crime without
getting cought.
Let's just put everyone in prison. That will create spaces that make crime
much more difficult.
Amy, you need to realize that people will
not stop commiting crimes unless their is an outright chance that
they will get caught. And even then people will still commit them.
You're right, crimes do occur in prison. But fewer.
Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
2007-05-29 14:54:45 UTC
Permalink
On May 29, 9:09 am, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 8:29 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 5:38 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be
costly
to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself.
By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime.
To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
No, I agree with George on this one.
Issolated areas are prone to more crime because it is much eaiser to
commit a crime without
getting cought.
Let's just put everyone in prison. That will create spaces that make crime
much more difficult.
Amy, you need to realize that people will
not stop commiting crimes unless their is an outright chance that
they will get caught. And even then people will still commit them.
You're right, crimes do occur in prison. But fewer.
O right because getting a thousand criminals into one building
isnt going to cause any crime.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-29 15:04:41 UTC
Permalink
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 29, 9:09 am, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex
...
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
Let's just put everyone in prison. That will create spaces that make crime
much more difficult.
Amy, you need to realize that people will
not stop commiting crimes unless their is an outright chance that
they will get caught. And even then people will still commit them.
You're right, crimes do occur in prison. But fewer.
O right because getting a thousand criminals into one building
isnt going to cause any crime.
If you put everyone in prison, some will be criminals, but most will not.
Which is kind of the point...
George Conklin
2007-05-29 12:01:11 UTC
Permalink
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 28, 5:38 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself.
By
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime. To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
No, I agree with George on this one.
Issolated areas are prone to more crime because it is much eaiser to
commit a crime without
getting cought.
The area is not isolated. It is just not defensible space. It is so-called
common space, which is what New Urbanism thinks is good. But in fact it is
the kind of set up which encourages bad behavior.
George Conklin
2007-05-29 11:57:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village, an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of
first-degree
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself. By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime. To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the fact
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion you're
likely to come to or not.
I suggest you consider again Newman's book on Defensible Space. You
comments are irrelevant to the published literature.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-29 14:10:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly
to
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of
first-degree
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself. By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime. To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the
fact
Post by Amy Blankenship
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion
you're
Post by Amy Blankenship
likely to come to or not.
I suggest you consider again Newman's book on Defensible Space. You
comments are irrelevant to the published literature.
Your comments are irrelevant to simple logic. So what? You still post
them...
Pat
2007-05-29 15:12:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village, an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly
to
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of
first-degree
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself. By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime. To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the
fact
Post by Amy Blankenship
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion
you're
Post by Amy Blankenship
likely to come to or not.
I suggest you consider again Newman's book on Defensible Space. You
comments are irrelevant to the published literature.
George, for the umpteenth time, there's a world of difference between
published literature and reality.

All trends today are "published" and contradict the idiocy of
yesteryears. Tomorrow, there'll be new fads and that will contradict
the idiocy of today. Just because it's published doesn't make it so.
george conklin
2007-05-29 17:40:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly
to
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of
first-degree
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself.
By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime.
To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the
fact
Post by Amy Blankenship
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion
you're
Post by Amy Blankenship
likely to come to or not.
I suggest you consider again Newman's book on Defensible Space. You
comments are irrelevant to the published literature.
George, for the umpteenth time, there's a world of difference between
published literature and reality.
Well, in this case reality reared its ugly head and your postings ignore
reality. Why?
Pat
2007-05-29 18:32:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly
to
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of
first-degree
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself.
By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime.
To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the
fact
Post by Amy Blankenship
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion
you're
Post by Amy Blankenship
likely to come to or not.
I suggest you consider again Newman's book on Defensible Space. You
comments are irrelevant to the published literature.
George, for the umpteenth time, there's a world of difference between
published literature and reality.
Well, in this case reality reared its ugly head and your postings ignore
reality. Why?
Again you miss the point. I think that reality and "published trends"
have very little to do with each other.
george conklin
2007-05-29 20:15:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly
to
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of
first-degree
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by George Conklin
rape.
You're the same person who said that counting the extra police costs
incurred by Wal-Mart as one of the costs to the town is condoning the
criminal behavior of shoplifters, not a problem with Wal-Mart itself.
By
the same logic, these are deviant individuals who committed a crime.
To
blame the space where they committed it is just another example of the
fact
Post by Amy Blankenship
that you are inconsistent in applying exactly the same principals to
different situations based on whether you approve of the conclustion
you're
Post by Amy Blankenship
likely to come to or not.
I suggest you consider again Newman's book on Defensible Space. You
comments are irrelevant to the published literature.
George, for the umpteenth time, there's a world of difference between
published literature and reality.
Well, in this case reality reared its ugly head and your postings ignore
reality. Why?
Again you miss the point. I think that reality and "published trends"
have very little to do with each other.
Sure they do. Environmental design shows that, given bad design, crime can
flourish. Given good design, better behavior is LIKELY to emerg. In short,
the good design is likely to produce better resuts as expressed by crime
RATES.
Clark F Morris
2007-05-29 01:16:41 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 28 May 2007 21:15:34 GMT, "George Conklin"
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village, an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Are the secluded woods near the theater a part of urban design or are
they a violation of it.
Post by George Conklin
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
====
Built in 1992, Southern Village is Chapel Hill's first "mixed-use
community." It was designed to be more like an established neighborhood
instead of a subdivision. Houses, apartments and townhouses surround a
market area that includes a grocery store, church, movie theater, office
space and retail shops, and children can walk or bike to an elementary
school there.
More than 3,000 people now live there, according to promotional materials on
Southern Village's Web site.
But Southern Village's movie theater and pizza and coffee shops make the
town square on the southern end of town a popular hangout for high
schoolers. And more secluded woods are close enough for some of those kids
to find privacy to experiment with drugs and alcohol, among other
activities, Chapel Hill Police Capt. Chris Blue said.
In the past couple of years, residents and merchants have complained that
congregations of unattended students have often created a ruckus: They've
fought, painted graffiti and headed into the nearby woods to drink alcohol.
In response, Chapel Hill police ramped up their presence last summer to
discourage the kids from gathering too much, trying to enforce a 9 p.m.
"drop-off" limit for teens. Merchants used wristbands to identify those who
came to watch an outdoor movie to try to discern between the ones who were
just hanging out from the ones there for entertainment.
"We had some success reaching out to parents and telling them of ... the
potential danger kids face being dropped off down there," Blue said.
Police also opened a police substation about two years ago behind the movie
theater. Community police officers keep business hours there, though the
substation's not always occupied.
This summer, expect another police campaign aimed at parents who might drop
off their kids and leave them at Southern Village unattended
------
Oh well, what do ignoranct architects know of real human behavior? Zilch.
George Conklin
2007-05-29 12:05:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Clark F Morris
On Mon, 28 May 2007 21:15:34 GMT, "George Conklin"
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village, an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Are the secluded woods near the theater a part of urban design or are
they a violation of it.
Having been there are looked at the design (several years ago), I assumed
that the area was going to support all kinds of uncontrolled behavior. I
am not sure that the woods (aka PARK) are not part of New Urbanism's
principles. Calthorpe's designs often include undefensible space with trees
and gathering areas.
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
====
Built in 1992, Southern Village is Chapel Hill's first "mixed-use
community." It was designed to be more like an established neighborhood
instead of a subdivision. Houses, apartments and townhouses surround a
market area that includes a grocery store, church, movie theater, office
space and retail shops, and children can walk or bike to an elementary
school there.
More than 3,000 people now live there, according to promotional materials on
Southern Village's Web site.
But Southern Village's movie theater and pizza and coffee shops make the
town square on the southern end of town a popular hangout for high
schoolers. And more secluded woods are close enough for some of those kids
to find privacy to experiment with drugs and alcohol, among other
activities, Chapel Hill Police Capt. Chris Blue said.
In the past couple of years, residents and merchants have complained that
congregations of unattended students have often created a ruckus: They've
fought, painted graffiti and headed into the nearby woods to drink alcohol.
In response, Chapel Hill police ramped up their presence last summer to
discourage the kids from gathering too much, trying to enforce a 9 p.m.
"drop-off" limit for teens. Merchants used wristbands to identify those who
came to watch an outdoor movie to try to discern between the ones who were
just hanging out from the ones there for entertainment.
"We had some success reaching out to parents and telling them of ... the
potential danger kids face being dropped off down there," Blue said.
Police also opened a police substation about two years ago behind the movie
theater. Community police officers keep business hours there, though the
substation's not always occupied.
This summer, expect another police campaign aimed at parents who might drop
off their kids and leave them at Southern Village unattended
------
Oh well, what do ignoranct architects know of real human behavior? Zilch.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-29 14:11:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Conklin
Post by Clark F Morris
On Mon, 28 May 2007 21:15:34 GMT, "George Conklin"
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village,
an
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Are the secluded woods near the theater a part of urban design or are
they a violation of it.
Having been there are looked at the design (several years ago), I assumed
that the area was going to support all kinds of uncontrolled behavior. I
am not sure that the woods (aka PARK) are not part of New Urbanism's
principles. Calthorpe's designs often include undefensible space with trees
and gathering areas.
Let's pave over the world. Then the cops will have a clear view of
everyone.
Pat
2007-05-29 15:23:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Conklin
Post by Clark F Morris
On Mon, 28 May 2007 21:15:34 GMT, "George Conklin"
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village,
an
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Are the secluded woods near the theater a part of urban design or are
they a violation of it.
Having been there are looked at the design (several years ago), I assumed
that the area was going to support all kinds of uncontrolled behavior. I
am not sure that the woods (aka PARK) are not part of New Urbanism's
principles. Calthorpe's designs often include undefensible space with trees
and gathering areas.
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly
to
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
====
Built in 1992, Southern Village is Chapel Hill's first "mixed-use
community." It was designed to be more like an established neighborhood
instead of a subdivision. Houses, apartments and townhouses surround a
market area that includes a grocery store, church, movie theater, office
space and retail shops, and children can walk or bike to an elementary
school there.
More than 3,000 people now live there, according to promotional materials
on
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
Southern Village's Web site.
But Southern Village's movie theater and pizza and coffee shops make the
town square on the southern end of town a popular hangout for high
schoolers. And more secluded woods are close enough for some of those
kids
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
to find privacy to experiment with drugs and alcohol, among other
activities, Chapel Hill Police Capt. Chris Blue said.
In the past couple of years, residents and merchants have complained that
congregations of unattended students have often created a ruckus: They've
fought, painted graffiti and headed into the nearby woods to drink
alcohol.
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
In response, Chapel Hill police ramped up their presence last summer to
discourage the kids from gathering too much, trying to enforce a 9 p.m.
"drop-off" limit for teens. Merchants used wristbands to identify those
who
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
came to watch an outdoor movie to try to discern between the ones who
were
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
just hanging out from the ones there for entertainment.
"We had some success reaching out to parents and telling them of ... the
potential danger kids face being dropped off down there," Blue said.
Police also opened a police substation about two years ago behind the
movie
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
theater. Community police officers keep business hours there, though the
substation's not always occupied.
This summer, expect another police campaign aimed at parents who might
drop
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
off their kids and leave them at Southern Village unattended
------
Oh well, what do ignoranct architects know of real human behavior? Zilch.
Undefensible space with trees. WTF. Amy's right, you want the whole
world paved and people goosestepping to work every day. Undefensible
space. That ludicrious. You might was well go live in Disneyland or
some hotel somewhere. Undefensible space. The world is chaotic.
It's full of trees. Roads aren't gridlines. And just who are you
defending it against?

George, you seem to be a reasonably smart guy but here's the problem.
All of your education never taught you to think -- or it totally
supress your ability to think. In all of these discussions, I don't
think you've ever put forth an original thought. You say "In John
Smith's tome...." but you never say "I think.....".

Why don't you close your books and journals and open your mind....
george conklin
2007-05-29 17:41:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Clark F Morris
On Mon, 28 May 2007 21:15:34 GMT, "George Conklin"
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village,
an
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Are the secluded woods near the theater a part of urban design or are
they a violation of it.
Having been there are looked at the design (several years ago), I assumed
that the area was going to support all kinds of uncontrolled behavior.
I
am not sure that the woods (aka PARK) are not part of New Urbanism's
principles. Calthorpe's designs often include undefensible space with trees
and gathering areas.
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly
to
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
merchants and a hassle to residents.
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
====
Built in 1992, Southern Village is Chapel Hill's first "mixed-use
community." It was designed to be more like an established
neighborhood
instead of a subdivision. Houses, apartments and townhouses surround a
market area that includes a grocery store, church, movie theater, office
space and retail shops, and children can walk or bike to an elementary
school there.
More than 3,000 people now live there, according to promotional materials
on
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
Southern Village's Web site.
But Southern Village's movie theater and pizza and coffee shops make the
town square on the southern end of town a popular hangout for high
schoolers. And more secluded woods are close enough for some of those
kids
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
to find privacy to experiment with drugs and alcohol, among other
activities, Chapel Hill Police Capt. Chris Blue said.
In the past couple of years, residents and merchants have complained that
congregations of unattended students have often created a ruckus: They've
fought, painted graffiti and headed into the nearby woods to drink
alcohol.
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
In response, Chapel Hill police ramped up their presence last summer to
discourage the kids from gathering too much, trying to enforce a 9 p.m.
"drop-off" limit for teens. Merchants used wristbands to identify those
who
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
came to watch an outdoor movie to try to discern between the ones who
were
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
just hanging out from the ones there for entertainment.
"We had some success reaching out to parents and telling them of ... the
potential danger kids face being dropped off down there," Blue said.
Police also opened a police substation about two years ago behind the
movie
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
theater. Community police officers keep business hours there, though the
substation's not always occupied.
This summer, expect another police campaign aimed at parents who might
drop
Post by Clark F Morris
Post by George Conklin
off their kids and leave them at Southern Village unattended
------
Oh well, what do ignoranct architects know of real human behavior? Zilch.
Undefensible space with trees. WTF. Amy's right, you want the whole
world paved and people goosestepping to work every day. Undefensible
space.
Pavement has nothing to do with it and you know that. Why do you always
try to make sensible design out to be silly? So you can post stupid
comments?
Pat
2007-05-29 01:43:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village, an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Post by George Conklin
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
Hey Mr. Cool. Notice the reference to graffiti. Let the graffiti,
vandalism and loitering start and pretty soon you have worse thing
happening. Also notice it said that they are costly to merchants and
a hassle to residents.
Post by George Conklin
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of first-degree
rape.
====
Built in 1992, Southern Village is Chapel Hill's first "mixed-use
community." It was designed to be more like an established neighborhood
instead of a subdivision. Houses, apartments and townhouses surround a
market area that includes a grocery store, church, movie theater, office
space and retail shops, and children can walk or bike to an elementary
school there.
More than 3,000 people now live there, according to promotional materials on
Southern Village's Web site.
But Southern Village's movie theater and pizza and coffee shops make the
town square on the southern end of town a popular hangout for high
schoolers. And more secluded woods are close enough for some of those kids
to find privacy to experiment with drugs and alcohol, among other
activities, Chapel Hill Police Capt. Chris Blue said.
In the past couple of years, residents and merchants have complained that
congregations of unattended students have often created a ruckus: They've
fought, painted graffiti and headed into the nearby woods to drink alcohol.
In response, Chapel Hill police ramped up their presence last summer to
discourage the kids from gathering too much, trying to enforce a 9 p.m.
"drop-off" limit for teens. Merchants used wristbands to identify those who
came to watch an outdoor movie to try to discern between the ones who were
just hanging out from the ones there for entertainment.
"We had some success reaching out to parents and telling them of ... the
potential danger kids face being dropped off down there," Blue said.
Police also opened a police substation about two years ago behind the movie
theater. Community police officers keep business hours there, though the
substation's not always occupied.
This summer, expect another police campaign aimed at parents who might drop
off their kids and leave them at Southern Village unattended
------
Oh well, what do ignoranct architects know of real human behavior? Zilch.
George Conklin
2007-05-29 12:06:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village, an
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer part of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use techniques that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly to
merchants and a hassle to residents.
Hey Mr. Cool. Notice the reference to graffiti. Let the graffiti,
vandalism and loitering start and pretty soon you have worse thing
happening. Also notice it said that they are costly to merchants and
a hassle to residents.
Post by George Conklin
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of
first-degree
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
rape.
====
Built in 1992, Southern Village is Chapel Hill's first "mixed-use
community." It was designed to be more like an established neighborhood
instead of a subdivision. Houses, apartments and townhouses surround a
market area that includes a grocery store, church, movie theater, office
space and retail shops, and children can walk or bike to an elementary
school there.
More than 3,000 people now live there, according to promotional materials on
Southern Village's Web site.
But Southern Village's movie theater and pizza and coffee shops make the
town square on the southern end of town a popular hangout for high
schoolers. And more secluded woods are close enough for some of those kids
to find privacy to experiment with drugs and alcohol, among other
activities, Chapel Hill Police Capt. Chris Blue said.
In the past couple of years, residents and merchants have complained that
congregations of unattended students have often created a ruckus: They've
fought, painted graffiti and headed into the nearby woods to drink alcohol.
In response, Chapel Hill police ramped up their presence last summer to
discourage the kids from gathering too much, trying to enforce a 9 p.m.
"drop-off" limit for teens. Merchants used wristbands to identify those who
came to watch an outdoor movie to try to discern between the ones who were
just hanging out from the ones there for entertainment.
"We had some success reaching out to parents and telling them of ... the
potential danger kids face being dropped off down there," Blue said.
Police also opened a police substation about two years ago behind the movie
theater. Community police officers keep business hours there, though the
substation's not always occupied.
This summer, expect another police campaign aimed at parents who might drop
off their kids and leave them at Southern Village unattended
------
Oh well, what do ignoranct architects know of real human behavior? Zilch.
Pat
2007-05-29 15:08:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village,
an
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer part of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use techniques that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.

The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.

The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.

Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
By Jessica Rocha, Staff Writer
CHAPEL HILL - The teenagers congregating at the upscale Southern Village
community in southern Chapel Hill have long been considered a nuisance.
They're blamed for graffiti, vandalism and loitering that can be costly
to
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
merchants and a hassle to residents.
Hey Mr. Cool. Notice the reference to graffiti. Let the graffiti,
vandalism and loitering start and pretty soon you have worse thing
happening. Also notice it said that they are costly to merchants and
a hassle to residents.
Post by George Conklin
But now the allegations are far more serious.
Four high school-age boys were arrested Friday on charges of
first-degree
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
rape.
====
Built in 1992, Southern Village is Chapel Hill's first "mixed-use
community." It was designed to be more like an established neighborhood
instead of a subdivision. Houses, apartments and townhouses surround a
market area that includes a grocery store, church, movie theater, office
space and retail shops, and children can walk or bike to an elementary
school there.
More than 3,000 people now live there, according to promotional
materials on
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Southern Village's Web site.
But Southern Village's movie theater and pizza and coffee shops make the
town square on the southern end of town a popular hangout for high
schoolers. And more secluded woods are close enough for some of those
kids
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
to find privacy to experiment with drugs and alcohol, among other
activities, Chapel Hill Police Capt. Chris Blue said.
In the past couple of years, residents and merchants have complained
that
They've
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
fought, painted graffiti and headed into the nearby woods to drink
alcohol.
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
In response, Chapel Hill police ramped up their presence last summer to
discourage the kids from gathering too much, trying to enforce a 9 p.m.
"drop-off" limit for teens. Merchants used wristbands to identify those
who
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
came to watch an outdoor movie to try to discern between the ones who
were
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
just hanging out from the ones there for entertainment.
"We had some success reaching out to parents and telling them of ... the
potential danger kids face being dropped off down there," Blue said.
Police also opened a police substation about two years ago behind the
movie
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
theater. Community police officers keep business hours there, though the
substation's not always occupied.
This summer, expect another police campaign aimed at parents who might
drop
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
off their kids and leave them at Southern Village unattended
------
Oh well, what do ignoranct architects know of real human behavior?
Zilch.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-29 16:15:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village,
an
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer part of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use techniques that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
Well you had a college professor read your post and be totally unable to
grasp what you said. What do YOU think?
Pat
2007-05-29 16:43:37 UTC
Permalink
On May 29, 12:15 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village,
an
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer part of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use techniques that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
Well you had a college professor read your post and be totally unable to
grasp what you said. What do YOU think?
I think I'm glad I have a liberal arts education from a Catholic
college.
Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
2007-05-29 17:52:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
On May 29, 12:15 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village,
an
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer part of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use techniques that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
Well you had a college professor read your post and be totally unable to
grasp what you said. What do YOU think?
I think I'm glad I have a liberal arts education from a Catholic
college.
Tru dat
george conklin
2007-05-29 17:39:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village,
an
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer part of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use techniques that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
There are places which encourage deviant behavior. There are some which
do not. Design is the issue. Get it? I guess not.
Pat
2007-05-29 18:39:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful people to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village,
an
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer part of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use techniques that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
There are places which encourage deviant behavior. There are some which
do not. Design is the issue. Get it? I guess not.
Design doesn't "encourage" deviant behavior although I think that
certain designs might discourage it.

He's an experiment you should run. Find a secluded wood, set up a
table with a pile of marijana, some crack, a few pipes, a bag of
heroin, and some needles. Get the place professionally graffiti'd.
Throw in a skateboard ramp and a basketball hoop (with wire net). Now
take a busload of nuns to the site and see if they indulge in the
deviant behavior that you attribute to the site.

I don't think your design will encourage squat.

It is the people, not the place.
george conklin
2007-05-29 20:17:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern Village,
an
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer
part
of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use
techniques
that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
There are places which encourage deviant behavior. There are some which
do not. Design is the issue. Get it? I guess not.
Design doesn't "encourage" deviant behavior although I think that
certain designs might discourage it.
Wrong. Many designs encourage deviant behavior. Sorry about that.
Post by Pat
He's an experiment you should run. Find a secluded wood, set up a
table with a pile of marijana, some crack, a few pipes, a bag of
heroin, and some needles. Get the place professionally graffiti'd.
Throw in a skateboard ramp and a basketball hoop (with wire net). Now
take a busload of nuns to the site and see if they indulge in the
deviant behavior that you attribute to the site.
I don't think your design will encourage squat.
It is the people, not the place.
What you are proposing is something called "The Broken Window Hypothesis."
It is also well documented.
Pat
2007-05-29 20:39:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the
point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer
part
of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use
techniques
that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
There are places which encourage deviant behavior. There are some which
do not. Design is the issue. Get it? I guess not.
Design doesn't "encourage" deviant behavior although I think that
certain designs might discourage it.
Wrong. Many designs encourage deviant behavior. Sorry about that.
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.

For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.

Just one, George.
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
He's an experiment you should run. Find a secluded wood, set up a
table with a pile of marijana, some crack, a few pipes, a bag of
heroin, and some needles. Get the place professionally graffiti'd.
Throw in a skateboard ramp and a basketball hoop (with wire net). Now
take a busload of nuns to the site and see if they indulge in the
deviant behavior that you attribute to the site.
I don't think your design will encourage squat.
It is the people, not the place.
What you are proposing is something called "The Broken Window Hypothesis."
It is also well documented.
As I said, good design might discourage to some minor extent, but I
don't think bad design encourages. Let's see your ONE example that
applied to me. It is, of course, well documented, so you say.
Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
2007-05-29 21:00:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
As I said, good design might discourage to some minor extent, but I
don't think bad design encourages. Let's see your ONE example that
applied to me. It is, of course, well documented, so you say.
Oh boy I should of never sided with George, you guys have persuaded me
to your side.
What prevents crime is a good sense or moral values, an education, and
decent income to prevent from
a *need* to steal for example. I'll call it the MEI Theory.
george conklin
2007-05-29 21:13:12 UTC
Permalink
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Pat
As I said, good design might discourage to some minor extent, but I
don't think bad design encourages. Let's see your ONE example that
applied to me. It is, of course, well documented, so you say.
Oh boy I should of never sided with George, you guys have persuaded me
to your side.
What prevents crime is a good sense or moral values, an education, and
decent income to prevent from
a *need* to steal for example. I'll call it the MEI Theory.
Such values might help prevent crime, but given the right circumstances,
they get weakened. It is an issue of probability, and certain design
features found in New Urbanism provide those areas of space in which deviant
activity takes place. This is an established fact, not just a theory.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-29 21:36:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Pat
As I said, good design might discourage to some minor extent, but I
don't think bad design encourages. Let's see your ONE example that
applied to me. It is, of course, well documented, so you say.
Oh boy I should of never sided with George, you guys have persuaded me
to your side.
What prevents crime is a good sense or moral values, an education, and
decent income to prevent from
a *need* to steal for example. I'll call it the MEI Theory.
Such values might help prevent crime, but given the right circumstances,
they get weakened. It is an issue of probability, and certain design
features found in New Urbanism provide those areas of space in which
deviant activity takes place. This is an established fact, not just a
theory.
George has his principals. Just make sure you stay out of dark alleys when
he's around...
george conklin
2007-05-30 10:22:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Pat
As I said, good design might discourage to some minor extent, but I
don't think bad design encourages. Let's see your ONE example that
applied to me. It is, of course, well documented, so you say.
Oh boy I should of never sided with George, you guys have persuaded me
to your side.
What prevents crime is a good sense or moral values, an education, and
decent income to prevent from
a *need* to steal for example. I'll call it the MEI Theory.
Such values might help prevent crime, but given the right
circumstances, they get weakened. It is an issue of probability, and
certain design features found in New Urbanism provide those areas of
space in which deviant activity takes place. This is an established
fact, not just a theory.
George has his principals. Just make sure you stay out of dark alleys
when he's around...
There are bad urban designs even if you like to believe in the tooth
fairy.
Pat
2007-05-30 02:37:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Pat
As I said, good design might discourage to some minor extent, but I
don't think bad design encourages. Let's see your ONE example that
applied to me. It is, of course, well documented, so you say.
Oh boy I should of never sided with George, you guys have persuaded me
to your side.
What prevents crime is a good sense or moral values, an education, and
decent income to prevent from
a *need* to steal for example. I'll call it the MEI Theory.
Such values might help prevent crime, but given the right circumstances,
they get weakened. It is an issue of probability, and certain design
features found in New Urbanism provide those areas of space in which deviant
activity takes place. This is an established fact, not just a theory.
I watch the TV show "Law and Order". They do a lot of shows of weird
legal situations -- things like the twinkie defense or my medicines
made me do it. All are interestings, some are 'ripped from the
headlines" and of course all have a surprise ending. What you are
proposing sounds too incredible even for Law and Order. It is the new
"Architecture Defense": the urban design made me do it.

Contributory Negligence is a HUGE legal issue and if "all the journal"
recognize the urban design phenomenon as "real", it will be just a
short time until planners and architects start getting arrested for
their bad design. If you give car keys to a drunk, your are
responsible for the accident. If you give a loaded gun to a spousal
abuser, you are responsible for the injury. Under your view, if you
design a bad urban space, you are responsible for the violence that
occurs there.

Has it truly become a world where no one is responsible for their own
actions? Didn't the mugging occurred because the guy is a mugger, not
that is occured because the planner designed it wrong? When flock of
nuns walk through a poorly designed area, do they become a street
gang?

George, you are allowing people to shed responsibility for their
actions. No one is responsible for their actions, except the poor
planner.

But before criminal liability attaches to planning, I bet you will be
an expert witness on civil trials showing that the planning firm, not
the killer, was financial responsible for the murder. Wrongful Death
Via Architecture -- or maybe just Wrongful Architecture.

It's unfortunate that you fail to recognize that people are
responsbile for their actions. Up here in the rural world, there are
bumper stickers that sum this up, they say "guns don't kill people,
people kill people". At least the gun crowd recognize that people are
responsible for their actions.

At least in your world, it is easy to grade exams. Everyone gets an
"A". Of course they do, because if they didn't learn the materials it
isn't their fault, it is fault course design and faulty instructions.
george conklin
2007-05-30 10:24:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
I watch the TV show "Law and Order". They do a lot of shows of weird
legal situations -- things like the twinkie defense or my medicines
made me do it. All are interestings, some are 'ripped from the
headlines" and of course all have a surprise ending. What you are
proposing sounds too incredible even for Law and Order. It is the new
"Architecture Defense": the urban design made me do it.
I suggest that you stop using TV writers as a basis for your research.
Already the cops are being asked about urban design, but they are
approaching it from the same false starts that planners use. Thus they in
fact contribute to the problem.
Sancho Panza
2007-05-30 18:44:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
I watch the TV show "Law and Order". They do a lot of shows of weird
legal situations -- things like the twinkie defense or my medicines
made me do it. All are interestings, some are 'ripped from the
headlines" and of course all have a surprise ending. What you are
proposing sounds too incredible even for Law and Order. It is the new
"Architecture Defense": the urban design made me do it.
I suggest that you stop using TV writers as a basis for your research.
Already the cops are being asked about urban design, but they are
approaching it from the same false starts that planners use. Thus they in
fact contribute to the problem.
It started with Pruitt-Igoe and continues through Columbus in Newark. All
those promised niceties seem to have vanished without a trace and, much more
important, without any explanations, apologies or objective research.
george conklin
2007-05-30 20:46:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sancho Panza
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
I watch the TV show "Law and Order". They do a lot of shows of weird
legal situations -- things like the twinkie defense or my medicines
made me do it. All are interestings, some are 'ripped from the
headlines" and of course all have a surprise ending. What you are
proposing sounds too incredible even for Law and Order. It is the new
"Architecture Defense": the urban design made me do it.
I suggest that you stop using TV writers as a basis for your research.
Already the cops are being asked about urban design, but they are
approaching it from the same false starts that planners use. Thus they
in fact contribute to the problem.
It started with Pruitt-Igoe and continues through Columbus in Newark. All
those promised niceties seem to have vanished without a trace and, much
more important, without any explanations, apologies or objective research.
Bob Jentsch was a junior planner on Pruitt-Igoe. Check out his comments on
the subject at:

http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/v42/jentsch.htm

While as a planner he has seen through some of the problems, most planners
today march on to the same drumbeat and refuse to look at changing anything.
Those planners are normative. They know what they want you had better damn
well conform.
george conklin
2007-05-29 21:11:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
On May 28, 5:15 pm, "George Conklin"
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the
point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer
part
of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use
techniques
that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
There are places which encourage deviant behavior. There are some which
do not. Design is the issue. Get it? I guess not.
Design doesn't "encourage" deviant behavior although I think that
certain designs might discourage it.
Wrong. Many designs encourage deviant behavior. Sorry about that.
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature on
the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area which do
not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern Village built a
large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and crime is what the got.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-29 21:37:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature on
the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area which
do not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern Village
built a large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and crime is
what the got.
George spends too much time in public restrooms with holes between the
stalls... He's right. Those DO encourage deviance!
george conklin
2007-05-30 10:25:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature
on the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area
which do not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern
Village built a large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and
crime is what the got.
George spends too much time in public restrooms with holes between the
stalls... He's right. Those DO encourage deviance!
Grow up Amy...if that is possible.
Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
2007-05-30 13:09:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature
on the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area
which do not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern
Village built a large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and
crime is what the got.
George spends too much time in public restrooms with holes between the
stalls... He's right. Those DO encourage deviance!
Grow up Amy...if that is possible.
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
george conklin
2007-05-30 14:21:29 UTC
Permalink
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature
on the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area
which do not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern
Village built a large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and
crime is what the got.
George spends too much time in public restrooms with holes between the
stalls... He's right. Those DO encourage deviance!
Grow up Amy...if that is possible.
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
What Defensible Space showed was that taxing existing citizens and putting
in defensible space provisions had a very large effect. Since the book is
free and on the web at HUD user, why not read it? My students have always
found it very, very informative and quite easy to understand. The book
reports they write show they usually (but not always) understand the main
points. Please remember that many of my students have been from the less
prosperous areas of their city.

Ths link will take you to a "local" (for me) study with correlational
analysis:

http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/raleigh.htm

MCA analysis controlls for all the variables shown and you are looking only
at the net effect of one variable at a time.


And this link will take you to the Newman book which found the same things
from an experimental viewpoint:

http://www.huduser.org/publications/pubasst/defensib.html

So pretend you are in a 4000-level course and read the materials.
george conklin
2007-05-30 14:25:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature
on the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area
which do not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern
Village built a large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and
crime is what the got.
George spends too much time in public restrooms with holes between the
stalls... He's right. Those DO encourage deviance!
Grow up Amy...if that is possible.
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
Let me correct the first line below: I meant to type: TAKING existing
citizens...
Post by Amy Blankenship
What Defensible Space showed was that taxing existing citizens and putting
in defensible space provisions had a very large effect. Since the book is
free and on the web at HUD user, why not read it? My students have always
found it very, very informative and quite easy to understand. The book
reports they write show they usually (but not always) understand the main
points. Please remember that many of my students have been from the less
prosperous areas of their city.
Ths link will take you to a "local" (for me) study with correlational
http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/raleigh.htm
MCA analysis controlls for all the variables shown and you are looking
only at the net effect of one variable at a time.
And this link will take you to the Newman book which found the same things
http://www.huduser.org/publications/pubasst/defensib.html
So pretend you are in a 4000-level course and read the materials.
Pat
2007-05-30 17:46:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature
on the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area
which do not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern
Village built a large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and
crime is what the got.
George spends too much time in public restrooms with holes between the
stalls... He's right. Those DO encourage deviance!
Grow up Amy...if that is possible.
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
What Defensible Space showed was that taxing existing citizens and putting
in defensible space provisions had a very large effect. Since the book is
free and on the web at HUD user, why not read it? My students have always
found it very, very informative and quite easy to understand. The book
reports they write show they usually (but not always) understand the main
points. Please remember that many of my students have been from the less
prosperous areas of their city.
Ths link will take you to a "local" (for me) study with correlational
http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/raleigh.htm
MCA analysis controlls for all the variables shown and you are looking only
at the net effect of one variable at a time.
And this link will take you to the Newman book which found the same things
http://www.huduser.org/publications/pubasst/defensib.html
So pretend you are in a 4000-level course and read the materials.
Gee, George, I've done my fair share of 500 level courses. I've done
some 600 level course. I've even done a bit on the 700 level. But
I've never gotten any closer than that to 4000 level course. Just
what kind of a degree is that for, an uber-ultra-PhD?
Sancho Panza
2007-05-30 18:47:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature
on the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area
which do not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern
Village built a large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and
crime is what the got.
George spends too much time in public restrooms with holes between the
stalls... He's right. Those DO encourage deviance!
Grow up Amy...if that is possible.
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
What Defensible Space showed was that taxing existing citizens and putting
in defensible space provisions had a very large effect. Since the book is
free and on the web at HUD user, why not read it? My students have always
found it very, very informative and quite easy to understand. The book
reports they write show they usually (but not always) understand the main
points. Please remember that many of my students have been from the less
prosperous areas of their city.
Ths link will take you to a "local" (for me) study with correlational
http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/raleigh.htm
MCA analysis controlls for all the variables shown and you are looking only
at the net effect of one variable at a time.
And this link will take you to the Newman book which found the same things
http://www.huduser.org/publications/pubasst/defensib.html
So pretend you are in a 4000-level course and read the materials.
Gee, George, I've done my fair share of 500 level courses. I've done
some 600 level course. I've even done a bit on the 700 level. But
I've never gotten any closer than that to 4000 level course. Just
what kind of a degree is that for, an uber-ultra-PhD?
That's the level where we debunk all the crap that was perpetrated on us
earlier. Remember when high school teachers "corrected" primary school
teachers, and then college professors did the same with high school
teachers? Well, believe me, those Ph.D.'s don't stand a chance.
Pat
2007-05-30 20:22:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sancho Panza
Post by Pat
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature
on the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area
which do not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern
Village built a large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and
crime is what the got.
George spends too much time in public restrooms with holes between the
stalls... He's right. Those DO encourage deviance!
Grow up Amy...if that is possible.
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
What Defensible Space showed was that taxing existing citizens and putting
in defensible space provisions had a very large effect. Since the book is
free and on the web at HUD user, why not read it? My students have always
found it very, very informative and quite easy to understand. The book
reports they write show they usually (but not always) understand the main
points. Please remember that many of my students have been from the less
prosperous areas of their city.
Ths link will take you to a "local" (for me) study with correlational
http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/raleigh.htm
MCA analysis controlls for all the variables shown and you are looking only
at the net effect of one variable at a time.
And this link will take you to the Newman book which found the same things
http://www.huduser.org/publications/pubasst/defensib.html
So pretend you are in a 4000-level course and read the materials.
Gee, George, I've done my fair share of 500 level courses. I've done
some 600 level course. I've even done a bit on the 700 level. But
I've never gotten any closer than that to 4000 level course. Just
what kind of a degree is that for, an uber-ultra-PhD?
That's the level where we debunk all the crap that was perpetrated on us
earlier. Remember when high school teachers "corrected" primary school
teachers, and then college professors did the same with high school
teachers? Well, believe me, those Ph.D.'s don't stand a chance.
I agonize about high school education. They are teaching the kids to
"write" basic on "the rubic". The writing for painful to read, lacks
all imagination, had to variety of cadence (or any cadance at all) and
it very formulamatic: 4 to 5 paragraphs, 8 to 12 sentence to
paragraph. Kid are graded on ability to follow that style, which is
absolute crap.

My arguement is that the VAST majority of all professional writing is
1 or 2 sentences per paragraph (sometimes 3, but seldom more) The
vast majority of good writing has variety and change within it.

Also, they rely on descriptiive adjectives (because of the long
structure) instead of descriptive verbs which are much more exciting
and fun.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-30 21:18:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by Sancho Panza
Post by Pat
Gee, George, I've done my fair share of 500 level courses. I've done
some 600 level course. I've even done a bit on the 700 level. But
I've never gotten any closer than that to 4000 level course. Just
what kind of a degree is that for, an uber-ultra-PhD?
That's the level where we debunk all the crap that was perpetrated on us
earlier. Remember when high school teachers "corrected" primary school
teachers, and then college professors did the same with high school
teachers? Well, believe me, those Ph.D.'s don't stand a chance.
I agonize about high school education. They are teaching the kids to
"write" basic on "the rubic". The writing for painful to read, lacks
all imagination, had to variety of cadence (or any cadance at all) and
it very formulamatic: 4 to 5 paragraphs, 8 to 12 sentence to
paragraph. Kid are graded on ability to follow that style, which is
absolute crap.
My arguement is that the VAST majority of all professional writing is
1 or 2 sentences per paragraph (sometimes 3, but seldom more) The
vast majority of good writing has variety and change within it.
Also, they rely on descriptiive adjectives (because of the long
structure) instead of descriptive verbs which are much more exciting
and fun.
I think the root problem is that Mamma is so proud that little Davie writes
at a college level, never realizing that what that REALLY means is that
little Davie has learned that he does not need clarity of thought because he
can hide his lack of any insights behind sentences so complex that his
overworked, undereducated teacher will give an "A" to rather than admit she
got lost in all the nonsense. Or, worse, she may well recognize it as
complete crap, but her school district may have a policy in place that
requires her to bolster Davie's self esteem anyway. Since Davie gets so
many A's he believes that these sentences composed of random thoughts in no
particular order are a sign of intelligence, rather than the reverse.

And Davie is right, in a way. If you read scholarly papers, you will find
that all too often the writers resort to this type of language because they
actually cannot state clearly what it is that they want to say, so they
dance all around the point and hope you guess it. Here is an excellent
example: http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/v51/chris.htm. Of course
they do this, because they've figured out it makes ignorance look like
intelligence. In short, they've outsmarted teachers, professors, and
editors.

If you've ever had a hard "ceiling" of the 7th or 8th Grade for what level
you can write for, you realize that you absolutely _must_ know what you are
talking about in order to formulate sentences that avoid all the
convolutions so excellently demonstrated in this paper. In my opinion,
students should not be able to graduated without being able to write the
same essay at _both_ the 7th and 12th grade reading level.

-Amy
george conklin
2007-05-30 23:37:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
And Davie is right, in a way. If you read scholarly papers, you will find
that all too often the writers resort to this type of language because
they actually cannot state clearly what it is that they want to say, so
they dance all around the point and hope you guess it. Here is an
http://www.ncsociology.org/sociationtoday/v51/chris.htm. Of course they
do this, because they've figured out it makes ignorance look like
intelligence. In short, they've outsmarted teachers, professors, and
editors.
You don't know how to do even that.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-30 18:19:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature
on the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area
which do not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern
Village built a large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and
crime is what the got.
George spends too much time in public restrooms with holes between the
stalls... He's right. Those DO encourage deviance!
Grow up Amy...if that is possible.
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
What Defensible Space showed was that taxing existing citizens and putting
in defensible space provisions had a very large effect. Since the book is
free and on the web at HUD user, why not read it? My students have always
found it very, very informative and quite easy to understand. The book
reports they write show they usually (but not always) understand the main
points. Please remember that many of my students have been from the less
prosperous areas of their city.
What you fail to understand is that being able to parrot back to you what
you think the publication is about is not the same thing as understanding
it, because clearly *you* don't understand what is in it. I didn't see
anything in there that was incompatible with New Urbanism. So apparently
you've either misunderstood the pub or misunderstood New Urbanism. I
suspect both, since:

1) You consistently advocate for cul-de-sacs per se without recognizing
that cul-de-sacs only work as described in the document when built with a
particular form.
2) Many other steps were taken in the case studies other than simply
changing the form of the buildings
3) You don't appear to have noticed that the document is referring
specifically to housing and in particular low income housing (it was said
several times that many of the principles would not be applicable to higher
income housing), therefore, I don't think you can infer that the author was
advocating for the removal of all public spaces used for any purpose.

I found it a very interesting read, though, since it was more about how to
properly manage a planning project than about Defensible Space per se.

-Amy
george conklin
2007-05-30 20:49:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature
on the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area
which do not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern
Village built a large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and
crime is what the got.
George spends too much time in public restrooms with holes between the
stalls... He's right. Those DO encourage deviance!
Grow up Amy...if that is possible.
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
What Defensible Space showed was that taxing existing citizens and
putting in defensible space provisions had a very large effect. Since
the book is free and on the web at HUD user, why not read it? My
students have always found it very, very informative and quite easy to
understand. The book reports they write show they usually (but not
always) understand the main points. Please remember that many of my
students have been from the less prosperous areas of their city.
What you fail to understand is that being able to parrot back to you what
you think the publication is about is not the same thing as understanding
it, because clearly *you* don't understand what is in it.
Oh dear. I did not write the articles you deleted the link for. Attack
the authors. Write to them. Tell them the truth. I am sure they are
waiting to hear from you. Oh I forgot...do you read or does someone have to
read the articles to you?
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-30 21:21:35 UTC
Permalink
"george conklin" <***@nxu.edu> wrote in message news:mrl7i.16572$***@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
What Defensible Space showed was that taxing existing citizens and
putting in defensible space provisions had a very large effect. Since
the book is free and on the web at HUD user, why not read it? My
students have always found it very, very informative and quite easy to
understand. The book reports they write show they usually (but not
always) understand the main points. Please remember that many of my
students have been from the less prosperous areas of their city.
What you fail to understand is that being able to parrot back to you what
you think the publication is about is not the same thing as understanding
it, because clearly *you* don't understand what is in it.
Oh dear. I did not write the articles you deleted the link for. Attack
the authors. Write to them. Tell them the truth. I am sure they are
waiting to hear from you. Oh I forgot...do you read or does someone have
to read the articles to you?
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't understood it.
But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually can't
comprehend...
george conklin
2007-05-30 23:38:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
What Defensible Space showed was that taxing existing citizens and
putting in defensible space provisions had a very large effect. Since
the book is free and on the web at HUD user, why not read it? My
students have always found it very, very informative and quite easy to
understand. The book reports they write show they usually (but not
always) understand the main points. Please remember that many of my
students have been from the less prosperous areas of their city.
What you fail to understand is that being able to parrot back to you
what you think the publication is about is not the same thing as
understanding it, because clearly *you* don't understand what is in it.
Oh dear. I did not write the articles you deleted the link for. Attack
the authors. Write to them. Tell them the truth. I am sure they are
waiting to hear from you. Oh I forgot...do you read or does someone have
to read the articles to you?
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-31 04:08:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
Certainly not you ;-)
Pat
2007-05-30 01:07:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
On May 28, 5:15 pm, "George Conklin"
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New
Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the
point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer
part
of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use
techniques
that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
There are places which encourage deviant behavior. There are some which
do not. Design is the issue. Get it? I guess not.
Design doesn't "encourage" deviant behavior although I think that
certain designs might discourage it.
Wrong. Many designs encourage deviant behavior. Sorry about that.
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
I suggest you read the book on Defensible Space. It is a real-world
experimental situation. Cisneros also summarized the entire literature on
the point. We can speak of areas which encourage deviance and area which do
not. As for you personally, it is not an issue. Southern Village built a
large numbers of areas which were prone to crime, and crime is what the got.
So if they bulldozed those areas and "properly" reconstructed them,
there would be no more crime?
Pat
2007-05-30 02:42:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the
point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer
part
of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use
techniques
that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
There are places which encourage deviant behavior. There are some which
do not. Design is the issue. Get it? I guess not.
Design doesn't "encourage" deviant behavior although I think that
certain designs might discourage it.
Wrong. Many designs encourage deviant behavior. Sorry about that.
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
He's an experiment you should run. Find a secluded wood, set up a
table with a pile of marijana, some crack, a few pipes, a bag of
heroin, and some needles. Get the place professionally graffiti'd.
Throw in a skateboard ramp and a basketball hoop (with wire net). Now
take a busload of nuns to the site and see if they indulge in the
deviant behavior that you attribute to the site.
I don't think your design will encourage squat.
It is the people, not the place.
What you are proposing is something called "The Broken Window Hypothesis."
It is also well documented.
As I said, good design might discourage to some minor extent, but I
don't think bad design encourages. Let's see your ONE example that
applied to me. It is, of course, well documented, so you say.
Hey George, still waiting. Give me ONE example, just one, of how a
badly designed environment is going to force me to break a law that I
wasn't going to break, otherwise. Come on George, just one example.
Let's see what happens when the rubber hits the road. "Everyone"
agrees with this the theory (and yes, it is a theory not a fact) and
it's in all of the journals. Someone, somewhere must have some
example. I'm waiting for my life of crime to begin.

(Shhhhh. Don't tell Amy, but I think she's a little shady. Maybe you
can find one that will make her break a law or two. ... and there's
that kid, maybe he'll be easy pickings 'cause he's an impressionable
teen. I think you might be able for find a law or two for him to
break).
Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
2007-05-30 04:03:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
It has been known for years that the silly dictates of New
Urbanism
encourage uncontrolled space which encourages otherwise lawful
people
to
commit crime. This is an example of this problem from Southern
Village,
an
Post by Pat
Post by George Conklin
enclave of Chapel Hill, North Carolina. It really does prove the
point.
Alleged rape site a teen hangout
I don't care what you-all say, but this is all crap. It is not an
"alleged rape site". It is "the site of an alleged rape". I ain't
the best writer, but that person ought to go ask for a refund of the
cost of her journalism degree.
Certain urban designs encourage deviant behaivor, as the longer
part
of
the article implies. They even went so far as to try to use
techniques
that
festivals use to do that. It does not work in an urban setting.
I don't care if they bulldoze and sterizle the entire darned place so
no one ever goes there again. Regardless, it is NOT the "alleged rape
site" it is the site of an alleged rape. Words mean something and
these two things do not mean the same.
The site of an alleged rape means that the site is know and someone is
alleging a rape.
The alleged rape site means that the rape occured and someone is
alleging that that is the spot where it occured.
Two totally different things. What are they teaching in college these
days?
There are places which encourage deviant behavior. There are some which
do not. Design is the issue. Get it? I guess not.
Design doesn't "encourage" deviant behavior although I think that
certain designs might discourage it.
Wrong. Many designs encourage deviant behavior. Sorry about that.
Give me ONE solid example of how a design feature is going to
encourage me to become a deviant. Just one, George, in the whole big
world of design. All I am asking is ONE example: ONE thing that will
cause me to go break the law in any significant way (that I wouldn't
have done anyway). Just ONE. Let's see it.
For bonus points, throw in one for Amy, too, but that's optional.
Just one, George.
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
He's an experiment you should run. Find a secluded wood, set up a
table with a pile of marijana, some crack, a few pipes, a bag of
heroin, and some needles. Get the place professionally graffiti'd.
Throw in a skateboard ramp and a basketball hoop (with wire net). Now
take a busload of nuns to the site and see if they indulge in the
deviant behavior that you attribute to the site.
I don't think your design will encourage squat.
It is the people, not the place.
What you are proposing is something called "The Broken Window Hypothesis."
It is also well documented.
As I said, good design might discourage to some minor extent, but I
don't think bad design encourages. Let's see your ONE example that
applied to me. It is, of course, well documented, so you say.
Hey George, still waiting. Give me ONE example, just one, of how a
badly designed environment is going to force me to break a law that I
wasn't going to break, otherwise. Come on George, just one example.
Let's see what happens when the rubber hits the road. "Everyone"
agrees with this the theory (and yes, it is a theory not a fact) and
it's in all of the journals. Someone, somewhere must have some
example. I'm waiting for my life of crime to begin.
(Shhhhh. Don't tell Amy, but I think she's a little shady. Maybe you
can find one that will make her break a law or two. ... and there's
that kid, maybe he'll be easy pickings 'cause he's an impressionable
teen. I think you might be able for find a law or two for him to
break).
Well, with Cabrini Greens, many people who lived their were laid off
from their job, they
then had to hustle to get by. This was esp the case because one of
Chicago's most natorius drug
dealing area was a few blocks away from Cabrini greens. People had no
other way of income, so they
had to go into the drug dealing business for money. I don't know I'm
just throwin it on the table see what you guys think of that
situation, were they forced to commit crime or not?
Pat
2007-05-31 01:10:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by george conklin
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
I think the only design that provkes crime are ones of poor public
housing projects.
Getting 15,000 lower class citizens together in one area but not give
them any jobs is
going to provoke drug dealing, and thus gang violence.
What Defensible Space showed was that taxing existing citizens and
putting in defensible space provisions had a very large effect. Since
the book is free and on the web at HUD user, why not read it? My
students have always found it very, very informative and quite easy to
understand. The book reports they write show they usually (but not
always) understand the main points. Please remember that many of my
students have been from the less prosperous areas of their city.
What you fail to understand is that being able to parrot back to you
what you think the publication is about is not the same thing as
understanding it, because clearly *you* don't understand what is in it.
Oh dear. I did not write the articles you deleted the link for. Attack
the authors. Write to them. Tell them the truth. I am sure they are
waiting to hear from you. Oh I forgot...do you read or does someone have
to read the articles to you?
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.

I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.

As for you, I'm still waiting for a example, just one example, of bad
architecture that is going to drive me over the edge and result in a
life of crime, or whatever. It is doesn't exist, you whole gestault
evaporates and leave you just a bitter old man with no purpose in
life. Too bad.... Just one example. We're all waiting.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-31 04:19:02 UTC
Permalink
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him seriously at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
2007-05-31 13:14:55 UTC
Permalink
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him seriously at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-31 14:16:32 UTC
Permalink
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him seriously at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Well, there are two issues with George.

The first is that he is a college professor. I think the thing that bothers
both Pat and me about that is that we believe it is important for someone
who is teaching the next generation of thinkers to possess the skills he is
supposed to be passing along. The fact that George does not appear to be
very good at logic and rhetoric (or at the very least is intellectually lazy
and/or dishonest) is something I find disturbing, and I think that Pat does
as well.

The second thing is that George does not believe in urban planning as a
concept, which means he is bound to be at odds with anyone who arrives here
with a genuine interest in that.

However, both Pat and I have on occasion agreed with George. Which just
goes to show, no one is wrong 100% of the time.

-Amy
george conklin
2007-05-31 15:00:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him seriously at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Well, there are two issues with George.
The first is that he is a college professor. I think the thing that
bothers both Pat and me about that is that we believe it is important for
someone who is teaching the next generation of thinkers to possess the
skills he is supposed to be passing along.
Well, if you were to actually appear before a class and had to support
what you try to post, you would get laughted at. I identify my sources,
work with a board and referees, and you would not even get to first base
with that kind of review. You are good example of why emotions do not
change real-world behavior.
Pat
2007-05-31 15:40:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him seriously at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Well, there are two issues with George.
The first is that he is a college professor. I think the thing that
bothers both Pat and me about that is that we believe it is important for
someone who is teaching the next generation of thinkers to possess the
skills he is supposed to be passing along.
Well, if you were to actually appear before a class and had to support
what you try to post, you would get laughted at. I identify my sources,
work with a board and referees, and you would not even get to first base
with that kind of review. You are good example of why emotions do not
change real-world behavior.
Yes George, I recognize that if I had to stand in front of a gaggle of
professors I'd probably get laughed at. That is what I find utterly
amazing. I live in the real world. I work in development for a
living and I'm in front of planning boards and city/town/village
boards on a routine basis. This is reality out here, not the Ivory
Tower. This is where reality his the pavement and most academic
theories just down fly.

If you were to go and propose "defensible space" to a planning board,
they would instantly get urges to make phone calls, take phone calls,
and ask each other what the special is down at the diner. You'd lose
there interest, you'd lose your project, and you'l lose your money.
We're not talking about the school losing some grant, we're talking
about someone putting their hand in your pocket and pulling out
$20,000 or $30,000 of YOUR money.

In theory I support zoning. In theory it makes sense. In practice it
makes no sense whatsoever. At best it instiutionalizes the status
quo. The worst it is a discriminitory tool to keep the minorities in
their area and the non-minorities in theirs. It also ensure that no
one without a wad a cash can do anything -- why also ensuring that
those with a wad of cash can do whatever they want.

Planners and zoning boards think they control development, but they
don't Money controls development. If a bank said all buildings must
be white and the zoning people said they must all be brick, you'd find
that they were all white and there was precious little brick
anywhere. Money is what controls development. So the lesson here is
that if you want to control development, don't study planning: study
finance.

When I consider a project, zoning is on my list, but it's pretty far
down.

I was once in a village and was discussing a project with the mayor.
I was just off of downtown and asked if first floor residential was
permitted. The mayor instantly said "yes". I asked what the zoning
was, the mayor said that he didn't know. So he called the building
inspector. The BI said that first floor residential wasn't allowed.
The mayor said to me "the BI says that first floor residential isn't
allowed, but don't worry about it, I'll take care of it". Done. So
much for zoning/planning. They type of thing is routine. And no one
has EVER asked about defensible space. Most regular people know what
works and know what doesn't pretty quickly.

Example #2. One public funding source I deal with has a point-driven
scoring system. You actually get MORE points if you get the zoning
changed to suit your needs.

The other thing that control development is water and sewer. You can
control more with the size and siting of them than you can with a
thousand pages of planning regulations.

So yes, George, I'd probably get laughed at by a group of professors
with their noses in books. But OTOH, those same professors would get
thrown out of most public meetings if they tried to present anything.
So you can keep your professors in your red brick walls and I'll say
out here on the streets where the air is real and the pay is better.
Sancho Panza
2007-05-31 17:10:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't
understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him
seriously
at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Well, there are two issues with George.
The first is that he is a college professor. I think the thing that
bothers both Pat and me about that is that we believe it is important for
someone who is teaching the next generation of thinkers to possess the
skills he is supposed to be passing along.
Well, if you were to actually appear before a class and had to support
what you try to post, you would get laughted at. I identify my sources,
work with a board and referees, and you would not even get to first base
with that kind of review. You are good example of why emotions do not
change real-world behavior.
Yes George, I recognize that if I had to stand in front of a gaggle of
professors I'd probably get laughed at. That is what I find utterly
amazing. I live in the real world. I work in development for a
living and I'm in front of planning boards and city/town/village
boards on a routine basis. This is reality out here, not the Ivory
Tower. This is where reality his the pavement and most academic
theories just down fly.
If you were to go and propose "defensible space" to a planning board,
they would instantly get urges to make phone calls, take phone calls,
and ask each other what the special is down at the diner. You'd lose
there interest, you'd lose your project, and you'l lose your money.
We're not talking about the school losing some grant, we're talking
about someone putting their hand in your pocket and pulling out
$20,000 or $30,000 of YOUR money.
In theory I support zoning. In theory it makes sense. In practice it
makes no sense whatsoever. At best it instiutionalizes the status
quo. The worst it is a discriminitory tool to keep the minorities in
their area and the non-minorities in theirs. It also ensure that no
one without a wad a cash can do anything -- why also ensuring that
those with a wad of cash can do whatever they want.
Planners and zoning boards think they control development, but they
don't Money controls development. If a bank said all buildings must
be white and the zoning people said they must all be brick, you'd find
that they were all white and there was precious little brick
anywhere. Money is what controls development. So the lesson here is
that if you want to control development, don't study planning: study
finance.
When I consider a project, zoning is on my list, but it's pretty far
down.
I was once in a village and was discussing a project with the mayor.
I was just off of downtown and asked if first floor residential was
permitted. The mayor instantly said "yes". I asked what the zoning
was, the mayor said that he didn't know. So he called the building
inspector. The BI said that first floor residential wasn't allowed.
The mayor said to me "the BI says that first floor residential isn't
allowed, but don't worry about it, I'll take care of it". Done. So
much for zoning/planning.
Maybe that's the routine in more pristine locales. In much of the rest of
the world, the officials want something in exchange before granting such
wishes.
Post by Pat
They type of thing is routine. And no one
has EVER asked about defensible space. Most regular people know what
works and know what doesn't pretty quickly.
Example #2. One public funding source I deal with has a point-driven
scoring system. You actually get MORE points if you get the zoning
changed to suit your needs.
The other thing that control development is water and sewer. You can
control more with the size and siting of them than you can with a
thousand pages of planning regulations.
So yes, George, I'd probably get laughed at by a group of professors
with their noses in books. But OTOH, those same professors would get
thrown out of most public meetings if they tried to present anything.
So you can keep your professors in your red brick walls and I'll say
out here on the streets where the air is real and the pay is better.
george conklin
2007-05-31 17:55:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't
understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him
seriously
at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Well, there are two issues with George.
The first is that he is a college professor. I think the thing that
bothers both Pat and me about that is that we believe it is important for
someone who is teaching the next generation of thinkers to possess the
skills he is supposed to be passing along.
Well, if you were to actually appear before a class and had to support
what you try to post, you would get laughted at. I identify my sources,
work with a board and referees, and you would not even get to first base
with that kind of review. You are good example of why emotions do not
change real-world behavior.
Yes George, I recognize that if I had to stand in front of a gaggle of
professors I'd probably get laughed at. That is what I find utterly
amazing. I live in the real world. I work in development for a
living and I'm in front of planning boards and city/town/village
boards on a routine basis. This is reality out here, not the Ivory
Tower. This is where reality his the pavement and most academic
theories just down fly.
Crime patterns are NOT theory. You visions of what ought to be is pure
theory. And wrong.
Post by Pat
If you were to go and propose "defensible space" to a planning board,
they would instantly get urges to make phone calls, take phone calls,
and ask each other what the special is down at the diner.
That is simply because planning boards are not interested in crime
control, but only in supporting maximization of developers' income levels
and in assorted persona opinions.

You'd lose
Post by Pat
there interest, you'd lose your project, and you'l lose your money.
Thank you for confirming that money is all that planning is about. The
purpose of boards is to maximize your income and to hell with the crime
rates, public good and anything other than your personal opinions.
Post by Pat
We're not talking about the school losing some grant, we're talking
about someone putting their hand in your pocket and pulling out
$20,000 or $30,000 of YOUR money.
In theory I support zoning. In theory it makes sense. In practice it
makes no sense whatsoever. At best it instiutionalizes the status
quo. The worst it is a discriminitory tool to keep the minorities in
their area and the non-minorities in theirs. It also ensure that no
one without a wad a cash can do anything -- why also ensuring that
those with a wad of cash can do whatever they want.
As currently practiced, zoning does not protect homeowners. It protests
the strongest with the most money to buy up land cheap, pay to get zoning
changed, and then make the big bucks.
Post by Pat
Planners and zoning boards think they control development, but they
don't Money controls development.
Correct.

If a bank said all buildings must
Post by Pat
be white and the zoning people said they must all be brick, you'd find
that they were all white and there was precious little brick
anywhere. Money is what controls development. So the lesson here is
that if you want to control development, don't study planning: study
finance.
When I consider a project, zoning is on my list, but it's pretty far
down.
I was once in a village and was discussing a project with the mayor.
I was just off of downtown and asked if first floor residential was
permitted. The mayor instantly said "yes". I asked what the zoning
was, the mayor said that he didn't know. So he called the building
inspector. The BI said that first floor residential wasn't allowed.
The mayor said to me "the BI says that first floor residential isn't
allowed, but don't worry about it, I'll take care of it". Done. So
much for zoning/planning. They type of thing is routine.
You seem to forget I know about such things. But that does not mean that
defensible space does not really control crime. It does.


And no one
Post by Pat
has EVER asked about defensible space.
Correct. That does not mean that defensible space is not what
traditional development hit on. Cul-do-sacs, and so forth. They do cut
back on crime and you can quickly notice that. The APA is the group which
denies all that.



Most regular people know what
Post by Pat
works and know what doesn't pretty quickly.
Example #2. One public funding source I deal with has a point-driven
scoring system. You actually get MORE points if you get the zoning
changed to suit your needs.
The other thing that control development is water and sewer. You can
control more with the size and siting of them than you can with a
thousand pages of planning regulations.
Not when the developers always put in water and sewer free, and then the
city annexes the land.
Post by Pat
So yes, George, I'd probably get laughed at by a group of professors
with their noses in books.
I guess you forgot I was on boards for over 20 years. I even took
continuing education engineering courses. Not that I needed CEUs, but they
did show you what could be done technically.


But OTOH, those same professors would get
Post by Pat
thrown out of most public meetings if they tried to present anything.
It depends if they were on the board, or knew the right people. The
problem is that planners always say the same old rants and after awhile the
big lie takes over.
Post by Pat
So you can keep your professors in your red brick walls and I'll say
out here on the streets where the air is real and the pay is better.
I am glad you make your money hurting the public.
Pat
2007-05-31 19:07:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't
understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you
actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him
seriously
at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Well, there are two issues with George.
The first is that he is a college professor. I think the thing that
bothers both Pat and me about that is that we believe it is important for
someone who is teaching the next generation of thinkers to possess the
skills he is supposed to be passing along.
Well, if you were to actually appear before a class and had to support
what you try to post, you would get laughted at. I identify my sources,
work with a board and referees, and you would not even get to first base
with that kind of review. You are good example of why emotions do not
change real-world behavior.
Yes George, I recognize that if I had to stand in front of a gaggle of
professors I'd probably get laughed at. That is what I find utterly
amazing. I live in the real world. I work in development for a
living and I'm in front of planning boards and city/town/village
boards on a routine basis. This is reality out here, not the Ivory
Tower. This is where reality his the pavement and most academic
theories just down fly.
Crime patterns are NOT theory. You visions of what ought to be is pure
theory. And wrong.
I'm not saying that crime stats are not real. I"m saying that
architecture can do little to influence them unless you want to design
the new Nazi state or a prison. Heck, within a prison -- the MOST
controlled place in the world, there's still crime.
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
If you were to go and propose "defensible space" to a planning board,
they would instantly get urges to make phone calls, take phone calls,
and ask each other what the special is down at the diner.
That is simply because planning boards are not interested in crime
control, but only in supporting maximization of developers' income levels
and in assorted persona opinions.
Under State law (at least for this state), crime control is not one of
their charges.

Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Post by george conklin
You'd lose
Post by Pat
there interest, you'd lose your project, and you'l lose your money.
Thank you for confirming that money is all that planning is about. The
purpose of boards is to maximize your income and to hell with the crime
rates, public good and anything other than your personal opinions.
Post by Pat
We're not talking about the school losing some grant, we're talking
about someone putting their hand in your pocket and pulling out
$20,000 or $30,000 of YOUR money.
In theory I support zoning. In theory it makes sense. In practice it
makes no sense whatsoever. At best it instiutionalizes the status
quo. The worst it is a discriminitory tool to keep the minorities in
their area and the non-minorities in theirs. It also ensure that no
one without a wad a cash can do anything -- why also ensuring that
those with a wad of cash can do whatever they want.
As currently practiced, zoning does not protect homeowners. It protests
the strongest with the most money to buy up land cheap, pay to get zoning
changed, and then make the big bucks.
Post by Pat
Planners and zoning boards think they control development, but they
don't Money controls development.
Correct.
If a bank said all buildings must
Post by Pat
be white and the zoning people said they must all be brick, you'd find
that they were all white and there was precious little brick
anywhere. Money is what controls development. So the lesson here is
that if you want to control development, don't study planning: study
finance.
When I consider a project, zoning is on my list, but it's pretty far
down.
I was once in a village and was discussing a project with the mayor.
I was just off of downtown and asked if first floor residential was
permitted. The mayor instantly said "yes". I asked what the zoning
was, the mayor said that he didn't know. So he called the building
inspector. The BI said that first floor residential wasn't allowed.
The mayor said to me "the BI says that first floor residential isn't
allowed, but don't worry about it, I'll take care of it". Done. So
much for zoning/planning. They type of thing is routine.
You seem to forget I know about such things. But that does not mean that
defensible space does not really control crime. It does.
I'm still waiting for my example.
Post by george conklin
And no one
Post by Pat
has EVER asked about defensible space.
Correct. That does not mean that defensible space is not what
traditional development hit on. Cul-do-sacs, and so forth. They do cut
back on crime and you can quickly notice that. The APA is the group which
denies all that.
There are political, not crime reasons, why gov't want cul-de-sacs.
But even they are on the way out because the fire companies don't like
turning their trucks around in them (and in some climates, the plow
crews don't like them either). In the area I live it, the new fad is
loops. Firemen have a lot of influence.
Post by george conklin
Most regular people know what
Post by Pat
works and know what doesn't pretty quickly.
Example #2. One public funding source I deal with has a point-driven
scoring system. You actually get MORE points if you get the zoning
changed to suit your needs.
The other thing that control development is water and sewer. You can
control more with the size and siting of them than you can with a
thousand pages of planning regulations.
Not when the developers always put in water and sewer free, and then the
city annexes the land.
Show me where they put in the water and sewer for free. I want to go
there. $45/l.f. is the going rate for basic sewer.
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
So yes, George, I'd probably get laughed at by a group of professors
with their noses in books.
I guess you forgot I was on boards for over 20 years. I even took
continuing education engineering courses. Not that I needed CEUs, but they
did show you what could be done technically.
But OTOH, those same professors would get
Post by Pat
thrown out of most public meetings if they tried to present anything.
It depends if they were on the board, or knew the right people. The
problem is that planners always say the same old rants and after awhile the
big lie takes over.
That I agree with. Planners rant the same old things over and over
and try to convince the gov't the rants are the truth.
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
So you can keep your professors in your red brick walls and I'll say
out here on the streets where the air is real and the pay is better.
I am glad you make your money hurting the public.
I'm not the one hurting anyone. Everything I do tends to fairly
highly regulated and reviewed until the cows come home. After enough
reviews, it all ends up as sausage.
george conklin
2007-05-31 20:25:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't
understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you
actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I
respect
her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something
I've
said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument
on
an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him
seriously
at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing
in
the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Well, there are two issues with George.
The first is that he is a college professor. I think the thing that
bothers both Pat and me about that is that we believe it is
important
for
someone who is teaching the next generation of thinkers to possess the
skills he is supposed to be passing along.
Well, if you were to actually appear before a class and had to support
what you try to post, you would get laughted at. I identify my sources,
work with a board and referees, and you would not even get to first base
with that kind of review. You are good example of why emotions do not
change real-world behavior.
Yes George, I recognize that if I had to stand in front of a gaggle of
professors I'd probably get laughed at. That is what I find utterly
amazing. I live in the real world. I work in development for a
living and I'm in front of planning boards and city/town/village
boards on a routine basis. This is reality out here, not the Ivory
Tower. This is where reality his the pavement and most academic
theories just down fly.
Crime patterns are NOT theory. You visions of what ought to be is pure
theory. And wrong.
I'm not saying that crime stats are not real. I"m saying that
architecture can do little to influence them unless you want to design
the new Nazi state or a prison. Heck, within a prison -- the MOST
controlled place in the world, there's still crime.
You are wrong. Architecture can influence crime patterns. But
architects don't care. They have "visions." They claim that these visions
will solve all kinds of social problems of their choosing, but they are
wrong about that too. So they ignore what works, and push what does not.
That is causing a lot of harm, and planners who buy into the "vision"
concept are doing a lot of harm too. As for prison, there is no defensible
space there.
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
If you were to go and propose "defensible space" to a planning board,
they would instantly get urges to make phone calls, take phone calls,
and ask each other what the special is down at the diner.
That is simply because planning boards are not interested in crime
control, but only in supporting maximization of developers' income levels
and in assorted persona opinions.
Under State law (at least for this state), crime control is not one of
their charges.
Neither is encouraging crime, but they do a good job of it anyway.
Post by Pat
Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Planners don't even control themselves. They are normative. They want
to tell you what to do. Want a cul-de-sac? It does control crime, but our
local planners are opposed and try to make the grid pattern the ONLY one
they will approve. They do that through the development ordinances. And
the planner who pushes that the hardest lives out of the county....
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
You'd lose
Post by Pat
there interest, you'd lose your project, and you'l lose your money.
Thank you for confirming that money is all that planning is about.
The
purpose of boards is to maximize your income and to hell with the crime
rates, public good and anything other than your personal opinions.
Post by Pat
We're not talking about the school losing some grant, we're talking
about someone putting their hand in your pocket and pulling out
$20,000 or $30,000 of YOUR money.
In theory I support zoning. In theory it makes sense. In practice it
makes no sense whatsoever. At best it instiutionalizes the status
quo. The worst it is a discriminitory tool to keep the minorities in
their area and the non-minorities in theirs. It also ensure that no
one without a wad a cash can do anything -- why also ensuring that
those with a wad of cash can do whatever they want.
As currently practiced, zoning does not protect homeowners. It protests
the strongest with the most money to buy up land cheap, pay to get zoning
changed, and then make the big bucks.
Post by Pat
Planners and zoning boards think they control development, but they
don't Money controls development.
Correct.
If a bank said all buildings must
Post by Pat
be white and the zoning people said they must all be brick, you'd find
that they were all white and there was precious little brick
anywhere. Money is what controls development. So the lesson here is
that if you want to control development, don't study planning: study
finance.
When I consider a project, zoning is on my list, but it's pretty far
down.
I was once in a village and was discussing a project with the mayor.
I was just off of downtown and asked if first floor residential was
permitted. The mayor instantly said "yes". I asked what the zoning
was, the mayor said that he didn't know. So he called the building
inspector. The BI said that first floor residential wasn't allowed.
The mayor said to me "the BI says that first floor residential isn't
allowed, but don't worry about it, I'll take care of it". Done. So
much for zoning/planning. They type of thing is routine.
You seem to forget I know about such things. But that does not mean that
defensible space does not really control crime. It does.
I'm still waiting for my example.
Post by george conklin
And no one
Post by Pat
has EVER asked about defensible space.
Correct. That does not mean that defensible space is not what
traditional development hit on. Cul-do-sacs, and so forth. They do cut
back on crime and you can quickly notice that. The APA is the group which
denies all that.
There are political, not crime reasons, why gov't want cul-de-sacs.
But even they are on the way out because the fire companies don't like
turning their trucks around in them (and in some climates, the plow
crews don't like them either). In the area I live it, the new fad is
loops. Firemen have a lot of influence.
The fire companies simply asked for turn arounds big enough for their
trucks. But smart growth wanted smaller ones to save space. Then there was
a problem. I've seen smart growth developments with streets so narrow if
ONE car parked on the curb, no truck could get through. People parked over
the sidewalks. No one from planning notices these issues. On a New Year's
party, the street would be 100% blocked to everything but foot traffic. All
that is acceptable under smart growth.
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Most regular people know what
Post by Pat
works and know what doesn't pretty quickly.
Example #2. One public funding source I deal with has a point-driven
scoring system. You actually get MORE points if you get the zoning
changed to suit your needs.
The other thing that control development is water and sewer. You can
control more with the size and siting of them than you can with a
thousand pages of planning regulations.
Not when the developers always put in water and sewer free, and then the
city annexes the land.
Show me where they put in the water and sewer for free. I want to go
there. $45/l.f. is the going rate for basic sewer.
All the developments going into Durham must put in water and sewer for
each house, as well as build an approved road. You might be able to build a
single house on a single lot somewhere, but when developments go in, they
provide all their own water, sewer and streets (and electricity, of course).
Sometimes gas lines too. Then the city annexes the development. Now they
have to get annexed FIRST before they put in the water lines. In the end,
the homeowners pay for it all upfront.
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
So yes, George, I'd probably get laughed at by a group of professors
with their noses in books.
I guess you forgot I was on boards for over 20 years. I even took
continuing education engineering courses. Not that I needed CEUs, but they
did show you what could be done technically.
But OTOH, those same professors would get
Post by Pat
thrown out of most public meetings if they tried to present anything.
It depends if they were on the board, or knew the right people. The
problem is that planners always say the same old rants and after awhile the
big lie takes over.
That I agree with. Planners rant the same old things over and over
and try to convince the gov't the rants are the truth.
The problem is with "STAFF." At some point even the mayor becomes
disgusted with their pushing. He once gave me several examples of the
failure to provide for defensible space in one industrial area he knew of.
However, when a 610 page ordinance comes up, no elected offical can really
deal with the details and staff knows it. So staff always wins, except of
250 annoyed citizens show up and hollar. Then staff regroups and comes
right back with the same old same old. And yes, I've been on both sides of
that remember.
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
So you can keep your professors in your red brick walls and I'll say
out here on the streets where the air is real and the pay is better.
I am glad you make your money hurting the public.
I'm not the one hurting anyone. Everything I do tends to fairly
highly regulated and reviewed until the cows come home. After enough
reviews, it all ends up as sausage.
Well, my statement was not all that fair. Because in the end without
someone on staff realizing the harm they do, it is hard to overcome the lack
of different viewpoints in the planning world. The book "Sprawl, A Compact
History" shows that this is a long-term problem. However, the much-hated
suburban patterns of the past 60 years have done a lot to contain crime and
it shows up in the data. Planners hate what has worked. And NO, it is not
just the people are different. "Defensible Space" showed that.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-31 21:03:23 UTC
Permalink
"george conklin" <***@nxu.edu> wrote in message news:0bG7i.16854$***@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Planners don't even control themselves. They are normative. They want
to tell you what to do. Want a cul-de-sac? It does control crime, but our
local planners are opposed and try to make the grid pattern the ONLY one
they will approve. They do that through the development ordinances. And
the planner who pushes that the hardest lives out of the county....
Perhaps if you pointed out that it is still possible to have cul-de-sacs
without losing the ability for pedestrians to get from place to place as
they could in a grid system and without forcing cars to drive a long way out
of their way to get in and out, similar to what they did in Dayton, you
might be able to reach a compromise. But if neither side is able to bend at
all, then clearly one side will be telling the other side what to do. And
since you're trying to convince everyone here that your way is the way it
should be, you're every bit as "normative" as anyone you're accusing of that
trait. I guess I should feel grateful, though, that you've moved on from
"revanchist."

We should start a betting pool of what word George wants to show off that he
can spell next week :-)
george conklin
2007-06-01 00:31:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Planners don't even control themselves. They are normative. They want
to tell you what to do. Want a cul-de-sac? It does control crime, but
our local planners are opposed and try to make the grid pattern the ONLY
one they will approve. They do that through the development ordinances.
And the planner who pushes that the hardest lives out of the county....
Perhaps if you pointed out that it is still possible to have cul-de-sacs
without losing the ability for pedestrians to get from place to place as
they could in a grid system and without forcing cars to drive a long way
out of their way to get in and out, similar to what they did in Dayton,
you might be able to reach a compromise.
Planners do not compromise. They are normative. Several blocks from a
cul-de-sac to a main street is a short hop and good for bus transit too.




But if neither side is able to bend at
Post by Amy Blankenship
all, then clearly one side will be telling the other side what to do. And
since you're trying to convince everyone here that your way is the way it
should be, you're every bit as "normative" as anyone you're accusing of
that trait. I guess I should feel grateful, though, that you've moved on
from "revanchist."
We should start a betting pool of what word George wants to show off that
he can spell next week :-)
The title of the book is "The Revanchist City." Try reading or get
someone to read it to you.
Pat
2007-06-01 02:59:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Planners don't even control themselves. They are normative. They want
to tell you what to do. Want a cul-de-sac? It does control crime, but
our local planners are opposed and try to make the grid pattern the ONLY
one they will approve. They do that through the development ordinances.
And the planner who pushes that the hardest lives out of the county....
Perhaps if you pointed out that it is still possible to have cul-de-sacs
without losing the ability for pedestrians to get from place to place as
they could in a grid system and without forcing cars to drive a long way
out of their way to get in and out, similar to what they did in Dayton,
you might be able to reach a compromise.
Planners do not compromise. They are normative. Several blocks from a
cul-de-sac to a main street is a short hop and good for bus transit too.
But if neither side is able to bend at> all, then clearly one side will be telling the other side what to do. And
Post by Amy Blankenship
since you're trying to convince everyone here that your way is the way it
should be, you're every bit as "normative" as anyone you're accusing of
that trait. I guess I should feel grateful, though, that you've moved on
from "revanchist."
We should start a betting pool of what word George wants to show off that
he can spell next week :-)
The title of the book is "The Revanchist City." Try reading or get
someone to read it to you.
Did I miss something? Did you all vote to make "normative" the word
of the day and I missed it or something?
Amy Blankenship
2007-06-01 03:09:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Planners don't even control themselves. They are normative. They want
to tell you what to do. Want a cul-de-sac? It does control crime, but
our local planners are opposed and try to make the grid pattern the ONLY
one they will approve. They do that through the development ordinances.
And the planner who pushes that the hardest lives out of the county....
Perhaps if you pointed out that it is still possible to have cul-de-sacs
without losing the ability for pedestrians to get from place to place as
they could in a grid system and without forcing cars to drive a long way
out of their way to get in and out, similar to what they did in Dayton,
you might be able to reach a compromise.
Planners do not compromise. They are normative. Several blocks from a
cul-de-sac to a main street is a short hop and good for bus transit too.
But if neither side is able to bend at> all, then clearly one side will
be telling the other side what to do. And
Post by Amy Blankenship
since you're trying to convince everyone here that your way is the way it
should be, you're every bit as "normative" as anyone you're accusing of
that trait. I guess I should feel grateful, though, that you've moved on
from "revanchist."
We should start a betting pool of what word George wants to show off that
he can spell next week :-)
The title of the book is "The Revanchist City." Try reading or get
someone to read it to you.
Did I miss something? Did you all vote to make "normative" the word
of the day and I missed it or something?
No, just George. Last month it was "revanchist."
Pat
2007-06-01 16:32:44 UTC
Permalink
On May 31, 11:09 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Planners don't even control themselves. They are normative. They want
to tell you what to do. Want a cul-de-sac? It does control crime, but
our local planners are opposed and try to make the grid pattern the ONLY
one they will approve. They do that through the development ordinances.
And the planner who pushes that the hardest lives out of the county....
Perhaps if you pointed out that it is still possible to have cul-de-sacs
without losing the ability for pedestrians to get from place to place as
they could in a grid system and without forcing cars to drive a long way
out of their way to get in and out, similar to what they did in Dayton,
you might be able to reach a compromise.
Planners do not compromise. They are normative. Several blocks from a
cul-de-sac to a main street is a short hop and good for bus transit too.
But if neither side is able to bend at> all, then clearly one side will
be telling the other side what to do. And
Post by Amy Blankenship
since you're trying to convince everyone here that your way is the way it
should be, you're every bit as "normative" as anyone you're accusing of
that trait. I guess I should feel grateful, though, that you've moved on
from "revanchist."
We should start a betting pool of what word George wants to show off that
he can spell next week :-)
The title of the book is "The Revanchist City." Try reading or get
someone to read it to you.
Did I miss something? Did you all vote to make "normative" the word
of the day and I missed it or something?
No, just George. Last month it was "revanchist."
Oh, okay. Now it's June. Does the new word start today (being the
first of the month) or does it start on Monday (for the new week)?

Any hints as to what it might be?

I've always loved "nondisjointness". Can we have that as the WOTW
sometime?
Amy Blankenship
2007-06-01 16:54:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
On May 31, 11:09 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Planners don't even control themselves. They are normative.
They
want
to tell you what to do. Want a cul-de-sac? It does control crime, but
our local planners are opposed and try to make the grid pattern the ONLY
one they will approve. They do that through the development ordinances.
And the planner who pushes that the hardest lives out of the county....
Perhaps if you pointed out that it is still possible to have cul-de-sacs
without losing the ability for pedestrians to get from place to
place
as
they could in a grid system and without forcing cars to drive a long way
out of their way to get in and out, similar to what they did in Dayton,
you might be able to reach a compromise.
Planners do not compromise. They are normative. Several blocks
from
a
cul-de-sac to a main street is a short hop and good for bus transit too.
But if neither side is able to bend at> all, then clearly one side will
be telling the other side what to do. And
Post by Amy Blankenship
since you're trying to convince everyone here that your way is the
way
it
should be, you're every bit as "normative" as anyone you're accusing of
that trait. I guess I should feel grateful, though, that you've
moved
on
from "revanchist."
We should start a betting pool of what word George wants to show off that
he can spell next week :-)
The title of the book is "The Revanchist City." Try reading or get
someone to read it to you.
Did I miss something? Did you all vote to make "normative" the word
of the day and I missed it or something?
No, just George. Last month it was "revanchist."
Oh, okay. Now it's June. Does the new word start today (being the
first of the month) or does it start on Monday (for the new week)?
Any hints as to what it might be?
I've always loved "nondisjointness". Can we have that as the WOTW
sometime?
My money's on "automaton", but it's up to George. He's the one who picks
;-)
Pat
2007-06-01 20:53:59 UTC
Permalink
On Jun 1, 12:54 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Pat
On May 31, 11:09 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Planners don't even control themselves. They are normative.
They
want
to tell you what to do. Want a cul-de-sac? It does control crime, but
our local planners are opposed and try to make the grid pattern the ONLY
one they will approve. They do that through the development ordinances.
And the planner who pushes that the hardest lives out of the county....
Perhaps if you pointed out that it is still possible to have cul-de-sacs
without losing the ability for pedestrians to get from place to
place
as
they could in a grid system and without forcing cars to drive a long way
out of their way to get in and out, similar to what they did in Dayton,
you might be able to reach a compromise.
Planners do not compromise. They are normative. Several blocks
from
a
cul-de-sac to a main street is a short hop and good for bus transit too.
But if neither side is able to bend at> all, then clearly one side will
be telling the other side what to do. And
Post by Amy Blankenship
since you're trying to convince everyone here that your way is the
way
it
should be, you're every bit as "normative" as anyone you're accusing of
that trait. I guess I should feel grateful, though, that you've
moved
on
from "revanchist."
We should start a betting pool of what word George wants to show off that
he can spell next week :-)
The title of the book is "The Revanchist City." Try reading or get
someone to read it to you.
Did I miss something? Did you all vote to make "normative" the word
of the day and I missed it or something?
No, just George. Last month it was "revanchist."
Oh, okay. Now it's June. Does the new word start today (being the
first of the month) or does it start on Monday (for the new week)?
Any hints as to what it might be?
I've always loved "nondisjointness". Can we have that as the WOTW
sometime?
My money's on "automaton", but it's up to George. He's the one who picks
;-)
George, how about "seisin" as the next WOTW.
george conklin
2007-06-01 11:17:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Planners don't even control themselves. They are normative. They want
to tell you what to do. Want a cul-de-sac? It does control crime, but
our local planners are opposed and try to make the grid pattern the ONLY
one they will approve. They do that through the development ordinances.
And the planner who pushes that the hardest lives out of the county....
Perhaps if you pointed out that it is still possible to have cul-de-sacs
without losing the ability for pedestrians to get from place to place as
they could in a grid system and without forcing cars to drive a long way
out of their way to get in and out, similar to what they did in Dayton,
you might be able to reach a compromise.
Planners do not compromise. They are normative. Several blocks from a
cul-de-sac to a main street is a short hop and good for bus transit too.
But if neither side is able to bend at> all, then clearly one side will
be telling the other side what to do. And
Post by Amy Blankenship
since you're trying to convince everyone here that your way is the way it
should be, you're every bit as "normative" as anyone you're accusing of
that trait. I guess I should feel grateful, though, that you've moved on
from "revanchist."
We should start a betting pool of what word George wants to show off that
he can spell next week :-)
The title of the book is "The Revanchist City." Try reading or get
someone to read it to you.
Did I miss something? Did you all vote to make "normative" the word
of the day and I missed it or something?
Normative means planners are trying to tell you what to do because they know
best and they assume you and the public are fools.
Amy Blankenship
2007-06-01 13:47:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Normative means planners are trying to tell you what to do because they
know best and they assume you and the public are fools.
Sounds a lot like you, really...
Amy Blankenship
2007-06-01 03:08:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Besides, if you had planners trying to control crime, them crime would
get out of control. Planners have trouble get land use right, so what
makes anyone think they could handle crime.
Planners don't even control themselves. They are normative. They
want to tell you what to do. Want a cul-de-sac? It does control crime,
but our local planners are opposed and try to make the grid pattern the
ONLY one they will approve. They do that through the development
ordinances. And the planner who pushes that the hardest lives out of the
county....
Perhaps if you pointed out that it is still possible to have cul-de-sacs
without losing the ability for pedestrians to get from place to place as
they could in a grid system and without forcing cars to drive a long way
out of their way to get in and out, similar to what they did in Dayton,
you might be able to reach a compromise.
Planners do not compromise. They are normative. Several blocks from a
cul-de-sac to a main street is a short hop and good for bus transit too.
See, told you you did not understand what you posted.
o***@hotmail.com
2007-05-31 23:13:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't
understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you
actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him
seriously
at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Well, there are two issues with George.
The first is that he is a college professor. I think the thing that
bothers both Pat and me about that is that we believe it is important for
someone who is teaching the next generation of thinkers to possess the
skills he is supposed to be passing along.
Well, if you were to actually appear before a class and had to support
what you try to post, you would get laughted at. I identify my sources,
work with a board and referees, and you would not even get to first base
with that kind of review. You are good example of why emotions do not
change real-world behavior.
Yes George, I recognize that if I had to stand in front of a gaggle of
professors I'd probably get laughed at. That is what I find utterly
amazing. I live in the real world. I work in development for a
living and I'm in front of planning boards and city/town/village
boards on a routine basis. This is reality out here, not the Ivory
Tower. This is where reality his the pavement and most academic
theories just down fly.
Crime patterns are NOT theory. You visions of what ought to be is pure
theory. And wrong.
I'm not saying that crime stats are not real. I"m saying that
architecture can do little to influence them unless you want to design
the new Nazi state or a prison. Heck, within a prison -- the MOST
controlled place in the world, there's still crime.
Ahhhh, you've hit on an essential problem here. Fear not. Say it. It's
the population! OMG! Do we have the guts to own up to this reality, or
are we going to befog it once again in breast-beating and platitudes?
george conklin
2007-06-01 00:29:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@hotmail.com
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't
understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you
actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I
respect
her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something
I've
said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument
on
an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him
seriously
at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is
throwing in
the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Well, there are two issues with George.
The first is that he is a college professor. I think the thing that
bothers both Pat and me about that is that we believe it is
important
for
someone who is teaching the next generation of thinkers to possess the
skills he is supposed to be passing along.
Well, if you were to actually appear before a class and had to support
what you try to post, you would get laughted at. I identify my sources,
work with a board and referees, and you would not even get to first base
with that kind of review. You are good example of why emotions do not
change real-world behavior.
Yes George, I recognize that if I had to stand in front of a gaggle of
professors I'd probably get laughed at. That is what I find utterly
amazing. I live in the real world. I work in development for a
living and I'm in front of planning boards and city/town/village
boards on a routine basis. This is reality out here, not the Ivory
Tower. This is where reality his the pavement and most academic
theories just down fly.
Crime patterns are NOT theory. You visions of what ought to be is pure
theory. And wrong.
I'm not saying that crime stats are not real. I"m saying that
architecture can do little to influence them unless you want to design
the new Nazi state or a prison. Heck, within a prison -- the MOST
controlled place in the world, there's still crime.
Ahhhh, you've hit on an essential problem here. Fear not. Say it. It's
the population! OMG! Do we have the guts to own up to this reality, or
are we going to befog it once again in breast-beating and platitudes?
No there are environment which tempt even the otherwise well-behaved.
Pat
2007-06-01 02:58:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by o***@hotmail.com
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex
life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you
haven't
understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase
you
actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I
respect
her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something
I've
said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument
on
an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him
seriously
at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is
throwing in
the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
Well, there are two issues with George.
The first is that he is a college professor. I think the thing that
bothers both Pat and me about that is that we believe it is
important
for
someone who is teaching the next generation of thinkers to possess the
skills he is supposed to be passing along.
Well, if you were to actually appear before a class and had to support
what you try to post, you would get laughted at. I identify my sources,
work with a board and referees, and you would not even get to first base
with that kind of review. You are good example of why emotions do not
change real-world behavior.
Yes George, I recognize that if I had to stand in front of a gaggle of
professors I'd probably get laughed at. That is what I find utterly
amazing. I live in the real world. I work in development for a
living and I'm in front of planning boards and city/town/village
boards on a routine basis. This is reality out here, not the Ivory
Tower. This is where reality his the pavement and most academic
theories just down fly.
Crime patterns are NOT theory. You visions of what ought to be is pure
theory. And wrong.
I'm not saying that crime stats are not real. I"m saying that
architecture can do little to influence them unless you want to design
the new Nazi state or a prison. Heck, within a prison -- the MOST
controlled place in the world, there's still crime.
Ahhhh, you've hit on an essential problem here. Fear not. Say it. It's
the population! OMG! Do we have the guts to own up to this reality, or
are we going to befog it once again in breast-beating and platitudes?
No there are environment which tempt even the otherwise well-behaved.
Still waiting for my example....................................
Amy Blankenship
2007-06-01 03:10:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by o***@hotmail.com
Ahhhh, you've hit on an essential problem here. Fear not. Say it. It's
the population! OMG! Do we have the guts to own up to this reality, or
are we going to befog it once again in breast-beating and platitudes?
No there are environment which tempt even the otherwise well-behaved.
Still waiting for my example....................................
You know, like an environment that surrounds dried up old geezers with
emotionally vulnerable yet sexy coeds...
o***@hotmail.com
2007-06-01 22:02:47 UTC
Permalink
On May 31, 11:10 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by o***@hotmail.com
Ahhhh, you've hit on an essential problem here. Fear not. Say it. It's
the population! OMG! Do we have the guts to own up to this reality, or
are we going to befog it once again in breast-beating and platitudes?
No there are environment which tempt even the otherwise well-behaved.
Still waiting for my example....................................
You know, like an environment that surrounds dried up old geezers with
emotionally vulnerable yet sexy coeds...
What's that address again?
Amy Blankenship
2007-06-03 14:46:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by o***@hotmail.com
On May 31, 11:10 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by o***@hotmail.com
Ahhhh, you've hit on an essential problem here. Fear not. Say it. It's
the population! OMG! Do we have the guts to own up to this reality, or
are we going to befog it once again in breast-beating and platitudes?
No there are environment which tempt even the otherwise well-behaved.
Still waiting for my example....................................
You know, like an environment that surrounds dried up old geezers with
emotionally vulnerable yet sexy coeds...
What's that address again?
North Carolina Central University
Durham, North Carolina 27707

:)

george conklin
2007-05-31 14:59:00 UTC
Permalink
"Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life"
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
On May 30, 11:19 pm, "Amy Blankenship"
Post by Amy Blankenship
...
Post by Pat
Post by george conklin
Post by Amy Blankenship
I thought what he wrote was fine. But it's clear you haven't understood
it. But obviously "you haven't understood it" is a phrase you actually
can't comprehend...
I guess no one understand your blather either.
I understand her blather. So I guess "no one" is a bit of a
overstatement.
I don't always agree with her, but I understand her and I respect her
opinions.
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him seriously at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
I look at behavioral data. You look at normative data. You want to tell
people how to live. People who post here post personal opinions and those
contract the real-world data. You cannot live with that.
Amy Blankenship
2007-05-31 15:40:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by george conklin
Post by Mr.Cool (Call me William if you would like) Defender of a complex life
Post by Amy Blankenship
I actually kind of get a kick out of it when he calls something I've said
"blather" or "drivel." It means he knows he's lost the argument on an
intellectual level (not that it's really possible to take him seriously at
that level, but sometimes it's fun to pretend) and he is throwing in the
towel. I think of it as his little white flag :-).
Has it ever happend that George was'nt all alone in his arguments
before? Cause it aways seems like
its him fighting everyone here.
I look at behavioral data. You look at normative data. You want to
tell people how to live. People who post here post personal opinions and
those contract the real-world data. You cannot live with that.
That's pretty low, George. Encouraging teens to be suicidal...
Loading...