FINDINGS
Plate 4.6: Abandoned building between residential homes in Wentworth
5.5 USING CPTED IN WENTWORTH
5.5.2 Feasibility of CPTED principles for Wentworth
151 people's behaviour (social interaction and relationships). Interestingly, feelings of safety are not always conditioned by actual criminal events.
152 believe that image and aesthetics (specifically greening of space) could reduce crime.
However, the poor condition of infrastructure in open spaces and parks are associated with drug and alcohol abuse, and places where criminals hid (Perry et al., 2006). Therefore, the deterioration of the physical and built environment heightens fear and perceptions of crime.
Subsequently, the activities in these spaces can be changed by 'greening the area' and increasing public use, which in effect would reduce crime.
Perry et al. (2006) suggest that green spaces, such as parks increase positive perceptions of crime and reduce fear. Similarly, Kuo and Sullivan (2001) found that green spaces lowered fear, incivilities and violent and aggressive behaviour. They also analysed local crime reports which showed lower crime rates in 'green' locations. Both studies indicate that improving the image and aesthetics of spaces influences both perceptions and actual crime.
However, according to CPTED, vegetation can also induce vulnerability, for example bush and open space. Therefore, while green spaces reduce crime, the long term management of such zones determine whether they become derelict and induce criminal activity (Perry et al., 2006).
ii) Access and escape routes
Chapter two presented various studies regarding the development of cities and their impact on crime and safety. The Wentworth community was juxtaposed with heavy commercial and chemical industry. This was particularly important for understanding the spatiality of crime, as the proximity of these areas was a concern for safety. Jacobs (1961), for example, highlighted that rapid industrial growth, posed a security concern for residents. This may further prevent residents from intervening and assisting when a crime takes place. Also, the proximity of industry to the Wentworth community serves as access and escape routes for offenders. However, they also allow residents to commute to work and to access different zones of the community. Thus, closing off certain areas must be conducted in a manner that does not spatially reduce the mobility of residents.
153 iii) Surveillance and visibility
Wentworth has limited street lighting. This was particularly evident in-between provincial housing developments. The existing lighting was hampered by overgrown foliage. Pain (2000) argues that while many studies propose that brighter street lighting may reduce fear and increase safety, it may also make physical disorder visible and increase fear. Increasing lighting must be done together with changing the design of the built environment. For instance, changing the position of public amenities (toilets) and ATM's with improved lighting reduces feelings of vulnerability (Cordner, 2010). Wentworth is characterised by social and physical disorder; merely increasing lighting will draw more attention to these problems and negatively affect the image and perception of the community. Other strategies like improving the general image and aesthetics, closing off access to certain areas and improving surveillance and visibility may be required.
Although CCTV is beneficial, it is costly to install and monitor on an uninterrupted basis.
For example, this study illustrated the use of CCTV in the Dalton Hostel Regeneration Project. Installing the system decreased crime because offenders thought they were 'watched'. Ironically, the system was not turned on to monitor criminal activity. This implies that while target hardening measures such as CCTV does assist crime prevention, monitoring these interventions is another issue that requires further research. In addition, as previously mentioned, these systems are more likely to be used in the CBD and commercial and/or industrial zones, as they are the economic centres of cities.
Practitioners tend to resort to target hardening using CCTV as a primary prevention tool.
However, local authorities have expressed concern regarding its overuse, “CCTV is only part of the solution and not the solution itself” (Municipal Institute of Learning Dialogue Series, 2010: 2). Consideration must be given to the fact that CCTV does not exclude but enhances other forms of active surveillance such as visible policing, increased lighting and creating clear lines of vision by removing bush. Long-term responses would be increased passive surveillance by community members, and encouraging the reporting of crime.
154 An alternative to the constraints of using CCTV would be to increase informal (passive) surveillance. This entails encouraging residents to watch and protect their space. However, Cozens et al. (2005) contends that changing the built environment to increase informal surveillance and visibility, does not necessarily mean that people will report or intervene when a crime occurs. Increasing informal surveillance by residents may prove successful in Wentworth because beyond CPTED, social crime prevention projects also encourage active participation of residents in their collective communitys' safety. CPTED supports other crime prevention initiatives by enhancing and promoting the principle of territoriality. In this way residents are encouraged to participate in protecting themselves, their property and environments. Ultimately, enhancing planning and design through the CPTED principles would increase territoriality and defensible space, resulting in residents becoming 'CCTV cameras in themselves', and passively watching over their own environments. Instances of this surveillance, are neighbourhood watch groups, and patrols.
The principles of CPTED overlap and enhance each other. Beside strictly using CCTV and encouraging passive observation, using the other features of the model will improve visibility and surveillance. However, actually applying the model in Wentworth must be guided and supported by strong policy and implementation strategies. The persons responsible for initiating and managing the use of the model, must have a clear understanding of the negative and positive aspects of the model, to ensure it does more good than harm for the community.