“Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment” Response

In the article “Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment” it mainly talked about the segregation and discrimination after segregation had supposedly ended. It also put a huge focus on how architect was a physical aspect in the whole relationship of what was going on. Especially since architect was being used to create more racism in the world just by the way it was structured. Sarah Schindler argues how the way bridges, fences, walls, and so one where made separated the colored and poor people from the rich white people. Schindler argues that when they made these structures it was for a reason and not just the simple excuses of “traffic” and “minimizing crime.” Instead Schindler believes that they structured the environment the way it is to avoid conflict with the white rich people. Since of course it wouldn’t appeal to many if a lot of colored or poor people came to shop, eat. or pass time where more high classed people spend they’re time at. Of course the same still happens in today’s time, and racism hasn’t a hundred percent ended over here as well. However our way of life and architect have changed to where everyone can go to wherever they please without road blocks along the way. The way things where structured was in order to hope that new residency would be rich white people, according to Schindler. This was done of course for the purpose of one thing, increasing profit to its maximum. An example used in Schindler’s article is about a bridge in New York by Robert Moses. According to Moses...

Annotated Bibliography Number Two

SCHINDLER, SARAH. Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment. Yale Law Journal. Apr2015, Vol. 124 Issue 6, p1934-2024. 91p. Web. In this article Sarah Schindler examines how the built environment can intentionally and unintentionally, psychologically and physically effect people. Schindler gives an example of this in New York where a city planner named Robert Moses built low-hanging overpasses over roads leading to Jones beach. Because a normal bus cannot fit under these low-hanging overpasses, this effectively prevents those who rely on buses (mainly the poor and minorities) from traveling to the beach. Moreover, Schindler argues that many lawmakers and city planners do not take seriously the idea of the built environment being a form of regulation in the same way a law is; and the people who do recognize that the built environment can be a form of regulation are unable to act through the current jurisprudence. I believe this paper serves as a good introduction to the influence of built environments. It provides good examples and explanations of the nature of built environments and why many law makers are as indifferent as they’re powerless to change or prevent the regulation that they may cause....

Architectural Exclusion

Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment by Sarah Schindler opens up discussing how some of the man-made features such as bridges created difficulty for certain individuals, typically the poor and the people of color, buses could not pass through these low built bridges which were designed to keep those individuals from accessing the beach. The separation from the wealthy and the poor were created through highways that help prevent integration, walls and fences. In the opening we discuss Atlanta’s MARTA train and the opposing views on expanding into the suburban areas which would restrict people of color from accessing jobs in those areas. This article discusses the many subtle but clear ways that the environment has constructed the division between the wealthy and poor population through physical design. This contributes to separation of economic status, inequality and exclusion of and for the poor people. In part one we discuss architectural exclusion and how we never tend to give a second thought at why buildings or park seats are created the way that they are. We think of them as social norms but in actuality there were masterminds at work giving meaning to every detail that we bypass without a blink, constraining our behavior through design. We discuss how architecture is never really thought of as regulation. We go deep into detail about the powerful and meaning role that architectural design plays in our society and creating barriers for access and integration. We also discuss the importance of not understating the significance behind space, place and mobility and how easy it is to get...

Summary One (Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation through Physical design of the Built Environment)

Source (Robert Moses’ overpass.)   The article titled Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation through Physical design of the Built Environment written by Sarah Schindler is broken up into five aspects that tackle the issue of how man-made structures can permit, prohibit, encourage, or discourage certain groups of people regarding where they travel and how they might behave, with a focus on how poor people (especially minorities) are targeted. According to the paper, the way people behave, travel, and where they might make their home is influenced by architecture; and by architecture Schindler means infrastructure, sidewalks, transit stops, benches, etc. Elaborating on this, Schindler mentions an example in which a city planner for New York named Robert Moses purposely built low-hanging overpasses over parkways leading to Jones Beach. The intention behind this was to prevent buses and in turn those who don’t own cars from traveling to the beach. More precisely, the consequences of this decision made it more difficult for poor people (especially minorities) to visit Jones Beach. Architectural influence can be more far-reaching and subtle than this though, going as far as to impact our decisions by molding the context of them, or by constructing the very options that we decide upon, leaving our free will intact. It’s the last part that is misleading. It leads people to believe that they’re fully in control. However, if one is given the options A, B, and C to choose from, then they should ask themselves: Why just A, B, and C? Why not D, E, and F as well? Are there external influences at work, pushing me to one option...
css.php