Again how does this idea apply to Atlanta specifically? What political goals could have shaped the urban environment of this city to:

1. become so dependent on transportation by car
2. distric the city into fairly defined neighborhoods (little five points, cabbage town, grantpark, old forth ward, etc.)

Is this merely the bi product of a political agenda, or the natural evolution of grouping based on exclusion?

What is lacking in this field of study that is holding it back from being recognized within legal literature and applied to legislation? Social sciences are a generally new concept in the grand scheme of discovery, and despite their important contributions on the subject of human interaction they are not viewed with the same validity as other sciences. Support and evidence backing the claims of social sciences can also be misconstrued as subjective even if accurate

Perfect example of how even the specific details of design all have purpose behind them. An increase in passive hostility towards the homeless has been a public trend lately, and is displayed in how we shift the built environment of an area to benefit one group over another. Removal or alteration of park benches for example affects the general public minimally, yet could be the difference of comfort vs concrete for the poor.

Continued evidence supporting the idea that broad government interactions obviously barring people from accessing certain locations are the easiest to create legislature over, yet the real modern issue stems from urban design which is incredibly hard to govern considering all the micro details that go into restricting communities.

In what way can exclusion based built environment be beneficial? The typical scenario of urban design being utilized for discrimination is seen as pimarily white upper middle class workers barring the poor and african americans from easy access to their communities. Exclusion generally only benefits the richer community with control over the scenario. I can only imagine exclusion being beneficial in a situation where rival communities are separated from one another through design due to a necessity for separation based on violence/safety rather than socio-economic differences.

Racial equality within the law expands as far as civil rights, suffrage, and other broad laws designed to protect against discrimination.These broad laws however, were created without built environment in mind, and fail to address how the positioning of roads, neighborhoods, and general urban design play in to the equal opportunity promised through civil rights. Even if design came largely into the limelight as a source of inequality, it would become an incredible obstacle to establish laws around considering the intense variability of scenarios that could favor one community over another.

At what point does urban design become racist?

This claim forced me to think about more than just the current built environment of Atlanta and how MARTA is terribly limited, but rather towards how Atlanta functioned prior to MARTA's expansion. How did a city with generally low socio-economic status civilians build itself to become so centric around automobile transportation? Was this a deeper product of built environment favoring the wealthier city planners and influential individuals?

Legislation to protect against broad and obvious racist restriction tactics can only go so far in their prevention methods. Built Environment is an incredibly complicated subject that takes countless variable into account, many seemingly harmless alone, but manipulative in conjunction with other physical limitations or obstructions. Specific communities can be blocked in or heavily inconvenienced from interacting or even existing within the space of a neighboring district based on racial difference alone.

Incredibly applicable to the current situation at hand between Atlanta and the North Metro areas of the greater city. North metro Atlanta boasts a significantly higher average income and consists of primarily upper middle class white workers. Marta is unable to efficently service this part of town as it would enable greater work opportunity for less fortunate inner city civilians at the expense of the comfort of racist white collar workers.

Before even beginning this article, the title itself at base value appears as a confusing concept that woulds require excessive support to prove. Schindler breaks down the basis of her argument and provides a prime example in conjunction to summarize the general direction of this article simply and efficently.

This is an important amendment that states "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside".

Link: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/amendmentxiv

What are bollards? Bollards are sturdy posts that help to control heavy flowing traffic and prevent life threatening car accidents.

Image: http://www.syifoundry.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/bollards-syi-1.jpg

Before I read this passage, I thought of one-way streets as a way of traffic regulation. Living in Midtown, Atlanta, majority of the streets are one ways. I understand that one-way streets are necessary because in the city everything is too crowded and it can become dangerous sometimes for not only the drivers but also the pedestrians walking place to place.

A type of physical exclusion exists between North Korea and South Korea that separates these two countries. The area is called the Korean Demilitarized Zone; it is roughly following the 38th parallel line. Image: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/71/Dmz-jsa-korea-4-4-2009.jpg

In context, this is another way to say serving as a superior/good model or pattern.

Also known as Larry, Lessig is a big political,legal activist and reliable attorney. He is the Roy L. Furman Professor of Law and Leadership at Havard Law School. He has begun to revolutionize and tie his intellectual knowledge with law with politics. Listed below is a link that directs to more information about Lessig.

Link: http://www.lessig.org/about/

This statement right here is what I believe the thesis sentence or the main idea of Schindler's article.

Sarah Schindler's article, "Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment," thoroughly explains the bigger problem behind the built environments that seclude those who make little to no income and of color. Following that, she addresses the judicial and political procedures that should be taken to resolve this issue.

As a supplementary reading, I chose to analyze Robert Rosenberger's article, "How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away." The author talks similarly to what Schindler implies in her article, which is seclusion and discrimination exhibiting through certain physical designs of architecture. In London, the homeless are extremely unfortunate because there are benches that prevent them from sleeping on them (design shown above).

Rosenberger, Robert, Conor Friedersdorf, John Tierney, David A. Graham, Julia Ioffe, David Frum, David Sims, Emma Green, The Editors, Jaclyn Skurie, Caitlin Cadieux, Alice Roth, and Nadine Ajaka. "How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away." The Atlantic. The Atlantic , 19 June 2014. Web. 27 Mar. 2017.

Image: https://c1.staticflickr.com/4/3042/2528899062_6f20925f16_b.jpg

Her ethos, also known as her credibility, is shown clearly and professionally in this section about her. Since she is well educated in her field of law, she brings strong evidence and claims regarding this controversy. In addition, she includes/gives credit to her various colleagues and scholars for their research assistance. With everything being said, I feel that Schindler's message is reaching out to those in higher education and power such as lawmakers, legislatures, and courts.

This defines as the study/philosophy of law.

Although Schindler provides sources to support her claim, I would only consider the news letter as a credential resource. It may not be as wise as to use someones blog unless they are considered as a scholarly resource.

I would normally find a newsletter or a blog post a little to bias to be considered as a scholarly resource, since more modern newsletters are meant to please a certain audience. However, in this situation I can't argue with this claim because I have witnessed such actions caused by gated communities. This worries me since we are living in 21 century and are still dealing with discriminative and judgmental issues in our communities.

I believe this is far more psychological than about a racial motivation. People have an inherent belief to block out negative stigma, they do not wish to see homelessness and poverty. They would much rather live theirs lives in ignorant bliss, in the protected bubbles to faves harsh realities and truths and that extends to all races and ethnic groups. Now that is not to say I don't believe race doesn't play a part I believe it does but I don't think it's the primary factor.

I never imagined the importance sidewalks had in blending and connecting different communities. I knew of their use and ease of access for mobility from one place to another but didn't realize the significance they placed on those who relied on the the most from inner city communities to people without motor vehicles.

I had lived in a 2 different gated communities from my early childhood to teen life and with a large scale of diversity and and sense of community. I would say overall the memories are incredibly pleasant with neighborhood picnics enjoying neighbors company and social get togethers. My case may have been more rare as I lived at one point in a immigrant sanctuary where the vast majority of the neighborhood was not natural born citizens, everyone coming from a different nation.

I find it absolutely astounding how if this is the case, how this figure would not be more of a controversial figure. Instead I find his Wikipedia page about him, praising him and how the debate of where this originally cited argument stems into a debate. In his legacy page, the view if he built low overhanging bridges out of racial idealogy is hotly debated between "Do Politics have Artifacts" article and "Do Artifacts have Politics" both taking opposing sides on this stance.

I found this specific detail about 12 foot tall buses very peculiar. It doesn't have any major focus to the article as a whole other than it supported lower income people and at the time, primarily people of color. The buses itself were before modern day air conditioning, there was very limited seats and were far less safe then modern buses we have now in days. this really relates the struggles some of these people went through on a daily basis that we just take for granted.

Did not Know the definition of this word, Google state the definition is "1. of the nature of a paradigm or model. "they offer this database as a paradigmatic example" 2. of or denoting the relationship between a set of linguistic items that form mutually exclusive choices in particular syntactic roles." Hey maybe I'll be able to use the adjective in a paper one day to increase the ethos of my argument one day

This reminds of the Americans with Disabilities Act and how disabled people did not have access to enter public and government buildings because they weren't wheel chair accessible making it harder and more dangerous for them to move around. This in my opinion is one act that is universally loved and can't see many arguments against it.

Citation: "Americans with Disabilities Act." United States Department of Labor. N.p., 06 May 2016. Web. 24 Feb. 2017.

This small paragraph addresses the claim of the entire article focusing on specific examples from New York's Long Island bridges to Atlanta's MARTA system. This claim also links back to the How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away Article, how building design choices are relatively left unchecked from invasive or negative impacts to a certain group of people. It also shows how subtle and how incredibly hard it was to notice the design choices used that could severely addressing hurt a certain group of people in this case as well, the poor and homeless. They both focus on addressing those of lower incomes as something that need to be kept out of sight and out of mind by making it uncomfortable to be in more wealthy areas or outright not giving them the rescources to go to these places at all

Cited Article: Rosenberger, Robert. "How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 19 June 2014. Web. 24 Feb. 2017.

This introductory paragraph really caused me to think back to my childhood parks and benches. It never once occurred to me why benches were so small or why they were uncomfortable or how no more than two people typically could sit on a bench at a time. Even when I did think longer onto it I believed it had to be for artistic value or because of budgetary cuts, and for all fairness it very well could have been, but now I began to look at the community as a whole I like many others avoid homeless people and try to keep it out of mind but now the issue has become more prominent to me because of this opening paragraph and opening my mind.

The Atlantic How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away deals with an almost identical premise. The paper describes how a Hotel in London had dull spikes indented into the sidewalk and concrete walkways surrounding the building and how they discouraged and harmed homeless people who used the shade and roof of these buildings to sleep away from the elements. Someone who took notice posted photos of these items and caused massive outrage worldwide at the terrible disregard for those less fortunate than ourselves. Mayors from Montreal to London criticized and were appalled by these additions to buildings.

The next paragraph focuses on "skate stoppers" and how these indents are placed into concrete sidewalks or rails to stop skateboarding in that area. These "pig ears" as they are also referred bring up an interesting point saying how damaging and negatively they affect a skateboarders life but not the average passerby, who would not even bat an eye to these additions to structures.

The article then rounds back around to the issues focusing on the homeless and how important architecture is to our perceived subconscious and repressed ideas or morals for those who use it. It brings up specific benches throughout many different cities that were designed to be either uncomfortable, meant for short term use and just not meant to be laid down on. It also addresses cities anti-loitering laws and how they are specifically used to harass the homeless and less fortunate who, either sleep or spend their days in public establishments. The final conclusion addresses how the public and mayors were outraged by these implementations and calls for actions asking if the mayors or governments would do anything to remove these "additions" and justify their anger.

Sarah Schindler "Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment" addresses how architecture itself can be used as an invisible and sometime completely unnoticeable divider between people, from social class, religion, ethnic groups to race. It addresses how built environments use their physical features to make some things harder to reach or less obtainable to a focused group of individuals. It gives many examples from lower designed bridges so buses could not pass through them which were characterized by low income, and mostly people of color, basically cutting people's access off to something that was meant to be a public resource for all. It goes into detail to show the ways many communities segregate or monopolize public attractions or services or divides others to a public resource.

Citations: Schindler, Sarah. "Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment." The Yale Law Journal - Home. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Feb. 2017.

Rosenberger, Robert. "How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 19 June 2014. Web. 24 Feb. 2017.

Referencing the other article by rosenberger, this would be an example of a use of architecture to divide communities, and a problem that those unaffected would never know about unless awareness was raised.

I have seen this just outside of Atlanta. Just outside of the areas dominated by businesses such as hotels, education or banking are the transitionary areas in which highway ramps merge in and out of the city. Past these areas are neighborhoods that are primarily low income individuals reliant on public transportation. Between this low income neighborhood and the city, there existed no sidewalks and little to no pedestrian light assistance. Those that do have personal transportations would have to take longer routes as these roads leading into the city were often 1 way streets.

This seems appropriate and fair that only those who are connected in some way to the neighborhood are allowed to use the area to park. I think that this prevents free-riding and doesn't promote segregration.

A few years ago, fully covered bench bus stops were almost always occupied at night with a homeless person, whereas now I have seen the rise of the use of signs to indicate where MARTA buses will stop, and the decline of covered benches.

I have lived in both cities and suburbs and this refusal to expand the transportation system to areas previously unaccessible to those without personal transportation detriments both areas. Suburbs are limited in the amount of development that can be sustainably achieved when the only individuals willing to work minimum or blue collar jobs are either the children of suburban residents or those that live within the city. Since innercity individuals cannot physically access the jobs out in the suburbs as a result of restricted public transportation both communities are harmed simply because citizens and lawmakers wish to keep out those they deem to be lower or undesirable.

This article goes into detail various methods that architects and law makers can implement in the built environment in order to affect neighborhoods or the population that interacts with the environment. Whether by refusing to allow bus stops to reach certain areas, not building sidewalks between low and high income areas or placing physical barriers such as concrete walls or fences, all these methods change how people and traffic move and interact with the environment. Division, whether caused or enforced by the perception of race or class, separates the populace and increases the difficulty of the struggle that an individual must undertake in order to move through economical classes.

This is an idea that both this article and the Atlantic article by Robert Rosenberger share. Rosenberger speaks about how groups not directly targeted by architectural devices would simply pass these deterrents everyday and never know the social implications of these devices. If media and people do not both voice their concerns and listen to those affected, change will never be made. However in the case of anti-homeless spikes public concern banished this specific method of homeless deterrence from occuring in public places. In the yale law journal, those traveling to Jones beach in a car would never realize that the low overpasses prevented poorer residents who rely on public transportation from accessing the beach. In other situations, subtle situations such as the lack of sidewalks or bus stations prevent those in need from accessing resources only those able to afford their own transportation would be able to access.

I noticed that this article focuses heavily on what in the built environment is changed or implemented and how these changes affect populations, but the majority of these changes seem to be made in mind to keep certain groups away, and that the only reasoning for these changes is as a result of classism or racism. Several times in this article it is said that there would be benefits to having low income individuals having access to higher income areas in the form of jobs and increased economy, but it seems ironic to me that these low income individuals who cannot physically access more jobs are kept poor as a result of those architects and lawmakers who designed these areas as to keep low income individuals out, but in turn prevent these individuals from progressing economically. It seems backwards to allow the continuation of this circular logic, in which individuals are held in contempt in the eyes of those that forced the "low class" in that situation.

The Atlantic article, "How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away" by Robert Rosenberger begins with the exhibition of metal spikes built into the floor of a corner in front of a business. This case of architechural design was implemented in order to deter the homeless away from this area. While public opinion managed to get these metal spikes removed, many other cases where architechture is used to exclude certain individuals are less obvious.

Many deterrents are only obvious to a passerby if you are affected by them. Benches or areas to sit that have what seem to be extra armrests actually prevent the homeless from laying on them for extended periods of time. Studs or large attachments to benches or edges in public space prevent skateboarders from using them to perform tricks. While architecture can be used to subtly divide communities, law and policy can be used visibly to target specific groups such as the homeless from entering unwanted areas.

Rosenberger, Robert. "How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 19 June 2014. Web. 19 Feb. 2017.

A gated community is not necessarily harmful to anyone, and it makes sense that most cities would not outlaw this type of architectural exclusion as it does not prevent anyone from trying to live there, it simply prevents the entry of anyone that does not have any real connection. Just as in the case of residential parking permits, this is a appropriate use of architecture. I don't fully understand why this was included, other than to be used as a transitioning point by the author to jump to another subject.

Edit: When positioned in certain areas, gated communities show people a visible difference in wealth and the economic divide between those that live within and those observing from outside. Aside from this, gated communities do not necessarily inhibit others from achieving growth. In many other cases, communities are gated in order to deter unwanted behavior and people such as criminals and solicitors from entering.

In Schindler's argument she discusses mostly about architectural discrimination among the African American community, but in Marak's argument the issue revolves around the elderly community; this raises the question of how many of the elderly are African American or are living in African American communities? It could strengthen both arguments if there is some form of correlation between the to issues.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/nextavenue/2016/09/08/elder-orphans-have-a-harder-time-aging-in-place/#3783a7e43bae

In my neighbor, Henderson Mill Rd is a dangerous road for pedestrians. We are located near two major expressways, I-25 and I-285. Often, drivers will get off the expressways and cut through my neighborhood to avoid traffic. My neighborhood only has one sidewalk for us to walk on. The sidewalk is located on the less populated side. On the other side, they are three sets of apartments and two sets of condominiums. This side is filled with a lot of immigrants and families. But there is no sidewalk located on this side, there is only a dirt path filled with debris and broken glass. If you wanted to travel across the street, you must run while avoiding incoming cars. I get the impression that I’m not wanted on the other side.

Then: Now: Today, the 8-mile wall is painted with large murals. Artist tend to paint on the side facing Alfonso Wells Playground, because there is an exposed stretch of wall with no homes behind it. In 2006, community activist and Detroit residents came together to paint the wall. On the wall, scenes of the civil rights movements including Rosa Park boarding the bus, neighborhood children blowing bubbles, and a group of a cappella singers. Now, the wall is a symbolic piece, because the message represents harmony and unity rather than segregation.

Bollard-is a short post in the street used to guide traffic protect vehicle collusion

In Atlanta, driving can be a stressful experience for commuters and visitors. The downtown roads are not only packed but difficult to navigate. Some of the roads are one ways or dead ends. Different roads unexpectedly end or merge into another road out of nowhere. The lack of signage make this situation even more stressful to drivers. For example, a restaurant is located on your right but the restaurant is located on a one-way street. A driver must past their destination and navigate their way back to the restaurant to enter. This makes drivers avoid the downtown Atlanta area when driving.

This example shows how architectural decisions manipulate our minds in the simplest way. A cafeteria manger simply switches the placement of the healthier food options to the front to guide people towards healthier choices. Now, the junk food options are switched to the back out of eye range. If a person usual order is junk food but does not see it displayed in front of them, it creates a switch in their mind. They just want the option in their line of vision and decide to select the healthier option over their usual order. This person is so programmed to the mandate that he does not expand or breach out to other choices.

In Atlanta, homelessness is a growing issue facing the city. Homeless people often tend to sleep or station themselves in public parks. They create their own community with each other and form their own village. For example, Hurt Park located outside of Georgia State University hosts many homeless people. When I pass by the park on the way to class, I notice homeless people either sleeping on the ground or on park benches. I understand when a new park is built; these types of benches are not built. I did not know they were built to deter homeless people from sleeping in the park. I think instead of preventing homeless people from sleeping in the park; we need to assist them in getting back onto their feet.

In the article, “How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away”, journalist Rosenberger explains how cities use architecture to deter the homeless population from loitering in park, subways stations, and bus stations. In London, spikes were placed outside of an apartment building to prevent homeless people from sleeping there. People were outraged about this and started a petition to remove the spikes. The spikes were a visible display of homeless-detergent technology, but there is more subtle design out there. An example, the design of park benches. Benches are7/ designed with slats/ large armrest create individual seats for each person to prevent comfortable sitting on them and laying down across them. They create this design to prevent homeless people+ in the park from sleeping there. Also, the same designs are implied in bus stops and transit systems. Ordinary people would not notice the reasoning behind the design, but if you’re a homeless person this sends a message that you’re not wanted here. Architectural design only truly impacts a person if they are the issue themselves.

In the United States, the term ghetto is often associated with the African American community, but other ethnic groups reside there such as Hispanics and whites. Ghettos tend to be made up of ethnic minorities, but neighborhoods filled with majority ethnic minority residents are not considered ghettos. For example, African Americans were segregated into northern communities such as Chicago’s Bronzevile. The residents were affluent African American families and the neighborhood had successful businesses in it.

In modern times, regardless of race or ethnicity, forty percent or more ghettos residents are poor. A neighborhood is considered a ghetto if there is a prevalence of poverty. There is a difference between other racially or ethnically homogenous communities and ghettos. The difference is ghetto residents cannot relocate even if they desire to. Poverty makes it difficult for residents to migrate out of these neighborhoods. Ghettos do not have many residential choices compared to non-ghetto locations. In the past, historic ghettos were formed due to indirect or direct racial or ethnic coercion and isolation. Now ghettos are based on class-based information which results in isolation.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/literature-and-arts/art-and-architecture/architecture/ghetto#A

In my neighborhood, there’s a bridge underpass that creates an invisible division. One side, the neighborhood is primary white. The people living there either own or lease their house; the houses are very cookie cutter style and maintain a presentable appearance. But once you go under the underpass, there are more apartments compared to houses. Most of the residents are non-white or immigrants, new to the neighborhood. It creates these two separate neighborhoods when they are the same.

In the article “Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment”, Schindler discusses how the architectural design of an environment creates unknown discrimination and segregation. Schindler describes how a certain architectural choice such as one way roads, benches with arm rests in between, and the lack of sidewalk in an area creates segregation in communities. One way roads created segregation by deterring other drivers from entering a certain area or neighborhood. For example, if an African America cannot navigate into a white neighborhood because of the configuration of a street this is a form of segregation.

Architecture gives a different message to each person. A design can communicate something to a certain population that another population would not notice. In the article, “How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away”, journalist Rosenberger describes how one city added skateboard studs to edges of handrails to ledges. If I saw those studs, I would not understand the meaning behind them. I might think it adds an interesting design to the railing but to skateboarders it means do not skate here. The studs were added to the railing to prevent skateboards from sliding along the edges. Those edge studs did not communicate that message to me, but the message was not meant for me. Architectural design has different implications that give a certain message to an individual.

This is a very interesting claim. Was this the sole purpose of building it low? I truthfully find this hard to believe. In fact, I don't think the architecture of the bridge would have been effective in preventing people of color from accessing the beach.

Schindler’s article, Architectural Exclusion: Discrimination and Segregation Through Physical Design of the Built Environment, delves into the issue of architectural segregation in our modern american society. She discusses many of the political and judicial actions that are not being taken to not resolve this issue.

She argues that our environments that have been constructed (whether it had been the MARTA of Atlanta, or the gated fences of predominately white communities) leaves a restraint on minority groups living in these communities. She adds that these communities are a result of judicial negligence and unlike other deterring architecture such as; Robert Moses’s low hanging bridges, makes life difficult for low economic communities to live in an equally balanced and distributed environment.

Schindler’s article brings to question whether businesses architectural choices are actually based on homelessness or on race. In rosenberger’s article it talks about how some businesses design their space to deter homelessness, but in doing so create a form of segregation; not between race but by living standard. This can be considered unethical, however this could be the result of businesses trying to satisfy their customers, while unintentionally being discriminatory.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/06/how-cities-use-design-to-drive-homeless-people-away/373067/

If Schindler claims are that architectural decisions form a hindrance or control on our environment, then the design of our architectural environments should be a fair representation of our "class" society. According to the New York Times there was a rise in discriminatory housing toward minority groups during 2015: this indicates that there may me an unbalance of power in our society.

This article takes time to introduce ideas of discrimination found through built environments. it breaks up into sections and goes through a list of different ways this can happen and different places it can be seen without day to day civilians even blinking an eye at it. Schindler defines these ideas as an ongoing problem, relevant before the people doing it even knew what they were doing. Since American culture hasn't always been as united as it is, we see architecture rejecting certain groups as far back as anyone can remember, even if there intentions through built environments weren't as direct at that time. Reading the opened my eyes to every one way street, neighborhoods lacking connecting sidewalks, and even bus stations that fail to construct in certain areas. Every form of environment around us depicts an understanding of some idea deeper than the building itself, and while sometimes lawmakers, judges, and courts can't always define them as what they are, we as the people now can work to eliminate this discrimination and work to connect it all.

Rosenberger, Robert. "How Cities Use Design to Drive Homeless People Away." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 19 June 2014. Web. 19 Feb. 2017.

This sentence could have been made stronger if Schindler had referred to the actual built environment of these communities, but we don't get anything referring to these communities until later in the article.

This paragraph works in the favor of the author since it gives documented historical evidence to strengthen their claim better than taking commentary or references from someone else.

Schindler tries to prove a point to strengthen her argument, but it may have been a better idea to use a better example. The example she provides could be considered as more alleviated or positive, while the argument that she is conveying is more serious and negative.

The wording in this particular sentence could be rephrased better than "small and apparently insignificant" as a legal scholar could analyze both small and large details and can always miss certain details. Simply put, anything and everything in a given architectural environment can be considered crucial or insignificant.

Although it outlines the reasoning and purpose of part 1, it does not provide or hint to any evidence that is brought out in part 1. It overall reveals itself to be underdeveloped or incomplete.

1) Everyone talks about this already

This reminds me of the Schindler reading. To everyone else a simple object has only one meaning but Schindler exposes the hidden meaning behind everyday objects. In this case, the landscape and open spaces on college campuses are looked upon as something that is just pleasing to the eye but in this reading we discover that their is a deeper meaning for why the landscape and open spaces on college campuses really do exist

Its sad that even if you're white if you have a disability they are still trying (and not failing) at excluding you!

This is definitely me, I have never looked around for a bench in a park and thought "there is none so homeless people don't lay there".

I've noticed that in Atlanta, not a lot of people park on the street compared to other cities. There does, however, seem to be more parking decks than any other city I've ever been in.

In "Five Places in Manchester that Cater for Children with Autism", the author describes how the Jump Nation trampoline center gates off a part of the jumping arena for kids with special needs to jump every month. This shows that the placement of certain barriers isn't always a bad or inhibiting thing. In the case of the jumping arena, it gives the children a safer place to jump and have fun without their parents worrying about their safety.

In my hometown of Carrollton, GA, there were multiple very large gated communities, but the crime in Carrollton was very low. There were rarely any break-ins. In Carrollton, the train tracks separated the predominately white side from the predominately black side, and most of the gated communities were close to the train tracks. It just goes to show that segregation in the form of architectural exclusion does still exist.

For my first Built Environment Description, I walked from Downtown Atlanta to the other side of Old Fourth Ward, but while I was walking through the center section of Old Fourth Ward, I noticed that there weren't many sidewalks. However, there's always sidewalks in Downtown and near Ponce City Market on the other side of Old Fourth Ward.

In Atlanta, I've noticed that 75/85 acts as a barrier between downtown and the historically African American areas of Sweet Auburn and Old Fourth Ward.

I've noticed this a lot in Atlanta. In places like Sweet Auburn Ave. and Old Fourth Ward, which have historically been African American neighborhoods, it's easy to see how the community now has been shaped by the history. Along with that comes the historical architecture of the area.

I've never really thought of ghettos as spatial entities, but I guess they really are. I think that a ghetto implies that a culture of people is excluded from the rest of the world, so if everybody in that ghetto has similar beliefs, that makes it an entity.

This is a perfect example of exclusion as a positive. Because the junk food is in the back, it gives people more incentive to eat healthier in a very subtle way.

As opposed to Emma Gill, who acknowledges the role of physical architecture as an enabler.

I've never really thought about this before, and I completely agree with it. Since I moved to Atlanta, I've noticed how certain types of people all tend to live in the same place. When you visit a certain part of Atlanta, there's usually always a certain type of person that you'll expect to see.

So the problem is do to the fact that planers are mainly concerned about the efficiency of traffic control. Perhaps if we were able to get rid of barriers and have a naturally racially mixed population in a city, "traffic logic" would be acceptable to prioritize.

In my opinion, this is definitely a problem. If people are completely aware that architecture is being used to exclude, which is basically segregation, then why isn't it being fixed?

This article discusses how architectural is used as a form of regulation, which puts the observation of architectural exclusion into a legal context, but it's interesting to see how in the article "Five Places in Manchester that Cater for Children with Autism", the exclusion isn't legal at all. In fact, the architectural exclusion used in Manchester completely gets rid of the legal side of the argument by promoting equality, which I think is a step in the right direction.

It's been a really long time since I've seen a park bench without armrests dividing it. When I was little I thought that they just designed them that way to give people some personal space, but it's interesting to see how something as simple as an armrest is placed into the larger topic of gentrification.

This article, compared to "Five Places in Manchester that Cater for Children with Autism", focuses more on the negative side of architectural exclusion, which is understandable because I think that the word "exclusion" has historically had a very negative connotation. It's really great to see the city of Manchester turn exclusion into a positive thing.

This article describes the different techniques used by business's in Greater Manchester, England to cater to children with autism. There are five different examples that the articles uses, the first of which is the Jump Nation trampoline center. Jump Nation, like most of the other examples in the article, has autism friendly days or weekends once a month. At Jump Nation, during the autism friendly weekend, they close off half of the jumping arena and turn the music volume on soft for children with over-sensitivities. They also put up nets so the children don't fall off of something high and hurt themselves. Movie theaters are also trying to cater to children with autism. Most of the cinemas in Manchester have autism friendly movie days every month in which they keep the lights on low, the volume low, and completely get rid of the trailers before the movie. This also happens in most of Manchester's stage theaters. The Manchester museum also helps out. They'll do special labs for kids with autism in which they can come before the museum officially opens and learn from experts who cater to their learning disabilities. Finally, Manchester's Adventure Forest is an autism friendly play zone where kids can come and wonder around free without any worries of getting lost or hurt, and if the kids don't feel comfortable going off on their own, parents are more than welcome to come play with their children on the padded indoor playground. With all that said, it seems that Manchester is leading the way for other cities and countries to start looking out for the needs of children with disabilities.

Gill, Emma. “Five Places in Manchester That Cater for Children with Autism.” Men, September 19, 2016. http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/family-kids-news/five-places-manchester-cater-children-11906088.

In "Five Places in Manchester that Cater for Children with Autism", Emma Gill describes ways that architectural exclusion can be a good thing, such as the Jump Nation trampoline center hosting monthly autism friendly jump weekends in which they turn the music volume down for children with over-sensitivities and put nets around the jump areas.

If the elected officials don't follow the desires of a majority of their constituents, they risk losing following elections. By responding to the wants of the majority, they can create a situation in which they have supported those that can vote them into office again.

Why do many places not take action against these structures? In many of these areas, the people living within the gated communities are wealthy individuals. These homeowners are more likely to participate in decision making for the community because they have made a hefty investment, and they want to keep their area safe. If the cities take action to prevent these walled-off communities, it could cause the wealthy citizens to move to other areas, affecting revenues for the city.

I believe that this still occurs today, albeit in a much more subtle manner. Certain neighborhoods are given priority, and their resident's concerns are of much more importance. For this reason, there are aspects of the environment that deter the entrance of people that are not as affluent.

Some of these exclusions may not be due to the structures design or construction, but from the regulations pertaining to the business or family that moves into it. In many instances, the regulations surrounding a business are made to help the majority of people. Some of these rules make it harder for some minority groups, such as those with autism, to participate in activities. As time has progressed however, more people are being included, opening the doors for all members of society to be active participants.

Architecture definitely plays a role in the everyday lives of citizens. I do, however, think that these regulations are beginning to change in the built environment. As discussed in the article, "Five places in Manchester that cater for children with autism," these regulations are beginning to change in a way that allows a wider range of people to have access to the amenities that higher members of society have had access to forever.

In the article, “Five places in Manchester that cater for children with autism,” it discusses several business that have begun to accommodate children with special needs. In the past, there have been many businesses and structures in cities that have not made it possible for all types of people, including those with disabilities, special needs, and the elderly, to take advantage of them. However, change has begun to occur in many places. As the article discusses, there are now businesses and companies that are beginning to host events specifically for those people with autism. Some of these, such as movie theatres and play centres, have been difficult for children with autism to go to because they are generally full of a lot of guests, which can cause anxiety in some of these children.

What this article shows is that not only are companies beginning to make accommodations so that more members of society are able to make use of their services, but society as a whole is progressing to include everyone. Autistic children were once not able to go to movies and attend large activities because the lights, sound, and sheer number of people could cause them to have bad anxiety. It is a way to ease the stress that presses down on the caretakers of the children, because they are unable to do activities with their children like others. This is a sign that in the future, more and more people with disabilities of any kind will be able to enjoy the luxuries other people get to in a way that makes them comfortable.

Emma Gill. “Five Places in Manchester That Cater for Children with Autism - Manchester Evening News.” Manchester Evening News. N.p., 19 Sept. 2016. Web. 27 Sept. 2016.

Living in Atlanta has provided an interesting insight into this particular case. While walking around downtown, I have recently noticed a lot of work crews repaving the sidewalks with ramps enabling disabled residents to have easier access to the safety of the sidewalks. What this shows is that only recently have people been able to enact change by making it a bit more equal for all people to have access to certain amenities.

This has come to light quite a bit in recent times. In many different neighborhoods across the countries, especially those with a large Caucasian population, it is possible that members of the community are more likely to report unkown individuals of another race because they do not fit the stereotypical member of that area.

This is an interesting point. Homeowners are going to be more active in community decision making because they are permanent residents. Renters are relatively able to move whenever and are less likely to vote because they can simply move away if something they don't like occurs to the area. Homeowners, on the other hand, have invested much more money into the area, and they are going to try and keep it as good and to their liking as possible.

As the article discusses, the built environmeny can be used as a form of regulation, making it work for some and using it to push away others. However, is it possible that some officials could pass laws preventing this kind of subtle regulation? They are often implemented as a way to deter the lower class from straying into areas populated by wealthier members of society, so is it right? If more people understood what was happening, would there be more concern with it?

When the public thinks about the laws and regulations that govern society, they often think of those passed by the federal and state governments. However, it is interesting to think that more subtle things are capable of regulating the people. Minute details in the construction and implementation of objects can play a role in determining who can use them, and who they may deter.

This is one of the main focuses of this section. Every structure in an area is built to serve a purpose. No matter how small the structure may be, people would not direct resources to its implementation if it did not better, at least somewhat, the area in which it is being built. The possibility for items to be built is based upon the area in which it is being placed, but it can also be used as a way to dictate who can use the space and in what way.

Schindler brings forth an interesting point in this section. In many instances in which companies and the like are creating public structures, it is important to strike a balance between both aestheticism and functionality.

I never thought of gated communities as an "obvious [form] of architectural exclusion", It simply did not strike me as such. I still think however, that gated communities are not necessarily a regulatory tool for segregation. They keep non residents out, yes, however if you were to be apart of that neighborhood, then you are included. The gate sets up a boundary, but it is not like the boundary is unassailable. Then again, if we look too segregation as the separation of difference as a whole, then the gated communities would not serve as a tool towards race segregation, but towards one of wealth. Though, that is only true if the community catered to the rich; if a similar community were to pop up that catered to the poor, where does the gate fit in then? It it still a form of exclusion and regulation? Rather, in this scenario, I see the gate as a form of security.

"Why Breastfeeding Rooms Are a Victory for California Students" by Michelle Miller, Summary:

Miller introduces Fresno High School and how it has "...changed a lot..." since she herself attended the school. The change taking place in the school; the opening of an area specifically catered to teen moms/ soon to be teen moms. In the first half of the article, Miller goes into how she herself, while attending the school, and even after, could not imagine there being any sort of "accommodation" for teen parents. In the second paragraph, she introduces the experience of her sister, who was a teen mom during her high school days; specifically going into the hardships her sister faced while attending school and taking care of a child. The middle half of the article focuses more on the room and gives detailed descriptions; calling it "...peaceful and inviting". Miller also goes into the practicality of the room, how it provides an area for moms to pump milk, to store milk, and to even learn about the various aspects of being a mom.

Afterwards, Miller takes a turn away from the room itself, and focuses more primarily on the positive impact the room will have for teen moms across the state. With the state of California passing the AB 302 law, high schools in the state of California are required to have separate rooms for pregnant teens, and accommodations for class/class work. She gives a very real statement, that "pregnant and parenting teens want to stay in school, graduate with their class, and be productive, successful adults" however because of the pressure and stress of juggling school and child care, teen moms are left with little to no choice but to drop out. She then goes back to the room, and how it will provide equal opportunities to moms, giving them a chance at graduation and success.

“Why Breastfeeding Rooms Are a Victory for California Students.” ACLU of Northe rn California. N.p.,n.d. Web. 22 Sept. 2016.

A good article that gives yet another example of exclusion by architecture is the article featured in The New York Times entitled, "The Architecture of Segregation" by the editorial board. The article focuses on fair housing and its connection to "...racial and economic segregation". Below is the link.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/06/opinion/sunday/the-architecture-of-segregation.html?_r=0

“The Architecture of Segregation - The New York Times.” N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2016.

If we compare the cafeteria manager's decision on healthy food to that of the breastfeeding room, then the relationship would go something like this. The introduction of the breastfeeding room mentioned in "Why Breastfeeding Rooms Are a Victory for California Students", represents the healthy food, whereas the original state of the school, depicts unhealthy food. The cafeteria manager, or in the case of the school, the principle, decided that the school should be more accommodating to its student, so he/she puts the breastfeeding room (the healthy food) out in the open so as to nudge people to use the room. Much like how the cafeteria manager placed the healthier choices in the more visible and accessible areas. This allows for a healthy environment where the student body can relax and live a healthier lifestyle. They are guided by the architectural decisions of the school board.

“untapped_LAX_manchester_aerial.jpg (JPEG Image, 640 × 400 Pixels) - Scaled (57%).” N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Sept. 2016.

This image shows exactly how highway placement can affect a neighborhood. This neighborhood, Manchester Square,a primarily African American community, is completely isolated on all sides due to the uncanny placement of highway routes. The highway system has successfully cut off any and all access to the neighborhood. Demonstrating that architecture can indeed act as a tool of exclusion. Here's a link to a little more detail about the neighborhood http://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/389967/the-ghost-town-of-los-angeles/

Placement in this context pertains to highways, however it also can relate to other things; quite possibly even a specific type of room, inside a school. Schindler goes into the importance of placement, and how the location of a structure can be a regulatory measure, such as a highway cutting across a "poor black neighborhood"; resulting in its destruction. The same process of examining location can also be put in context with "Why Breastfeeding Rooms Are a Victory for California Students". The breastfeeding room was built inside the school, rather than outside of the school. Why does its placement matter? If the room was outside the school, it would be detached; an area where teen moms would feel even more alienated from their student body. By having the room inside the school, the school itself is including teen moms into its fabric, creating a sense of connection between mom and student; allowing for both to exist independently, but working together cohesively.

Over the summer my friends and I went on a road trip cross country, and one of the place we visited was Kentucky. When we got into the suburbs, as the person driving, I realized a lot of one way streets; so much so that it seemed as if the entire grid system functioned on these one way streets. They're presence made it unnecessarily hard to get from point a to point b; even when the two points were no more than a couple feet apart. The road itself however, did not seem to be a from of exclusionary practice, though I am not 100% confident, as we did not stay long. The one way streets however, does correlate to the above quote, as it directed both movement and access.

A clear cut example that gives credence to the notion that the built environment of a place can be a form of regulatory practice. The highway itself may indeed provide for the residents, however, the deliberate placement of said highway between two neighborhoods, who very well may be of different ethic cultures, would show otherwise.

Part 1 and part 2 introduces architecture as a tool for regulation and how the built environment reflects this idea. This one quote is an example of how architecture serves to exclude, however, I want to note that not all structures are built with the goal of exclusion. Some, much like the breastfeeding room mentioned in "Why Breastfeeding Rooms Are a Victory for California Students" by Michelle Miller, are built with the goal of inclusion. The contrast between the breastfeeding room and the eight mile wall though, is very stark; the first is one of the extremes of inclusion, while the other, the complete opposite. The two however, are both architectural works, I find it astonishing, and this example furthers the point Schindler is trying to make; that the built environment does in fact have the capability to be regulatory.

Exclusion is a form of, or rather, it is segregation. Where one group, not necessarily a race, is alienated/neglected from the whole. In the case of "Why Breastfeeding Rooms Are a Victory for California Students" by Michelle Miller, it is the teen moms who are, in a sense, "segregated" from the rest of the student body. The school, before the passage of AB 302 in California, did not provide to its teen moms population. This caused the teens moms to feel a form of exclusion, an alienation that eventually lead to their dropping out; an aspect Miller touches upon in her article. The school, the built environment within the school, does not cater to these moms, and it is within these context that it excludes, and alienate them; focusing/catering primarily on non pregnant students.

The architecture of high schools are in such a way that it does not provide for certain groups of individuals; teen moms for example. Because they do not have these accommodations, teen moms do not have an outlet in which they can relieve the stress of school and parenthood; specifically pumping milk/breastfeeding. A form of constraint appears, limiting the moms only to school work. Although, the statement alone would appear to incorporate all forms of architecture as a from of constraint, I do not believe so. The breastfeeding room mentioned in the article "Why Breastfeeding Rooms Are a Victory for California Students" by Michelle Miller, prove otherwise. The room is an addition to schools, it is apart of the physical architecture, I however, do not see it as a from on constraint.

It would be an understatement to say that spaces have racial meanings; they most certainly do. Each "space" has its own history of exclusion that gives it a certain tag, an identity almost. Take for example Auburn Avenue, or "Sweet Auburn" to residents, in Atlanta. That space was known for its thriving African American population, a thriving business center that was recognized nationally as the economic hub for black Americans. The exclusion the African Americans felt propelled the streets identity, giving the area meanings associated with the black community.

In relation to "Why Breastfeeding Rooms Are a Victory for California Students" by Michelle Miller, this statement proves to be true. If we look at the behavior and ends of teen moms before the introduction of the "breastfeeding room", then it would be something along these lines: A teen gets pregnant, she has the baby, she must now juggle between school and child, however the school does not give any sort of leniency for these moms, so unable to bear under the pressure, 9 times out of 10 they drop out of school. The end; having no little to no chance at monetary success. However, with the introduction of the room, a new behavior can be see. Now they have more opportunities, more accommodations by the school, leading to decrease drop out rates and increased graduation rates; therefore resulting in a much more desirable end. The design and function of the room led to a change in behavior, which in turn promoted the desired ends of the state.

I can associate this claim to myself, as before reading this article, I never thought of the built environment being anything more than a tool of cultural expression; built for the betterment of people. Now however, it would seem that the built environment has more to it than meets the eye. If I were to think about it, the highway that passes through Auburn Avenue (known as Sweet Auburn), effectively destroyed the once bustling African American business district. Though, I choose to not believe this too much, as I can think of a good number of designs that do in fact help further the general interest. Take for example, the breastfeeding room mentioned in "Why Breastfeeding Rooms Are a Victory for California Students" by Michelle Miller, the room by no means function as a tool for regulation and exclusion. Its whole design is meant for the inclusion of teen moms in the school dynamic.

Building a structure, of any size, first requires an outline; a design. It is within this process that regulatory tendencies of the built environment comes to life. The design of any building is within the hands of the architects, there architects all have their own separate opinions, their own views; a product of their upbringing. Because of this, the building design they make will be a representation of their perceived culture; as such, there is and never will be, a "'neutral design'". The breastfeeding room in "Why Breastfeeding Rooms Are a Victory for California Students" is a perfect example of the non neutrality of building designs. The room was made to specifically cater to the pregnant/ teen mom population in schools, it wasn't made to just exist, it was created with a clear image, and a clear goal in mind; to provide accommodations to teen moms.

This is essentially a study of the vernacular culture of modern day society. Never have I thought about associating the built environment with regulatory practices, rather, I viewed it as a means for fostering community interactions; a tool for bypassing cultural barriers. However, the article demonstrates the opposite, presenting points and evidence that the built environment can act as an exclusionary tool that works against certain ethic groups.

“History_Builders_of_The_Great_Wall_42710_reSF_HD_still_624x352.jpg (JPEG Image, 624 × 352 Pixels).” N.p., n.d. Web. 29 Sept. 2016.

An architectural landmark that is still celebrated today, the Great Wall of China was build on the premise of exclusion; A measure to ensure the safety of Central China from the Huns.

3 MAIN TAKE AWAYS/POINTS OF ARGUMENT FROM THIS ARTICLE: This article criticizes the discriminatory aspects of the built environment. It claims, and proves, that the way that architecture regulates a society by preventing or discouraging access to or from a certain section of cities by design. It also claims that the certain groups of people who are most often architecturally excluded are the poor and peoples of color. Not mentioned much in the article, but that I have made note of through my supplemental reading annotations is the exclusion of the elderly. This perhaps is not a design on purpose but it nonetheless exists and affects this group of people as well. Architectural exclusion includes, but is not limited to, physical barriers, transit and placement of transit stops, highways and exists and road infrastructure, the ease of navigation, parking and parking permits. All of these things together affect the way that people live and interact with one another.

By opposing the MARTA expansion, these mostly white residents in Atlanta are not only preventing poor and people of color access, but also the elderly. As seen above, poverty affects all races especially in older years. The residents of northern Atlanta suburbs are preventing access to people who they may not even realize. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/poverty/report/2010/09/27/8426/the-not-so-golden-years/

Marak, Carol. "'Elder Orphans' Have A Harder Time Aging In Place." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 8 Sept. 2016. Web. 22 Sept. 2016.

I highly doubt that when these things were designed that they were created this way to exclude the elderly even if they were made to exclude the poor and peoples of color. However, this is the effect.

Marak, Carol. "'Elder Orphans' Have A Harder Time Aging In Place." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 8 Sept. 2016. Web. 22 Sept. 2016.

This picture shows how a simple sidewalk can transform an area and bring people together and bring people of all ages, genders, and colors to places they may not otherwise be. For the elderly, walking down a sidewalk may be the only option for their transit.

Marak, Carol. "'Elder Orphans' Have A Harder Time Aging In Place." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 8 Sept. 2016. Web. 22 Sept. 2016.

It is much more widely discussed how there are unfair regulations to certain groups based on gender and race, but groups by age are almost never talked about in terms of inclusion or exclusion. Even here it is not discussed, besides implicitly. Elderly are in many cases more poor and are separated from certain places as a result.

Marak, Carol. "'Elder Orphans' Have A Harder Time Aging In Place." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 8 Sept. 2016. Web. 22 Sept. 2016.

While some of these excluded groups may be able to get along with out access to certain places, the elderly are more in need and are also excluded because of their physical disabilities. They not only may need to get somewhere, but they do not have company. This is part of why Marak created a Facebook group to connect these elder orphans who need a community of peers. They also work on finding solutions to these hard to access places, with the assistance of the Milken Institute.

Marak, Carol. "'Elder Orphans' Have A Harder Time Aging In Place." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 8 Sept. 2016. Web. 22 Sept. 2016.

The Milken Institute is hoping to influence the way city planning committees create their cities so that the city accommodates the elderly who most often have nobody to help them in everyday life. Even a simple sidewalk can have an effect on elderly happiness, health, and accessibility.

Marak, Carol. "'Elder Orphans' Have A Harder Time Aging In Place." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 8 Sept. 2016. Web. 22 Sept. 2016.

Lowering bridges to prevent buses largely does affect the poor and and people of color, but it also largely affects "elder orphans", who are too old to drive and who have nobody that can help take care of them. These people are largely dependent on public transportation as well. Marak, Carol. "'Elder Orphans' Have A Harder Time Aging In Place." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 8 Sept. 2016. Web. 22 Sept. 2016.

This article is about how elder orphans, people over 65 years of age who have no living friends or family to care for them, are having more and more difficult maintaining and/or obtaining a comfortable living environment as they age. Everyone ages and it is never an easy transition, but it is especially harder for those elder citizens who cannot get along on their own, who account for 29% of older persons are these elder orphans. The article explains that there is such a large number of elder orphans now because they are the baby boomers who have resulted in less children and a greater divorce rate. The writer of this article is an elder orphan who has created a Facebook page for other elder orphans to come together and find community and support and discuss their problems to find solutions. The main issues presented are legal and care issues such as dealing with finances when there is nobody around to help in times of need. Affordable housing is almost nonexistent for these elders who mostly live on social security. Transportation is usually not something that elders are able to handle themselves because their physical abilities are impaired. Even though the Facebook group is extremely helpful in finding some solutions, it is still imperative that service and support at the local level is implicated. One such business that is answering the call of these elder orphans is The Milken Institute. They work with local governments to build awareness of elder orphans. They work to provide for the needs of elders such as: living comfortable, affordable, healthy, happy, and financially secure, with proper living arrangements, access to mobility, and respect. They work to create a space for elders to thrive. There are cities that are providing well for the aging community as far as health care, active lifestyle choices, economy, and environment, but even here there is not enough available transportation, or affordable housing. Simple things could be implemented all around cities for these aging communities to better adapt, such as sidewalks which would provide a way for elders to go places as well as get them up and moving around, decreasing chronic diseases and isolation and loneliness.

Marak, Carol. "'Elder Orphans' Have A Harder Time Aging In Place." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 8 Sept. 2016. Web. 22 Sept. 2016.

The entire idea of a "public good" is that it is a good that is non-excludable. I suppose the courts decision to side with residency restrictions may be in an effort to prevent free-riding, but that does not negate the fact that its underlying motives are racist and unconstitutional in the grand scheme of things.

There is no way this highway system was created with the objective of easy accessibility. As someone who has frequented this highway many times, and still struggles to navigate it, I can attest that the highway system in downtown Atlanta is definitely one that could be considered in this section of the article.

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/11/15/nyregion/mall-accused-of-racism-in-a-wrongful-death-trial-in-buffalo.html?_r=0 This is an article about the incident in more detail. The family of Wiggins sued the mall for its racist justifications. This event took place in the early 90s, way after laws had been erected against segregation. It was not and is not alright for business owners to discriminate based on race, gender, sexual orientation, or class.

This raises a good point. Whereas keeping bad things out of an area of town is a good thing for the government to strive toward, it ignores the problem entirely. The people who are perpetrating the crimes should not simply be kicked out of an area, but rather should be sought out individually. Just because the crime leaves a certain area does not mean the crimes do not exist elsewhere. It becomes a cycle.

Another perspective on walls and gates around more affluent communities is that of the outsider. Not only is it true that the gates keep outsiders out, but it keeps those inside of the gates sheltered and helps assert the idea that the outside is dangerous and bad, even though it is not in many cases. The people inside the gates are victims of their own fear and racism.

Donald Trump's proposal of a wall to prevent Mexican immigrants from coming to America is the most prevalent example of this today. However, this type of defense is also prevalent through the Great Wall of China. Just like Trump claims to be securing the nation, so too do city planners who may have ulterior motives that may be racially backed.

A specific example of a certain area being the home to a certain race both in the past and now is Auburn Avenue in Atlanta, GA. In the past, this street was the most wealthy black community in the country, but since the Civil Rights Movement, many of the wealthy moved away, but because the businesses in the area were targeted towards black people, there was no motivation for other races, specifically white, to repopulate the area. Now the street is a very poor area, and still heavily known as a poorer black community. Read more about the history and decline of Auburn Avenue at the following link: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/06/10/atlanta-historic-auburn-ave-again-at-crossroads.html

There is a reason for everything. This is not to say that every bridge that is low is intended to segregate, but not considering the repercussions of the design does not negate the fact that there WILL be repercussions.

It is normal for people to think that taking race out of the equation could lead to a less racist society. But this planning scholar completely dismantles this thought by claiming that it is essential to fixing the problem of racism by fulling acknowledging and accepting the concept of race.

Many people would see the first type of bench as a nice thing to do for homeless people by providing shelter. However, the second picture shows a bench that deters homeless people from seeking rest on it, which is a public good that by definition is supposed to be non-excludable. Most people would not view this second bench as being negative. In fact, it is most likely viewed as a nice way to prevent contact with strangers while sitting on the bench.

Jim Crow laws were used in the past to segregate. An example of violence that could ensue were the multiple sit ins by nonviolent protesters who were met with angry white men and women who refused them service and refused to be served in the same space as them.

https://www.schlittlaw.com/blog/low-bridges-long-island-parkways/ These lower bridges can lead to death! This bridge in New York, pictured above, was built by Robert Moses, who has a history of creating restricting infrastructure.

The power is hidden in that it is hard to prove intent, as I mentioned in a previous annotation above. However, it is only hard to prove if you are not looking for the problem that so many people and scholars are pointing to, which is this exclusionary practice through city planning, architecture, and infrastructure. So since these things have been noticed in patterns, and even in some instances out right admitted, there should be more of a movement to punish such acts as segregation.

Marshall was the Court's 96th justice and its first African-American justice. This may help to explain why he, of all the justices of the court, was the only one to understand the racial implication of the architectural exclusion.

http://www.socialexplorer.com/927f1ed3fb/view

These maps show how apparent the segregation is in the area of Memphis 1970 and 1980 which may explain the community idea of keeping the different racial groups segregated.

The law and the government both address exclusionary impacts, but neither can or will do anything about what is happening. It seems that there is no way to prove the intent of these tactics, even though the intents, once studied, can be quite clear to those willing to believe it.

In a review of the graphic novel, "Robert Moses: The Master Builder of New York City", David Langdon states that, "for each groundbreaking feat of structural engineering and political mobilization, there is another story told of his callous social engineering, the consequences of which reshaped the lives of New Yorkers as much as his architecture." The authors of the graphic novel, Pierre Christin and Olivier Balez, use a sequence of pictures to expose the multiple facets of this architect who was both a master at his craft, while also a profound racist and destroyer. Read more about this novel: http://www.archdaily.com/772815/robert-moses-the-master-builder-of-new-york-city-pierre-christin-and-olivier-balez

This type of exclusion, whether intentional or not, leads to segregation in the long run that may last for years, decades, generations, or centuries. Later on, the article mentions that there are businesses in wealthier regions that need employees but cannot attract any because of how the transit system works.

One of the many unfortunate results of the tactless decisions made by the higher ups in places all over the world. These obstacles are unnecessary, or at least troubling due to their adverse effects. And these aren't just individual scenarios. Many situations in many different towns turn out like this, because of the deplorable choices of others.

The selfishness highlighted by their choices is baffling. They don't even stop to think about the people who are trying to work they way into better situations. Also, they don't consider they money lost by excluding these individuals, or they may just believe it to not be worth the risk. Either way, these choices are appalling.

Getting to and from the new Braves stadium will be hell for people that live on my side of town near College Park. If at least one of their intentions was to increase attendance at their games, they've failed, in this aspect at least.

I've been in this situation all too often while growing up in different parts of Florida, Alabama, and Georgia.

In doing so, he relayed a message of exclusion to outsiders without the direct support and permission of the insiders, and that is impermissible and unfair.

These type of biases are the main factor prohibiting this country from being as truly diverse and open-minded as nit claims to be to foreigners. What sense does it make to call this country the "land of opportunity" if only a select few actually obtain that opportunity? Food for thought.

Solid example of a strong, precise, and valid premise within her argument.

You would think that scholars of law would actually take the time to delve into such a topic if many have determined it to be a factor of law and and regulation. You can't get to a high level in your career and forget how to do the things that got you there, like studying and becoming aware of such things.

I think of this when I look at arguments for/against Affirmative Action and also in The promotion of diversity in PWI's and HBCU's.

I noticed this last summer while in Texas. My uncle is a fairly wealthy man, and he has a house in a wealthy part of the DFW area: Frisco, Texas. However, his family is one of the minuscule amount of black families living in the city, partly due to the price of the houses alone.

Before a structure is even built, a detailed blueprint is introduced including: area, size, and ultimate design of the structure. This is then voted on and then the construction process begins once it is approved. There is no "neutral design" because the design itself is approved by many before it is actually built.

Now that I actually think about it I can see how architecture has the power to shape the lives of those around us. For example, the opening of a new middle school near the one I attended caused thousands of students to have to attend the new one. This was due to the redistricting of my school area which these students no longer pertained to. Due to this change of school these students were separated from children they had known their entire lives and forced to socialize with new people in this new school.

I feel that most people do not think of architecture as being regulatory. Even this body of literature does not define architecture as regulation even though it "founded" the idea of architectural regulation.

I have seen these types of benches in Central Park and mostly the subways in New York. The subway seats used to have dividers to prevent anyone from laying comfortably across them. In some cities concrete spiked are placed under bridges to prevent the homeless from sleeping there.

I agree with this statement because I never really focused on why a certain piece of architecture was built a certain way or placed in a certain area. Now that I know and realize what architectural exclusion is, it has become easier to identify pieces of architecture that present themselves as exclusionary in our physical environment.

The placement of things such as highways and shops can affect and control how communities behave and interact with one another whether they are all strangers to one another eliminates chances of protests or any wants for change to be made

Like gerrymandering/ redistricting to get more votes and change the barriers of communities to benefit them. Such as separating rich communities from poor ones or more black communities from white communities by the use of redistricting.

A physical barrier between communities that becomes so normal it's dismissed as even being wrong and leads to no form of change being done about it letting just become "just the way it is" in life and fades to the background.

It's amazing how architecture can regulate communities in ways such as getting jobs, or where one can buy items or spend their time, gain new experiences .Even to the extent of people never really knowing what is outside their own community.

I always wondered why the MARTA wasn't more expanded, it just shows how they wanted to keep their communities the way the were and were so opposed to increasing the chances of integration or having any interaction with the black community. But why have they still not expanded the station today?

authors profession

Schindler addresses more ways the law and architecture found ways to place restrictions on black communities.

With the court being as it was at the time, it shouldn't have been terribly difficult for Justice Marshall to understand why the other Justices would choose to keep the status quo of the white community at the time. They knowingly and willingly supported the exclusion of "undesirables".

Partially due to the city being car-centric, the size of the subway system in Atlanta dulls in comparison to the size of subway systems of New York or D.C.

She starts off by giving us a hardcore fact about how the infrastructure in America is set up.

From what I interpreted; she's basically stating how someone or some group of people will always have an advantage.

These street structures were built to prevent and trick non-residents and travelers to believing that nothing is there for them to trespass upon or seek.

That conversation right there explicitly presents that because of racial stereotyping and profiling prevents certain groups that "they did not want to attract" from getting to the mall. It's unfair and doesn't make sense to have a bus stop right on the other side of the highway and not thinking about who rides the bus that works at the mall. If they're allowing charter buses inside the mall then why couldn't they do the for such public transportation transits? I hope with such an incident as a minor losing their life having to walk a dangerous route to get to their work place opened their eyes and made them aware of their decisions and the impacts it makes on certain people and seek to change it for the better because it shouldn't have to take a life lost for accessibilities to be made.

The limiting of routes to reach such areas are leaving potentials unemployed.

This states that because of one's racial background and class, a certain group overlooks them as undesirable because they do not want them or others like them in their territory.

While some traffic barriers have been made for the benefit of helping innocents, they also been regulated to prevent any harm or wrongdoings reaching innocents from such violence and crime from thugs and gangs.

These racist views on putting up walls and fences on a particular property to isolate and separate another is stereotyping the other group thinking that if they block out crimes and violence by having a barrier that it won't get to them. It's also stating that one must great lengths to run errands because the resources they seek to reach aren't exposed or available right outside the door for them. The residents think primarily of themselves claiming it's for safety but fail to be considerate for the other groups seeking for efficiency and equality.

Despite the wall still being there as a way to segregate a community from another, racial groups are still isolating from one another in the city. Also, I have looked up pictures for this and along the sides of the wall, there are painted murals that showcase art and the meaning of the wall in an expressed manner.

His biographer was right. Considering that he acclaimed Jones Beach and was biased preferring a certain class and race group over another, drove him to constructing a landscape that prevented the groups he did not favor accessing them. He basically played a role of racial favoritism because of his prejudices.

Courts and laws tends to not see the details within the big picture as to how and why some landscapes and architecture are created to exclude certain minority groups. Back when there were racially divided seatings among places, they're believing that just because their hasn't been signs around for nearly half a century "regulating" and yet segregating where and what races should sit that certain infrastructures that are mentioned that have been built are not used to separate and isolate certain accepted groups from marginalized others.

This example sets a prominent visual that in order to control and alter people's decisions without them knowing it, they make whatever they believe is a better choice more visual and reachable to them rather than make what they believe is not good nearly unaccessible.

I recall reading an article years before that a certain city or country (I do not remember if it was stated in the US, I believe it was Canada but I could be wrong) placed spiked-like figures on the seating and the backs on the benches almost resembling a needle bed to prevent homeless people from laying on them. I even remember how a majority of the responses were saying that's cruel or has gone too far and how that's unfair because it's treating them poorly.

An example that comes to mind is skate parks. I have never seen a skate park in an affluent area, and I feel this may be by design, although whether it is a result of differences of interests in the communities, or wanting to keep the skateboarders out of affluent areas I do not know

While the general focus does seem to be on pedestrian traffic, there does seem to be a bias as to what communities are prioritized

Buildings also sometimes install small spikes in the ground behind doors to prevent the homeless from sleeping there

I agree with this, people take many things like this for granted

A perfect example is the internment camps

This might be the most obvious example of using architecture in an excluding way. I like to think this would never be approved today, but I suppose it's possible to hide it behind a "crime-prevention" pretext.

Being an especially nervous driver, I can understand how a short supply of street signs can make for a nightmarish driving experience.

This is very true and has even been seen a resent as the 2016 Olympics in Brazil. The current president of Brazil wanted all "run-down" houses and poor citizens to be relocated into the mountains and out of sight of tourists to give the country a more premium look. Seeing this done in Atlanta either unwillingly or not is definitely not a new practice by any means necessary, and is referred to by others as "showing your good side".

This could be seen as a doubled edged sword in terms that yes usually poor residents to tend to bring in more crime which maybe why those residents refuse to have the Marta extended in that area. Which would be a very logical argument to make. On the other hand this could be also seen as a way to not diversify the neighborhood as well, but in my personal opinion it mostly has to do with the probability of increased crime or homeless individuals.

This one seems pretty justified, if not a little excessive. Why would someone need to park in a neighborhood if they don't live or are visiting someone there?

I think this is the main reason most people don't really hear or think about this sort of thing; it's hard to prove that an architectural decision was intentionally exclusionary and not just mere coincidence.

It is interesting to think that the landscape itself MAKES the races portrait themselves differently. Many people think other people that live in Savannah for example are dangerous and will shoot you but that is a stereotype of Savannah.

The writer shows how rooted segregation is rooted in our nation that was so strong that physical walls ran through the cities in order to separate black people from white people. 1940 was a period of mass segregation before the civil rights movement really started making a huge statement.

This is sad. It showed me how blessed I am. This touched me. When I moved to Atlanta, I seen how there's a lot of homeless people lying down on benches trying to get rest. So for them to create a way to prevent that, it's sad. They have no where else to go and no support.

This law refers to the law on the right of people to be treated equally.

I'm pretty sure if the people could see the message then the Court System could see the message too.

The message shows an act of discrimination/ racism to African Americans and the poor.

They claim they are promoting safety, but it's just racism. I never understood the system. How could closing a street promote safety?

I think this can be connected to Schindler. Schindler tries to make the argument on how homeless people are not actually homeless because they have space under bridges and in tunnels.

New York Times Editorial

Justice Thurgood Marshall's dissent was more faithful to the evidence: ''A group of white citizens,'' he wrote, ''has decided to act to keep Negro citizens from traveling through their urban 'utopia,' and the city has placed its seal of approval on the scheme.'' Despite a national commitment to equality, blacks were being kept quite literally in their place.

I've never thought of this, but I guess we all have a right to access streets, rights?

There's a fence around the one conspicuous housing project on the new 14th Street. Would be an interesting Built Environment for one of you to work on.

M&M, right?

So what's her point here?