The National Housing Federation warned if the findings were correct, associations may have wasted considerable resources.
Professor Bill Hillier of Space Syntax Laboratory at the University College London said the guidelines mistakenly sought to eliminate a crucial source of natural surveillance on estates-passers-by.
He claimed his work highlighted the need for traditional street design rather than designs like cul-de-sacs which eliminate passers-by.
He told Housing Today: "Visibility and people are the keys. If you have properly-designed streets then passers-by are an important asset in security. You need lots of movement in and out of buildings but also some through movement."
"Secured by design is very restrictive in that it endorses things that are very defensive and territorial and has many of the properties that aren't shown by our data to be good."
National Housing Federation policy officer Abena Nsia said that if the findings were true it would mean that many associations had wasted considerable time, effort and money in trying to implement the strategy.
She said most associations tried to comply with the standard but it was very difficult to make it work in practice: "Professor Hillier's findings are significant in that, if true, this time and effort is wasted since the current Secured by design does not achieve its intended objectives."
But the Association of Chief Police Officers, which publishes the strategy, dismissed Griffiths's research as "limited".
ACPO's Designing Out Crime group chairman Bill Griffiths said he didn't "have a problem" with Hillier's conclusions on the benefits of passers-by, but maintained the evidence was "inconclusive".
Local Government Association policy officer Jeannette Yorke said: "Many housing associations and local authorities find Secured by design helpful when tenants have complained they felt vulnerable."
A new version of Secured by design will be available later this year.
Source
Housing Today
No comments yet