Sarah Schindler’s article on architectural exclusion acknowledges the idea that urban spaces are designed in ways that regulate our daily lives. Schindler notes that despite the fact that the majority of urban planners understand the ramifications of their design choices in regards to socio-economic issues, they “fail to afford sufficient weight to the concept of exclusion by design.”(2015) The impact of urban planning is also largely ignored in legal scholarship. Lawmakers have failed to focus on architectural exclusion “as a form of regulation that should be analyzed and patrolled in the same way that a law with the same effect would be.”(2015) Schindler uses various examples of features in the built environment to prove that architectural exclusion should genuinely concern lawmakers and urban planners.
Physical barriers such as fences, walls, a gated entrances are used to this day in order to subdivide communities and separate neighborhoods. A prime example of the use of physical barriers to subdivide a community can be found in Hamden, Connecticut. “[The] ten-foot-high, 1,500-foot-long fence separated the racially diverse (though predominantly white) suburb … from the primarily black public housing projects in New Haven.”(2015). Hamden, Connecticut is not an isolated incident and there are many other examples of these deliberate exclusionary practices in places like Rosedale, Baltimore. Additionally, transit and transportation infrastructure prevent “certain groups of people to access certain parts of a community.”(2015)
Transit and transportation infrastructure are also used to subdivide communities and systematically deprive certain groups of people. Schindler examines how transit stops are placed and brings attention to the fact that high-income communities often lobby against public transit stops in their area. This practice directly excludes low-income citizens from accessing certain areas and also restricts job opportunities to a certain geographical area. Not only are the livelihoods of low-income individuals affected but also, the economy outside the public transit sphere suffers. Wages must be increased and as a result entrepreneurs are discouraged from establishing businesses in suburban areas. By making economic opportunities less accessible, the safety of low-income citizens is jeopardized. Cynthia Wiggins died while crossing a seven lane highway in order to get to work.”The mall’s owners had actively resisted requests to allow the bus to stop on its property; rather, the bus stopped outside the mall on the other side of the large highway.”(2015)
There are countless examples of how highways separate racially diverse communities. These highways often have detrimental effects on the poor or minority group in the situation and benefit the high-income group. “In 1954, the City of Detroit was engaged in urban renewal.156 It razed the black community of Black Bottom to build the I-375 highway.”(2015) The poor members in the black community are forced to relocate into government housing while the middle-class were fortunate enough to continue in other prosperous neighborhoods. Schindler provides numerous examples of similar incidents in Miami and highway I-95, Oakland and highway I-880, etc. The most concerning aspect of these case studies is that the attempt to remove poor and minority neighborhoods through the guise of urban renewal is not illegal. These examples back Schindler’s claim that the majority of lawmakers are not concerned by these grave issues.
One final method of exclusion that Schindler focuses on is the use of residential parking permits. These permits prevent all non-residents from parking in a community and only those with guest passes can visit the area. Despite the fact that this is a blatant way to exclude “undesirable” people from certain areas “The Supreme Court expressly upheld the ability of cities to enact this sort of parking permit requirement. “(2015) The supreme court’s decision reveals the true depth of an issue that goes beyond high-income citizens, individual urban planners, and lawmakers. The very bed of American justice is malignant with racial and economic bias.
