The perceived safety and spatial behaviour in three different neighbourhoods in Rotterdam

There is a difference between registered safety and perceived safety. An inquiry was done to register how people use space in three different neighbourhoods from different time periods during a weekday. The following spatial parameters were taken into account: Axial and angular analyses with topological and metrical radiuses of the street and road network (Hillier & Ida 2005), and various micro scale tools (van Nes & Lopez 2010) showing the relationship between private and public space. In one of the area interviews were made of the areas users and dwellers for identifying which streets and public spaces are perceived to be unsafe and safe. As it turned out, high spatial integration of the street net contribute to a great variation of all types of people in streets. These areas consist of a highly inter-connected street net with shops located along it and with entrances directly connected to the street. These areas are conceived to be the safest to stay and move through by the interviewed users. Conversely, neighbourhoods with a labyrinthy street structure and lack of entrances and windows on the ground floor level contribute to few people in street and to a feeling of un-safety in the spaces between buildings. The degrees of spatial integration on various scale levels are low in these kinds of housing areas. Therefore, the structure of the street network and the public-private relationship between buildings and streets plays a role for setting the physical framework to encourage street life and perceived safety.