EmailMeForm



Implementing CPTED Crime Prevention Design Principleson a Community Project-Based Scale:Syracuse, New YorkA Process Manual for Identification, Planning, and ImplementationA Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of theRequirements of the Renée Crown University Honors Program atSyracuse UniversityLila NazarianCandidate for Bachelor of Artsand Renée Crown University HonorsPolitical Science, Citizenship and Civic EngagementSpring 2020Honors Thesis in Political Science, Citizenship and Civic EngagementThesis Advisor: _______________________ Dr. Anne E. Mosher, Department Chair, Citizenship and Civic EngagementThesis Reader: _______________________ Professor Margaret S. Thompson, Associate Professor of History and Political ScienceHonors Director: _______________________ Dr. Danielle Smith, Director Implementing CPTED Crime Prevention Design Principles on a Community Project-Based Scale: Syracuse, New YorkA Process Manual for Identification, Planning, and ImplementationLila NazarianSyracuse University Political Science and Citizenship and Civic EngagementMaxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs Renée Crown Honors ProgramSpring 2020Syracuse University,y AprilSpring 2020Abstract: For families and residents iIn neighborhoods like Syracuse’s Near Westside, crime is a constant problempersistent reality for families and residents. Not only does crime affect residents’ feelings of safety, but it impedes community cohesion and affects quality of life. The Near Westside is one of the oldest neighborhoods in Syracuse, but that means it also has some of the oldest and most neglected housing stock. The structural factors of the Near Westside’s homes and streetswhich have contributed toreated one of the highest rates of concentrated poverty in the nation. These infrastructure deficits also are shown to contribute to Syracuse neighborhoods whose architecture actually encourages crime as a result ofthrough low visibility and poor poor accessibility. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles are an innovative way to improve infrastructure reduce crime and improve community cohesion and reduce crime, but can be out of reach for local organizations due to consultation costs and the complexities of implementation and maintenance. In partnership with the Near West Side Peacemaking Project (NWSPP), I have written a CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design) Process Manual which scales CPTED principles to the local level, allowing organizations like NWSPP to design, plan, and manage innovative crime prevention projects by working with community residents and city departments. Its most prominent feature is its Case Studies, which provide explicit applications of CPTED principles and explains their purposes, so that users can easily replicate them. It focuses on synthesizing CPTED principles with public engagement, and provides explanations guidelines for city code compliance, maintenance, and funding.Note:Section I includes the central components of my CCE Capstone Action Plan, the remainder of which can be found in the Appendices section of this document. This section forms the historical and empirical basis for my project and for this Process Manual. A full annotated bibliography can also be found in the Appendices section. Section II constitutes the Process Manual itself, which has been peer reviewed by my community partner and other city stakeholders, all of whom are listed under the Assessment of Organization document (Appendix ii) in the Appendices section. This Manual is constructed so that it could potentially be reproduced and used by nonprofits around the city. The language and organization of this section is intended to meet the demands of that specific audience. Executive Summary:This manual is the finalized and expanded version of my CCE Senior Action Plan, which was completed during the Fall 2019 semester. This Thesis developed from my interest in the intersections of political history and policy structure, and how the legacies of decades-old law continue to shape communities of the present. Current demographic trends in major American cities indicate concentrations of low-income residents in neighborhoods which have been historically segregated and underserved. Richard Rothstein, among many others, has documented the pervasive effects of the explicitly racist policies implemented at all levels of government across educational opportunity, housing, and economic mobility. The effects of these issues are intricately linked, to each other and to the policy structures of the cities and towns in which they exist. In short, these policies were written for the express purpose of discrimination based on income and race, and continue to cause inequality along these same strata. Addressing these entrenched issues is a daunting task for organizations working in the nonprofit sector, especially those located in neighborhoods like Syracuse’s Near Westside which negotiates these structural inequalities on a daily basis with a limited budget. Conventional approaches to structural issues such as crime apply broad theoretical concepts like a blanket across entire regions. But, communities even within a single city all possess unique needs, resources, and history. It is broadly ineffective to apply uniform solutions to communities that are anything but uniform. Localized and community-based policy is the most innovative means of addressing problems like those on the Near Westside. This manual stands as just one example of such an individualized and carefully calibrated initiative, which will allow community organizations to scale broad design theories to the needs of their streets, homes, and parks. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles incorporate basic elements of the built environment in order to create public and private spaces which discourage crime and promote quality of life in communities. Paired with conscious efforts to build community identity and cohesion, these design concepts are empirically shown to reduce both violent and nonviolent crime. CPTED designs include widening and lengthening vision planes on neighborhood streets and among private properties, designating boundaries between public and private spaces, and using lighting to improve visibility and feelings of safety. By building a coalition of community residents, nonprofit organizations, and local government officials, CPTED projects can unify these groups and implement improvements to the neighborhood in question which can counteract issues like crime and safety. Instead of asking local organizations to face the gargantuan task of fighting for massive structural change, this policy empowers communities and the organizations that serve them to use their expertise as members of a community to identify problems and apply innovative issues to solve them. This policy alleviates the financial and informational barriers that usually prevent CPTED from being a viable option and makes its principles accessible and scalable to local contexts. Table of ContentsAcknowledgements ………………………………………………….……………..(7)Section I. Academic Material ………………………………………………….. (94)Assessment of the Problem and Population ……………………………...(94)Description of the Action Plan ………………..………………..…..…..………..(138)Expanding the Scope of this Manual …………………………….…..……..(1914)Section II. Process Manual ……………………………………………….……..(2217)Introduction ……………………………………………………………….……(2317)Definitions ………………………………………………………..……………..(2418)The Theory of CPTED and Supporting Evidence …….…………….….…(2520)The Kinds of Crime CPTED Can Address …..……………………........….(3026)Building a Community-Based Process……………………………………..(3127)Forming a CPTED Action Team …………...………………………..(3329)Selecting Viable Parcels and Developing a CPTED Plan …..…….(3632)Parcel Oownership ……………..……..(3732)Syracuse Resources ..………..…....…..(384)Funding and Cost ………...……...…….(3834)Zoning and Oother Regulations ......…..(4935)Design Options ………………….……(4036)Examples of CPTED Design: Case Studies ..…………………….……….(4137)Organizations involved in Syracuse, NY ………………………………….(5147)Evaluation Tools for the Near West Side …………………………………. (54)50)Appendices ……………………………………………………………………..(562)Appendix iI: Annotated Bibliography …………………..…….…(5652)Appendix IIii: Assessment of Organization ..................................(6460)Appendix IIIiii: MAX 401 Opinion Essay ……………………...…..….(6663)Appendix IViv: Reflections on Developing this Project ……………………...(6966)Appendix Vv: CCE Action Plan Fall 2019 Presentation………………...………...(7269)Acknowledgements:This project is, in many ways, an encapsulation of my journey across all of my disciplines over the course of the last four years: it would be impossible for me to have completed this work without the invaluable guidance and support of my professors, mentors, and family. I am deeply grateful to the Citizenship and Civic Engagement Program at the Maxwell School which has challenged me relentlessly to grow and evolve as a student and a citizen. My experiences have fueled and focused my passion for policy and justice and inspired me to shape my career around those values. Dr. Anne E. Mosher, Amy Schmidt, Professor Shana Kushner Gadarian, and Professor Peter Wilcoxen have all provided immeasurable wisdom and guidance. My peers in the Class of 2020 and my mentees in the Class of 2022 continually remind me what it means to be an engaged citizen, and inspire me to stay in the fight for equitable structural change. My Political Science and History professors, especially Professor Margaret S. Thompson and Professor Mark E. Rupert, have also mentored me throughout my undergraduate career. I am a better writer, thinker, and citizen because of them. I am deeply grateful to have had the opportunity to learn in their classrooms. The Honors Program at Syracuse has been an unbelievable gift and offered opportunities to study with some of the best professors in the nation. I am deeply grateful to my advisors, Hanna Richardson and Karen Hall, for their relentless energy and belief in my potential. I would also like to thank Jolynn Parker for her time and effort, and her belief in me. My Political Science advisor, Laura McArdle, has also played a critical role in my career planning and aspirations.My teammates on the Women’s Lacrosse team have enhanced my experience at Syracuse tremendously, and made my time as a student-athletes contribute invaluably to my growth as a student. My coaches, Gary Gait and Caitlin Defliese, as well as my academic advisor Jason Leslie, athletic trainer Kathleen Chaney, and Student Engagement Coordinators Mark H. Trumbo and Cam Spera, have all served as mentors to me. I owe much of my growth as a leader to all of these role models. Finally, I would like to dedicate this manuscript to my parents, Doug and Jeanette Nazarian, my sister Grace Nazarian, and our longtime caregiver and family member, Edna Grayson. Thank you for making me who I am, and sacrificing so much to support my dreams. Section I. Foundational ResearchAcademic MaterialAssessment of the Problem and Population:OverviewThe City of Syracuse, like many other American cities, lives with the institutional effects of residential segregation and racially-based financial discrimination. The collateral impact effects of these policies go beyond simple geographic divisions. Poor families, especially those families of color, were systematically prevented from investing in a homes; additionally, and developers were incentivized away from multi-family minority housing. As a result, the infrastructure in low-income neighborhoods, including walkways, power lines, and lighting, is underdeveloped and insufficiently maintained. We can attribute this issuethese conditions to the lack of investment capability among within the public sector, which in turn constrains economic growth. In other words, areas of concentrated poverty and high crime struggle to attract investment, and thus struggle to develop and improve. Neighborhoods with higher concentrations of poverty, especially racially and ethnically segregated neighborhoods, also experience higher rates of violent crime which are significantly linked to these conditions of concentration and segregation. Crime, especially violent crime, has a significant effect on resident perception of safety and can therefore push people out of neighborhoods which are struggling with crime rates. Violence “can influence [those with means] to leave, which leads to an increase in segregation and violence.” Residents without the option to relocate or migrate bear the brunt of these collateral effects. Reducing crime, therefore, must address structural problems by alleviating disparities in areas like infrastructure disparities, such as in infrastructure, in such areas. Elements of the built environment like vacant homes and visibility are key parts of this process; Cozens et al., MacDonald, Zahm, and others demonstrate the undeniable correlation between increased crime rates and dysfunctional infrastructure.On the Near West Side (NWS), these realities are all too present. This Action Plan will focus on this neighborhood in the western quadrant of Syracuse, which faces direct disadvantages as a result of the construction of I-81, which created a physical divide between low- and upper-income neighborhoods while razing minority neighborhoods in the process. NWS residents face high levels of crime and concentrated poverty, and live in a wide range of public, subsidized, and private homes with a range of needs. Over 50% of residents earn incomes below the federal poverty line. The neighborhood reports the highest number of shots fired, violent crimes, and drug crimes in the city. Community members have continually expressed concern over “failing infrastructure,” including potholes, broken sidewalks, and missing or broken street lights. It is clear that the conditions of these areas are a significant factor to shaping (or affectingaffecting) the quality of life and safety of the neighborhood’s residents. Following evidence-based principles, it is reasonable to conclude that they are contributeing to the problem by shaping an infrastructure which is not maximized designed by the municipal authorities to prioritize residents’ safety and discourage crime. In addition to the institutional issues described above, the process of implementing Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles is not generally accessible to local organizations due to logistics and cost. Nonprofit organizations, especially those funded primarily by grants, may be limited by the capital they have available to allocate to crime prevention design initiatives. Even if they have funding for it, there is a myriad of municipal processes and resources that are necessary for construction and installation of any project. These include city building codes, as well. Finally, for small or relatively simple areas of need, the cost of hiring a consultant is not proportional to the size of the project. But, CPTED principles are broad and have not been consciously scaled to local needs, so local organizations struggle to implement them with confidence without the guidance of a consultant. Details on the population affectedThe Near West Side Neighborhood is home to approximately 7,000 residents with a median household incomes of about $14,000. Over half of residents (54%) live below the poverty line. An amalgamation of refugees, immigrants, and Syracuse natives, the diversity of the neighborhood bears a strong includes a large Puerto Rican component influence, as well as people from many other ethnic backgrounds. Housing stock in the area denotes a high prevalence of vacant homes and homes in need of repair. Public housing developments include row houses as well as four high-rise senior living developments. Crime rates in this area are among the highest in the city, as measured by for shots fired, violent crime, and drug offensescrime. Residents report concern about exposure to violencecrime and personal safety, showing that the environment of the neighborhood contributes negatively to perception of safety. . The service provider network is well-developed, and includes collaboration among school administrators, the Syracuse Housing Authority, the Near West Side Initiative, Northside Learning Center, and others who serve the neighborhood population. The Near West Side Initiative works on developing real estate in the area.In the 13th poorest city in the nation, the Near West Side stands out as a particularly distressed neighborhood. Beyond crime and poverty, residents do not feel safe. They do not think their sidewalks and streets are safe to be on, partially because of who might be walking on them but also because they cannot walk or see safely. As a result, residents do not feel safe letting their children play outside, running errands, or participating in community events. As the city begins installations of LED street lamps, the neighborhood has an opportunity to assess its infrastructurallighting needs and cultivate take steps towards a better working relationship with city government, which has been an issue in the past. In order to address the full extent of these issues, residents living in public housing and in high-traffic areas need to live in a built environment which is conducive to visibility and improved sense of security. The ultimate goal would beis to improve quality of life for all 7,000 residents but, as a start, this Action Plan will focus on identifying high-use community areas in need of improvement in terms of safety and crime prevention design. Description of the Action Plan:CPTED Process Manual for Community OrganizationsMy action is based on my collaboration with municipal and community organizations to compile a process manual for implementing Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles on a neighborhood scale; the manual is the culmination of my research and efforts. My area of focus is the Near Westside neighborhood in Syracuse, NY and I am partnering with the Near Westside Peacemaking Project. This manual includes a set of important sections, all of which are necessary to constructing a clear, sustainable process of CPTED application in neighborhoods across Syracuse. They are: A Brief Description of CPTED Theory,Aann Outline of the Broad Social Issues being addressed,Case Studies of Completed Projects,Public Engagement,Relevant City Codes and Policies,Cost and Funding, andManagement/Maintenance, as well as.There will also be sections on Important Community Figures, Organizations Who Are Working on These Issues, and another on Evaluation Methods and Resources.. This information can be used byhelp local organizations so that they can improve their communities through with sustainable and effective crime prevention and reduction and prevention. There is significant initial research that is necessary to substantially address all of these areas, particularlyhat establishes empirical support for the efficacy of the Definition of CPTED Theory in addressing , explanation of the sStructural issues at handocial Problems being addressed. Studies have worked to establish basic, as well as best practices for Public Engagement and Project Management as well. There are a number of guidebooks on CPTED theory available online which can be extremely helpful—but, make sure tothis manual will incorporate more than one of these to ensure it use more than one of these so as to includesorporate a representative range of interpretations and perspectivesthe range of interpretations offered by each. In addition to basic definition of the four principles of CPTED, this part of the manual aims to explain why each principle is important and how the principles enhance each other to work as a collective whole. It explains basic strategies that CPTED designs hope to accomplish, all towards the goal of making these concepts accessible and demonstrate practical applications so that users can visualize the value of each concept. Finally, this section should includes the specific kinds of crimes which will be targeted by CPTED designs (property, violent, juvenile, etc.). In order to develop the Case Studies section, as well as the Relevant City Codes, Funding/Cost, Public Engagement, and Management sections, I worked closely with my community partner and other knowledgeable people who have experience in this sphere. I selected 3 Case Study categories: Residential (cut-through), Green Space, and Commercial. An expanded revised manual couldmay include more case studies, but these three are able to show succinctly show some of the basic design ideas that successfully apply CPTED across those three environments. “Cut-throughs” are present throughout the Near Westside, due to the lack of cross-streets in the central region of the neighborhood. They are informal pathways between streets, and stand as. They are an important example to show and analyze so that athe successful design canould be replicated for maximum community benefit.The Funding and Cost section outlines the grant- and capital-based funding options through which CPTED projects can be put into action. City government, especially in Syracuse, may not have the resources to dedicate significant amounts of funding to projects like these, but may be able to provide support in the form of labor from the Department of Public Works or other labor resources. Local organizations like Peacemaking are funded in large part by grants, which in many cases are applicable to innovative crime prevention strategies like CPTED. In addition to Community Development Block Grant funding, there are other grants available for which a project like CPTED design and implementation would qualify. Cost calculations include debris removal, labor, materials, construction and installation of lighting, railings, or other structures, electrical equipment, vegetation, and future maintenance costs. The Relevant Codes and Policy Section will explains the Syracuse City Codes for buildings and public spaces which apply to CPTED projects in both public and private spaces. By listing the regulations that will apply, users can ensure that, in the process of implementing the Manual’s design suggestions, they are not violating cCity codes. Doing so and therefore would require the projecthave to stop or undergo significantly alterations the project. These include regulations relate toabout lighting fixtures, vegetation, proximity of public structures to private spaces, sidewalk dimensions, railing sizes and regulations, and a number of other important rules. It is vital that this section be accurate in order to avoid additional costs or setbacks during the process of CPTED implementation. The Maintenance and Sustainability section discusses the overarching philosophy of organic and enduring crime reduction. This includes not only intentional design and community input, but also specific allocation of maintenance responsibility to local organizations, city departments, residents of the neighborhood, or some combination of the three. Regardless of who is responsible for maintaining the cleanliness and conducting repairs on the site, it is crucial that there be a definitive plan in this respect. In order for the site to remain successful and positive, it must be actively maintained so that its purpose remains visible and present. The Organizations section lists members of the Syracuse Near Westside service provider network to give an example of a successful and diverse group of organizations which collaborate on issues like crime. It includes city and local organizations, another layer of diversity which is important. The network includes organizations in different disciplinesspheres, including education, religion, housing, minority issues, community engagement, and conflict resolution. It serves as a resource for Syracuse-based projects as well as an example of who the CPTED team should include.The Evaluation section concludes the instructive portion of the manual and makes suggestions as to how communities can measure the efficacy of their CPTED implementations. These come in the form of annual reports from organizations in the neighborhood that measure crime rates or perceptions of safety, or from official Police Department crime rate and arrest density reports. It is important to measure safety and community engagement not only through basic crime rates, but also in perceptions of safety and community cohesion. If people feel safer than they did before, and are interacting with their communities more, the implementation can be shown to have a broad positive effect on the community. Evaluation of crime trends, though, will likely require transparency on the part of local law enforcement, as the community organizations will want to see thoseeir crime statistics. My community partner, The Near Westside Peacemaking Project (NWSPP), is deeply engaged in the Nearw Westside neighborhood, and hasd an established community development presence. In fact, it hosted a CPTED seminar in 2017, before I began thismy project. I also worked with my Public Affairs professor whose full-time employment is with a housing nonprofit in Syracuse, as well as with city officials from the Department of Neighborhood and Business Development and the Syracuse Mayor’s economic stimulus program, Syracuse Surge. I discussed my Action Plangot in touch with city officials through introductions by my professor and community partner; much of this correspondence took place over email and some consisted of in-person meetings. I also met with community members from the Near Westside and heard the perspectives of both residents and service providers in other parts of the neighborhood. Networking and attending community events was crucial to having these conversations and finding accurate information to put into this manual. I presented my ideas about visibility and crime prevention, and the feedback from my community partner and through their responses I became awareindicated that a manual for CPTED implementation would be helpfuhelpful to the long-term sustainability of the neighborhood. Feedback from community members in this way augmented my independent research and ensured that my perceptions of how the manual should advise users on Public Engagement and Ccity code compliance was put into the specific context of Syracuse neighborhoods and local organizations. The Case Sstudies section is the most practical section and therefore should will be is the central focus of the manual; users willshould be able to develop concrete ideas of how to construct CPTED designs based on the information about lighting features, sidewalks and walkways, and boundaries. Cost and timeline metrics should will also be are also included in these case study descriptions, so that users can gauge these factors as well. I am currently in the process of verifying and substantiating the Policy and Funding sections with the input of my community partner, NBD officials, and my Public Affairs Professor. I am incorporating each of their areas of expertise to ensure a comprehensive explanation of the regulations and financial constraints that CPTED implementations need to consider. My community partner is also helping me revise the Public Engagement structure in order to maximize community input and productivity, with a focus on transparency. Expanding the Scope of this ProjectThe intentional design of this Process Manual is adaptable to neighborhoods both in other parts of Syracuse, as well as in neighborhoods in other cities and states. My goal for my Action Plan was to create a model that was flexible enough to meet the needs of a wide range of communities on a topic that was relevant across geographic and socioeconomic areas. This manual was written with the Near Westside neighborhood and its above-average rates of crime and concentrated poverty in mind. But because it works to simplify the broad principles of CTED, the process manual is adaptable to the needs and profiles of virtually any neighborhood. There are three primary sections in the Process Manual, all of which are adaptable beyond the Near Westside neighborhood: the theoretical base of CPTED, examples of successful case studies, and logistical information about funding, policy compliance, and management. The basic principles of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design constitute the foundation of the actions outlined by the manual. They discuss space, boundaries, and sight in abstract terms; they apply to virtually any type of space in any location. There are specific considerations for residential, commercial, and green spaces, but those are all clearly denoted. The second section, which includes the case studies of successful projects in residential, commercial, and green spaces, includes case studies specific to the Syracuse area. They are drawn from the city for which this report was originally intended, but the value of the examples would still translate if organizations from other cities or regions were to use them, regardless of the location.The third section is the most specific to Syracuse. This portion includes sections on Funding, Relevant Policies and City Codes for construction and Design Management and Maintenance. The Funding section and City Policy Processes and Codes sections would need revision if they were to be applied to a municipality besides Syracuse. They are both written both with the grant situations and capacity of the local organizations and municipal government of Syracuse in mind. The city budget at the present time is extremely limited, but the service provider network in this particular neighborhood is robust. The funding recommendations are written with emphasis on grant funding rather than municipal funding, which is not the case for every city or municipality across the country. Other cities or towns are almost certainlikely to have different resources in this respect, so this section would need to be modified to make general recommendations about when to utilize grant funding, and when to allocate municipal or state funding. In order to make the Policy and Codes section applicable to municipal codes outside of Syracuse, it would need to be rewritten to include recommendations for finding information about codes and regulations relevant to the location of the project, or give broader guidance about what code limitations can be expected as opposed to specific policies. On the other hand, the Design Maintenance and Management section is applicable to locations outside of Syracuse. It discusses best practices, from design to completion, about maintaining the utility of CPTED designs regardless of location or type of space. The major limitations of the CPTED design and implementation processes are community support and available resources. Community support allows the organization to move forward with a project. Without it, the space will have no sense of ownership as part of the surrounding neighborhood; its effect will not be sustainable, and will fail to make any measurable impact on its surroundings and inhabitants. Similarly, CPTED designs are obviously limited by the grant or capital funding that is available as well as by the labor and technological limitations of organizations and government bodiess. If the city budget is limited, as is the case in the city of Syracuse, the government is limited in its ability to support community development projects like CPTED implementations. If local organizations have not been awarded grants that relate to community development or other work related to CPTED, their funds are not available within the parameters of the grant. Community engagement is an issue that can be addressed with public forums and deliberation among local organizations and residents. There are other methods which can improve the relationship between these two groups, and open deliberative channels so that community members can identify areas they would like CPTED projects to focus on , or make modifications to suggested projects. Financial limitations are harder to overcome, and could require private donations or other means of raising capital. If these two limitations were addressed or alleviated, this model could be replicated at a greater quantity frequency (or to a greater extent) and neighborhoods would have the capacity to implement multiple projects per year. As is covered more extensively in Section II, tSince the nature of CPTED is to improve cultivate a sustainable and positive quality of life for all neighbors, (as covered more extensively in Section II), its main expansion is in the quantity and scale of its implementation. It is important, however, that municipalities distribute resources for CPTED interventions with consciousness of socioeconomic disparities, race, and location throughout their jurisdictions. Equitable implementation is key. In order to ensure this, in addition to increased funding, a CPTED planning committee would need to organize community deliberation with residents of the target neighborhood to discuss potential areas of focus. By building this relationship, the committee can orient the project around sustainable community development, consistent with the CPTED principles. Section II. CPTED Process ManualIntroduction:Nonprofits and community organizations across the city of Syracuse work hard to find innovative ways to improve their neighborhoods. As in many cities across the country, issues like crime and infrastructure are constant factors. Since these are big structural problems, it can be difficult for local organizations to address issues of crime on a small scale because small-scale problems are direct symptoms of larger systemic problems. The features of the built environment are directly linked to crime rates and have a direct effect on how crime happens. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles are an innovative option for local organizations and nonprofits to combat this by making the physical structures of neighborhoods as repellent to crime as possible. CPTED designs improve visibility, accessibility, and community function in neighborhoods and therefore reduce crime. However, the process of applying CPTED is immensely complex. Not only do organizations have to procureget funding for new materials and renovation services, but they must navigate the city codes that govern parcel ownership and infrastructure regulations. Usually, this requires hiring a consultant and assuming additional expenses. Otherwise, local organizations struggle to scale down the broad principles of CPTED to their neighborhoods and individual parcels. This makes it difficult to apply them comprehensively, and often means organizations spend inefficiently on projects that are not timely or targeted. Choices often need to be made between finances and quality. This manual eliminates that choice and offers an innovative solution.Instead of assuming the cost of hiring an expert or expending resources inefficiently, providers can use the steps outlined here. This manual outlines the basic CPTED principles and the theories behind them, but focuses on their practical application as a policy process. It outlines basic steps of identifying parcel owners and relevant city codes, and provide a clear process of CPTED planning and organizational guidelines. Finally, this manual describes some Case Studies of completed projects to serve as guiding examples. DefinitionsFor the purposes of this document, the words “local organizations” and “service providers” are synonymous. They refer to nonprofit or community-based bodies focused on community issues and development and that are invested in community improvement. The “service provider network” refers to the collaborative body, both formal and informal, that service providers in the same geographic area form, in which they pool their resources to address common neighborhood issues. “Parcels” refer to plots of land which can (but do not always) include residential or commercial structures. In short, this term describes the area of land that comes with the purchase of a house. In this manual, “parcel” is synonymous with “plot” and “space.”“Unit(s)” are a measure of habitable space. “homes” are residential structures, which can include one or more units. CPTED Theory and Supporting EvidenceCrime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles are a set of concepts which engage the built environment to discourage criminal activity and sustainably improve quality of life for communities and cities. Jane Jacobs’ The Death and Life of the American City (1961) established the foundational concept that elements of the built environment have a direct relationship with crime because they allow for more or fewer “eyes on the street.” Oscar Newman’s Defensible Space (1972) contributed to exploring the importance of physical design to crime prevention. Others have studied the idea of defensible space and territorial markings, culminating in four basic principles of CPTED:Natural Access ControlNatural SurveillanceTerritorial ReinforcementMaintenanceThese principles overlap in concept and practice, but for purposes of clarityso they are only separated in this case here for clarity. When applying CPTED, these principles often complement each other and function as one broad strategy. The word “natural” generally refers to normal and routine uses of the envvironment. In the section below, why are certain words/phrases underlined? I still don’t get it; I think I also noted this on the previous draft.Natural Access Control relates to elements of the environment which operate as barriers. On private properties they keep unauthorized people out of private or secure spaces, most simply in the form of locks or gates, but also doors, shrubs, and fences. Public spaces can be designed in shape and composition to direct foot traffic. This includes the use of “psychological” barriers like signs or textured/ marked sidewalks to make unauthorized areas seem more difficult to access and thus discourage criminals. The Singapore CPTED Guidebook notes a cautionary detail in implementing this principle: Because any strategy that fosters access control is also likely to impede movement, careful consideration should be given to access control strategies. Such strategies may limit the opportunity for crimes, but should not hinder the mobility of potential victims.Modern criminological studies of the complexities of urban and suburban environment.20Natural Access Control is closely related to Natural Surveillance, which engages with toptimizes the concept that criminals do not want to be observed committing a crime or leaving the scene of a crime. This draws directly from Jacobs’ theory of “eyes on the street” where the primary goal is to create a constant feeling that the space is within eyesight of a bystander or neighborhood resident. Designs accomplish this by altering the flow of foot traffic so that it passes by a potential crime area, or uses tools like windows or lighting. In many cases, simply removing foliage and other vegetation can remove obstructions to lines of sight. Territorial Reinforcement contributes to the success of both of the previously mentioned principles. When successful, there is clear visual and implicit knowledge of one’s territory and respect for the territory of others. Designs accomplish this by clearly marking the boundaries between public and private spaces, using fences, paving, art, or signs. Maintaining aesthetic quality and cleanliness of public areas also contributes positively to mutual respect of territory. Spaces with clear purpose and identity appear to be familiar, established parts of the neighborhood and therefore discourages perpetrators. If people are proud of the space and familiar with it, they are more likely to use it and be aware of others who frequent the area, as well.Maintenance establishes the sustainable aspect of any CPTED implementation; designs successfully include this principle when there are clear visual cues that ensure the space is used for its intended purpose. This also includes organizational support which can enforce this and maintain the quality of the space. Clear spatial definitions between public/private and residential/commercial spaces also help define purpose. Avoiding dilapidation and maintaining a well-kept space is important; the key is to retain the idea that the space is intentional and a source of pride. The design should be tailored with consciousness towards physical maintenance like trimming vegetation, replacing light bulbs, and other routine tasks. Are the light fixtures easily purchased and in stock? Are walkway materials durable in inclement weather? Will the railings rust in rain or snow? Like the other principles, intention and careful planning will ensure the space can be efficiently maintained and retain its function. Why are certain words underlined in this paragraph?Criminological studies have revealed spurred important developments evolutions to these original principles but have not been applied them translated to the common practice of urban planning. So, the four basic principles commonly in use do not capture all of the more complex parts of successfully implementing CPTED principles. Cozens, et al., build upon Newman’s study of defensible space, citing the importance of Geographical Juxtaposition (GJ) in successfully altering the built environment. This just means that there are both physical and social aspects of area surrounding a CPTED project that also play a role in whether the CPTED principles can improve crime. Geographical Juxtaposition It goes beyond the physical place itself, butand also shows how it fits into the neighborhood around it. ItGJ matters both for the properties right next door [to what?], or stores a few blocks away. Physical GJ is closely linked to Territorial Reinforcement. It is important that an individual home or public space is cleanly neatly defined from the surrounding area—the ownership of all spaces should be clearly defined. This is done using signs, fencing, and vegetation to define where private space stops and public space begins. But it is important that these divisions are not overly segregating. They just need to define space, not prevent anyone at all from entering it. In public spaces, GJ it can also divide where a green space stops and public walking areas (i.e. the sidewalk) begin. The social dynamics of the surrounding area are vital to activating the community in a positive way. Not only does a CPTED project need to be functional, it needs to be positively engaged by the residents nearby. Part of implementing a successful project includes public engagement work to make sure it is used consistently. Again, why here—and below—are some words underlined? There may be a logic to this, but I don’t know what it is. [This needs to be removed—it’s a comment of mine, I think.]It is also important to consider how surrounding commercial areas affect foot traffic. Certain establishments are linked to specific types of crime, so being aware of what these factors could be is important to structuring any space using CPTED. For example, a nearby school may correlates with crimes usually committed by youth—low-grade vandalism, disorderly conduct, perhaps underage drinking. Designing a space near a school means that you need it is important to consider how the space may enable these crimes if not designed with them in mind. It might mean additional lighting or more intensive public engagement to meet the specific anti-crime needs of that area. The Singapore CPTED Guidebook includes some Basic Design and Management Strategies which encompass the CPTED principles, and may help provide some ideas for basic strategies for local organizations that are beginning to design an implementation of these principles:2602156114536Use activity generators: recreational equipment, signs, community bulletin boards, benches or other seating.Create a sense of ownership through maintenance and management.Provide signs and information.Improve the overall design of the built environment.00Use activity generators: recreational equipment, signs, community bulletin boards, benches or other seating.Create a sense of ownership through maintenance and management.Provide signs and information.Improve the overall design of the built environment.10160222885Allow for clear sight lines.Provide adequate lighting.Minimize concealed and isolated routes.Avoid designs that could corner or trap people in any way.Reduce spaces where people or features are isolated.Promote mixed use land (residential, commercial, etc).00Allow for clear sight lines.Provide adequate lighting.Minimize concealed and isolated routes.Avoid designs that could corner or trap people in any way.Reduce spaces where people or features are isolated.Promote mixed use land (residential, commercial, etc).Crime Needs Shown to be Positively Affected by CPTED ImplementationSuburban and Urban Crime Environments, as well as Nighttime and Daytime Outdoor Crime, are shown to be positively affected by CPTED designs.Specific Crime Categories:Nonviolent Crime:Property CrimeIndex crimes: burglary, grand larceny, vehicle theftViolent/Felony Crime:Index Crimes: Murder, non-negligent manslaughter, robbery**, felony assault**Sexual AssaultFeelings of Safety:Walking, using public transportation alone, walking or driving past unknown strangers, being alone at homeBuilding a Community-Based ProcessAn Important Note: It is of paramount importance that any design, implementation, or government initiative that employs CPTED following this manual consciously accounts for equity and justice. People withof marginalized identities have been and continue to be systematically oppressed by policy in zoning, housing, infrastructure, and other areas. The only way to avoid adding to that injustice is to be respectful of those with whom designers and municipal authorities you are working. These design concepts are meant to innovate and reform—ignoring the realities of systematic injustice negates this purpose entirely.This means that the CPTED Action Team of local and municipal officials should represent, as best as possible, the identities and experiences of the neighborhood it is working with. It also means that the deliberative process of selecting parcels for CPTED implementation should draw equitabually among racial, ethnic, socioeconomic, disabled/abled, and religious demographics throughout the neighborhood, and weigh their concerns appropriatelyequitably. This process must be accessible and transparent for community members with regard to decision deadlines, cost, and intentions. Most importantly, those officials and organizers who are working to bring CPTED designs to life should be conscious that they must preserve the agency of the neighborhood’s residents. This is not “savior” work, but rather an opportunity to empower others and correct structural injustice. are not saviors—Thethis process is collaborative, deliberative, and intentionally sustainable. The evidence shows that without wholehearted community support, these designs will have negligible effect on their surroundings. In the interest of sustainable change, any new design must have utility and purpose for residents so that it can be integrated into the existing neighborhood framework. Forming the CPTED Action TeamThe community engagement in the process of completing a CPTED implementation and social activation of the space are both is vital to ensuring sustainable crime prevention. The physical space needs to fit the expectations and desires of the community and serve as an active part of social life. The space must not only exist, but it needs to be an integral component of the community.During the planning stage, the service providers in the community and the city government will collaborate to compile a list of parcels or areas within the neighborhood which are viable for CPTED implementation. This team should include:At least one member of the city Neighborhood and Business Development Department.At least one member of the city Department of Public Works and the Zoning Department, and another department related to construction and community development.Representatives from local service providers in housing, community development, minority issues, education, and religion as well as any other organizations who represent the culture of the neighborhoodAt least one representative of law enforcement, or administration from the Police Department or the District Attorney’s office.Using public ownership records, city officials can identify privately and publicly owned parcels and integrate local knowledge of neighborhood need to select a “menu” of options for community deliberation (See section below titled “Selecting Viable Parcels”).This team of city and local officials should aim to accomplish the following:Identify a short list of parcels which are viable for implementationIdentify ownership constraints for the parcel itself and neighboring propertiesConstruct a plan for funding sources and prepare to present rough estimates for public deliberation.Construct tentative plans for maintenance and management of the project, also flexible to public deliberation.It is important that community members be aware of the criteria the city-local team is using to select or eliminate parcels from consideration. This transparency should also extend to deadlines and expected dates on which the “menu” of parcel options will be announced. Communication should flow through local organizations to community leadership groups and finally to residents through physical/verbal and digital outlets.Once this logistical portion of the deliberation process is complete, the city-local team will release a list of potential parcels for deliberation in a set of community forums. They should be mediated either by community leaders, or by members of the service provider network who have developed relationships with residents and are skilled specifically in community dialogue. Depending on the size of the neighborhood, the number and frequency of forums will vary, as will the deliberation period.These forums should aim to accomplish the following:Decide the QUANTITY (if greater than one) of projects that the community and its service providers have the capacity to take on.Agree on the FOCUS of the design (crime prevention, recreation, other) and the necessary elements needed to accomplish this.Make this decision with consideration for funding sources and limitations.Construct and solidify a plan for maintenance and management.Once the community has accomplished these tasks items and has selected a parcel or parcels on which to work, forum facilitators will work with local organizations to formulate a formal outline of the plan. The service provider network will then collaborate with city officials to set concrete dates for each step of the design implementation. City officials, in addition to poutside of providing resources or funding, should also work with local organizations to make sure that the project is compliant with all relevant city building codes and relevant construction codes. The city-local team will continue to involve the community in the implementation stage by updating residents on the evolution of the project and any relevant updates via physical and digital postings. Selecting Viable Parcels and Developing a CPTED PlanIdentifying Parcel ownership and evaluating the condition of the parcel itself are crucial first steps to selecting an area of the your neighborhood in which to implement a CPTED design. Many city governments have a departments and/or website function that allows you the CPTED design team to look up the owner and status of a parcel using street name and number. Organizations like Syracuse’s Land Bank also keep records of parcels throughout the city of various conditions. Resources like these will help you the team determine where workable parcels are. This process is one of the key roles of the city officials on your CPTED Action Team. In cases where homes are seizable, you a CPTED Design requiresneed their expertise and resources to procure the parcel(s) in question. [Have I made my point?]Parcels that are VACANT: These are units/homes that are not actively inhabited by the owner or any other residents. These parcels can still be owned privately, either by an absent owner or out-of-town landlord. Procuring these parcels (if privately owned) involves contacting the owner and either purchasing the parcel or reaching a development agreement. Unclaimed vacant parcels are seizable by the city under certain circumstances, or if they meet criteria that negate their previous private ownership. riteria. Parcels that are PRIVATELY OWNED: These can be vacant or occupied. Occupied private homes, if situated near a potential project, are significant to the success and viability of that parcel. If there are privately owned parcels adjacent to the project site, it is crucial to get owner approval and support for any project you might implement near their home. See the intro section on GJ (p.8) and general community engagement information earlier in this section for explanation as to why this is so important. Privately owned, but vacant, properties require interaction with the listed owner if they are not immediately seizable. Agreements can include purchase from the listed owner, or a development agreement of some form. Parcels that are SEIZABLE: Any parcel categorized as seizable on city records or reputable housing organization listings falls under this category. If not listed as “seizable” by either of these bodies, it cannot be described as such in theyour planning process. “Seizable” means that the property in question has been vacant and/or is delinquent on taxes or utilities to the degree that it falls within the city’s jurisdiction to seize the parcel. Reference See your city’s codes and zoning laws for more information on this status. If the parcel you are interested in is deemed seizable, the city officials on theyour CPTED Action Team can work to seize it and bring the parcel under the ownership of the city. This makes it a viable and accessible location for a CPTED design. Look for parcels that fit this categorization. Syracuse Resources:Syracuse City Government Parcel Search: Greater Syracuse Land Bank: Zoning Ordinances: Syracuse Zoning Department: Evaluating Costs/Resources:The Syracuse City government, through its Department of Neighborhood and Business Development, offers a number of funding opportunities for community development. Community Development Block Grant funding is one of the primary options for CPTED and similar projects, and is sourced from federal funding and allocated to state and city governments. HUD community funding is also allocated through Syracuse city government. The Central New York Community Foundation is another source of funding for community development projects. The HOME Investment Partnerships Program also provides funding for home development and improvement.Home Headquarters, a Syracuse nonprofit, is one of the most experienced and robust lcapable loan resourcesers for home improvement and community development micro-grants and micro-leases. This is another resource that can help fund small, neighborhood-scale CPTED projects. Another funding option, which ArtPlace employed in the construction of SALTQuarters, was to collaborate with multiple organizations to spread the expenses across parties which will all benefit. In the instance of SALT, the owners agreed to lease parts of the gallery to the Near Westside Initiative in order to cover construction and maintenance costs. Neighborhood development funding is generally derived from grant funding, as described above, or state and city-allocated capital either from regional tax revenue or federal allocation. Cities struggling with economic stagnation or budget limitations have less flexibility in the realm of small-scale development. So, it is likely that grant funding is the most pragmatic and accessible means of securing capital for these designs. If municipal funding is feasible, it must be entered into the city or county budget by means of the City Council or other legislative body. Cost considerations should include not only labor and supply requirements from construction, but future maintenance as well. In some cases, the City Department of Public Works or others may be able to contribute resources in the form of labor and construction. Calculating supply costs varies based on the project (See Case Studies section) and city officials on the Action Team can assist in these projections. Including inspection costs and future maintenance needs can be estimated using city consultation or previous project costs. Observing City Zoning Laws and Other RegulationsResources for City Zoning Ordinances and general building regulations can be found under each Case Study in the following sections. Depending on the categorization of the space, different zoning regulations will apply. Residential, Commercial/Industrial, and green spaces all fall under different sections of Syracuse’s Zoning ordinances:. Syracuse Code Enforcement Department’s Basic Projects Guide here: Zoning Regulations Document: , some ordinances apply rather universally:Signage Articles: Part C, §VI City Codes: Part C, General and Special Requirements §I Articles C-I-2, C-I-4, C-I-8, C-I-10. For Landmark Preservation, see Part C §VII, Articles C-VII-3a-3c, C-VII-7, C-VII-8, C-VII-9Design OptionsThe specific composition and function of each component of a CPTED design is determined by the unique needs of the space. Design options are shaped by the particular needs of the space and materialize after those particular needs (specific crime issues, lighting needs, accessibility needs, etc). See the Case Studies section for some basic design ideas. Use the case studies below to sharpen CPTED your design ideas further. These are examples of successful projects in (1) Residential, (2) Green Space, and (3) Commercial areas. The Case Studies are the KEY functional element of this manual. They are each annotated and explained so that users can easily take the ideas present in these spaces and apply them to their own neighborhoods, without the necessity of a sophisticated understanding of CPTED. Examples of CPTED Design: Case StudiesFig 1: Residential Implementation: Cut-through on Shonnard Street Image Courtesy: Google MapsBackground: Located on the 500 block of Seymour Street, this cut-through walkway connects to Shonnard Street. The Department of Neighborhood and Business Development (NBD) completed the renovation of this area in approximately 2017. This region of the neighborhood features long east-to-west streets with no cross-streets across most of them. This means that many of these informal cut-throughs formed as people tried to save time while walking in these areas. The property on the west and east edges of the above cut-through are privately owned, so NBD needed permission from the owners in order to go forward with this project. The parcels were vacant lots, one on Shonnard and one on Seymour Street, that were owned by GSPDC, LLC. also known as the Land Bank.Primary Agency and Involved Partners: City Department of Neighborhood and Business Development, the Land Bank. Focus points: clearing the vision plane, improving visibility, improving the overall design of the area, reducing isolation and creating a sense of ownership. Relevant Syracuse City Codes: See Syracuse Code Enforcement Department’s Basic Projects Guide here: . For Residential Codes: Part B §I, Articles B-I-1 through 9. City Codes: Part C, General and Special Requirements §I Articles C-I-2, C-I-4, C-I-8, C-I-10. If the project includes a multi-unit residence, §V Articles C-V-1. See also §VI, C-I-1 through 9 for sign ordinances. Design: Concrete paving addressed aesthetic and accessibility concerns. The original walkway space was mainly grass and dirt, causing muddy and uneven surfaces. The addition of a sidewalk not only improved the appearance of the walkway, but denoted the space specifically as one for pedestrian use using a small median at either end. It allows the walkway to function in this way regardless of weather. The railing on the east and west sides of the walkway defined the pedestrian space and maintained the autonomy of private land from the public walkway. The rail structures at both ends of the walkway denote the purpose of the walkway for walkers and bikers, not for motorcycles, cars, or other larger vehicles. This preserves the dynamic of the space. Lighting through solar-powered lamps contribute to improved visibility, placed at three spots across the walkway. Not only does this alleviate some of the concerns of private owners living on the neighboring parcels, but users feel safer, as well. Perpatrators of crime are less able to approach and surprise residents, and cannot hide in shadows or poor areas of visibility. Crucially, the visibility remainsis consistent across the entire walkway. Foliage and vegetation arewere cleared to 20 feet above the ground for optimal visibility over the distance of the entire walkway. This ensures the maximum radius of the lamps, as well as a genuine line of sight across the walkway regardless of the time or weather conditions. These visibility factors couple to improve pedestrian visibility and safety. They contribute to a constructed environment that is minimally conducive to crime. Fig. 2: Park/Green Space Implementation Fig. A and B: Images Courtesy: Google MapsBackground: Located on the 300 block of South Warren and East Fayette Street, M. Lemp Park is a prime example of an innovative urban green space. This design was optimized for urban surroundings, but the principles it follows are adaptable to suburban communities. It is optimized for function and safety. The green space includes vegetation, designated functional space, and lighting design mean to optimize safety. In this case, it is also important to consider sunlight availability for vegetation in parks surrounded by tall buildings. This part of the Syracuse downtown area is approximate to Armory Square, City Hall, and many staple commercial and cultural locations throughout the city. This places M. Lemp Park in a geographic area with high levels of foot traffic and activity throughout the day and night. The park is accessible to a diverse profile of pedestrians and city residents within a wide radius of the CPTED project.Timeline: Dedicated in 2016. Primary Agency and Involved Partners: Owned by M. Lemp Jewelers as part of their ownership of 300-04 S Warren Street & E Fayette Street. Relevant Syracuse City Codes: See Syracuse Code Enforcement Department’s Basic Projects Guide here: . For Commercial and Business ordinances, see Part B §III-V for Local Business District (III), Central Business District (IV), and Commercial District (V) codes. City Codes: Part C, General and Special Requirements §I Articles C-I-2, C-I-4, C-I-8, C-I-10. See Part C §VI for Sign Ordinances. For Landmark Preservation, see Part C §VII, Articles C-VII-3a-3c, C-VII-7, C-VII-8, C-VII-9See also the Syracuse Parks Department for Permits and Information about sanctioned City parks. Contact for Parks Planning and Development: CMcClain@ , (315)-473-4330, Ext. 3024Focus Points: Urban green space, lighting and visibility, integrating vegetation into the urban landscape. Design: The trees on the western edge of this park (between the sidewalk and the street) not only help to define pedestrian space, but the height of the foliage allows for clear sight lines into the park and down the adjoining streets. The vegetation in the inner zone of the park is lower, and perhaps obstructs vision planes in some cases, but does not take away major visibility. Benches and clearly intended seating areas denote the purpose of this space: community interaction and socializing. Clear lines between the park’s paved walkways and street sidewalks create clear division between the green space and pedestrian space. This division is descriptive, not divisive, because there are no barriers between the sidewalk and the park. It simply describes function.The main safety apparatus of this park is the lighting layout. In Figure B we can see how lighting in the park is not redundant to the existing street lighting. In other words, the designers appear to have taken account of the lighting that was already there. There are tall poled lamps within the park, as well, which are ideal for vision planes because they do not obstruct visibility of the surroundings. They also provide a wider distribution of light due to their height from the ground. Fig. 3: Business/Commercial Space Implementation:Fig. a Fig. b Fig. c Images Courtesy: HYPERLINK "" SALTQuarters website, Google MapsBackground: SALTQuarters ArtPlace Gallery, located at 115 Otisco Street, is a Near Westside Initiative project that revitalized an abandoned restaurant (Fig. a) and created a commercial artistic space in the residential heart of the Near West Side (Fig. b). This project attracts artists both locally and nationally and provides a space for artistic work that reflects the vibrancy of the surrounding community. The space is designed to add positivity to the Near Westside through its function as well as its community engagement. The purpose of the space is to amplify the cultural values and history of the neighborhood, and build community cohesion through this process. It is not an explicitly CPTED-driven design, but incorporates many of the same foundational goals and purposes. Timeline: Funding received May 2012, Finished May 2013.Cost: $400,000Primary Agency and Involved Partners: Near Westside Initiative, ArtPlaceFocus Points: artistic collaboration, community cohesion, commercial diversity, neighborhood resources. Design: The frame of SALTQuarters retains the general shape of the original structure (Fig. A). The warm coloring of the central siding contrasts with the darker gray as well as surrounding buildings. This is more of a stylistic choice than functional, but could have utility in breaking up the color scheme of the street and creating clear delineations between properties (Territorial Reinforcement). Greenery on both sides of the sidewalk is well-maintained and marks clear boundaries between private and public land—SALT and the sidewalk. Wrought metal art on the western side of the building communicates the purpose and function of the building. Entrances at the northwestern and western sides of the building correspond with sidewalk openings, denoting clear paths of entry and exit. Vision planes at both of these entrances and outside all windows are clear of greenery allowing for the “eyes on the street” effect (Natural Surveillance). Glass doors as well as large windows also communicate the openness of the interior function of the space to the outside community. Organizations and ResourcesNear Westside Peacemaking Project, Center for Court InnovationWebsite: Background: “Building on a traditional Native American approach to justice, the Center’s peacemaking programs focus on healing and community restoration rather than punishment.” Built as a satellite program of the Center for Court Innovation, NWSPP provides restorative justice programming for community members who are at risk of entering the justice system, or simply unable to resolve conflicts. Peacemakers, trained community members, work to help neighbors resolve conflicts and cultivate cohesion within the neighborhood. NWSPP also employs many community development initiatives through the Take Back the Streets program which has included CPTED initiatives and other neighborhood improvement projects. Primary Services: Peacemaking Restorative Justice programming, community development and organization. Contact: Peacemaking Project: 315-266-4349601 Tully Street, Syracuse NY 13204Leah Russell, Peacemaking CoordinatorNear Westside InitiativeWebsite: : “The Near West Side Initiative (NWSI) is a community partnership involving Syracuse University, philanthropy, area residents, and civic leaders. Its goal for the disinvested area is fostering economic development, jobs, health, housing, and academic enrichment for both the university's students and those who attend the NWS's public schools. Art and culture play a key role in the priorities of the NWSI as well.”Primary Services: Real estate development, social enterprise, health partnership, cultural development. Part of the University and Community Partnerships sector. Contact: 350 W Fayette StSyracuse,?NY?13202United StatesCity Dept. of Neighborhood and Business DevelopmentWebsite: : “The Department of Neighborhood and Business Development works to preserve and enhance Syracuse neighborhoods and commercial centers by administering federal, state and local funding programs, engaging with and providing support to encourage residential development and economic growth and leveraging resources to create thriving neighborhoods, communities and business districts throughout the city of Syracuse.”Primary Services: Housing and Community Development, Property purchasing, Funding, Permit program, SURA Urban Renewal. Contact: Stephanie Pasquale, CommissionerCity Hall Commons, 6th Floor201 E. Washington St. – Syracuse, NY 13202(315) 448-8100Home HeadquartersWebsite: Background: Home HeadQuarters provides low-interest home improvement loans and grants, first mortgage financing and closing cost assistance, homeowner education and counseling, foreclosure prevention and real estate and property development throughout Central New York.Primary Services: Loan and Grant provision, home and property purchasing and financing, rental investment, micro-grants and –loans. Contact: 538 Erie Blvd. West, Syracuse NY 13204(315)-474-1939info@ EvaluationConventional practices would indicate that police crime reports and other basic metrics of criminality measure the impact of a CPTED project in the neighborhood in question. However, as demonstrated by Rigakos in the San Romanoway Community Revitalization Project (2007), as well as in other projects, perceptions of security as well as overall community integration are vital measures of how a CPTED project has improved safety and quality of life. Grohe describes how resident perceptions of defensible space contribute to perceptions of safety. In short, social and environmental factors were significant to perceptions of safety and security, and were linked to rates of criminality. Perception of the space is, in short, correlated to the success of CPTED designs in improving quality of life. In order to evaluate the impact of a CPTED design, therefore, it is important to incorporate both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data includes more conventional measures such as police crime logs and community crime rates, crime types and trends within each of these categories. It also includes participation in community programs and attendance at events approximate to the project. Cozens, et al., note this, showing that the surrounding physical and social space are vital considerations during the process of designing CPTED projects. So, we can therefore measure quantitative effects of these projects by trends in the area surrounding the project in question. This can include car accidents, pedestrian accidents, injuries, business prosperity, and other metrics. Qualitative data captures the perceptions and nuances of neighborhood needs that are often omitted in quantitative measures. TCI Syracuse’s Kitchen Table Talk reports, for example, involve candid conversations with residents of the neighborhood about their perspectives ofon the community. From these kinds of mediaums it is possible to gauge the perceived effect of a CPTED project, which Grohe, Saville, and others emphasize is a significant causal factor in the success of a CPTED project piling both genres of data during the evaluation process will require collaboration among municipal and private interests. Annual reports from local nonprofits, as well as city departments, can contribute to quantitative analysis in addition to police logs. Since local nonprofits and community organizations are best equipped to speak directly with residents, it is likely that the bulk of qualitative data will come from the neighborhood service provider network. Saville makes an important note that results in terms of reduced crime and increased perceptions of safety may not present as quickly or clearly as theorized. But, it is important not to get distracted by one negative datapoint, especially if it is in the context of many positive ones. Improving quality of life and safety is a process driven by both physical and social factors. Community cohesion is vital to ensuring the success of a CPTED project, especially across long-term intervals. AppendicesAppendix Ii. Annotated Bibliography Section I: General LiteratureSource 1: Armstrong, Anthony. “Deconstructing Segregation in Syracuse: The Fate of I-81 and the Future.”?Poverty and Race Research Action Council, Make Communities, May 2018, pdf/Syracuse_I-81_FieldReport.pdf.This report discusses the historical policy decisions at the local, state, and federal level which caused the residual concentrations of poverty and inequity with which the city of Syracuse still struggles. These realities are especially important to consider in the context of the I-81 debate, which will determine the future of the highway which divides the city physically and socially. It stands as a continuation of racially-based policy and segregation. In examining the racial discrimination and segregation that has shaped the neighborhoods of Syracuse, the authors show the significance of this decision and the potential impact it may have. Bassanese, Sandro.?Property Crime in Townhouse Developments: An Assessment of Physical Design and Crime Rates, University of Guelph (Canada), Ann Arbor, 1999. ProQuest, researchers constructed an experiment in order to study the relationship between the built environment and crime rates. Using a group of townhouse developments, the authors developed a list of design variables meant to capture the principles of the built environment that relate to crime. Each townhouse received a different magnitude of these design principles and was ranked on a scale accordingly. Results showed that townhouses with lower rankings on this scale, meaning they had fewer of the design element incorporated, had approximately six times more incidences of crime than developments with a higher prevalence of these design principles. Each set of principles had a unique strength of correlation to crime prevention, which is also discussed. Boone, Christopher G., et al. “Parks and People: An Environmental Justice Inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland.”?Annals of the Association of American Geographers, vol. 99, no. 4, 2009, pp. 767–787.?JSTOR, stable/20621242.The authors examine the distribution and access to parks through the lens of economic and environmental justice. Using census data, Boone et al. demonstrated the proximity of parks to white and black residents as measured by walking distance. Results showed that while black residents are more likely to be within walking distance of a park than white residents, white residents have access to more acreage of parks. High-need areas have access to less acreage than low-need areas. The authors argue that conceptions of equity have to consider these disparities as created directly affect opportunity and community resources in low-income, concentrated poverty neighborhoods. Dansie, Elizabeth J., and Jamison D. Fargo. "Individual and Community Predictors of Fear of Criminal Victimization: Results from a National Sample of Urban US Citizens."?Crime Prevention and Community Safety, vol. 11, no. 2, 2009, pp. 124-140. ProQuest, , doi: report examines the relationship between fear of crime and factors which inform these fears and make residents feel as though they could become victims of crime. The survey incorporated data from 12 U.S. cities, three main constructs were related to this fear; law enforcement, neighborhood environment, and neighborhood crime. The authors describe the complex dynamics among these factors, noting (among other findings) that knowledge of negative characteristics of the neighborhood decreased preventative efforts to improve the neighborhood on the behalf of residents. The results support recommendations that reformative efforts need to focus on all three of these areas in order to improve perceptions of safety. Davis, William A. II.?Concentrated Poverty in U.S. Cities: Can We Fix it? Wake Forest University, Ann Arbor, 2014. ProQuest, article explores the social, economic, and political factors which not only contribute to concentrated poverty in urban areas but perpetuate the inequity present in these neighborhoods. Why do residents of high-poverty areas continue to struggle with inadequate infrastructure, neighborhood quality, and opportunity? The author explores these factors and evaluates the governmental actions which have been taken to address the issue in the last 25 years. Generally, we see that these actions have improved life for relatively few low-income residents, and have failed to alleviate conditions in areas of concentrated poverty. Graddy, Elizabeth A., and Raphael W. Bostic. “The Role of Private Agents in Affordable Housing Policy.”?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, vol. 20, 2010, pp. i81–i99.?JSTOR, JSTOR, stable/20627910.This article focuses primarily on the role of private agents in the housing market as they relate to affordability and quality of housing. But, it also touches upon the federal government’s decision to sell its public housing developments to local agencies as well as private developers, which had definitive negative effect on the quality and maintenance. This reality connects directly to the built environment conditions of neighborhoods which include public housing and high poverty levels. The authors examine these policy issues and recommend strategies which local authorities can use to make policy which addresses this historic negligence. Grohe, Bonnie. "Measuring Residents' Perceptions of Defensible Space Compared to Incidence of Crime."?Risk Management, vol. 13, no. 1-2, 2011, pp. 43-61. ProQuest, , doi: this study, the author examines perceptions of crime and “defensible space” among residents in order to identify the factors which influence resident perceptions of safety in their neighborhoods. Their feedback, collected through personal recounts of their experiences observations, was compared to official (scholar-supported) concepts of what defines defensible and indefensible space. Results showed that environmental and social characteristics were significant to residents, supporting the idea of second-generation crime prevention through environmental design. The author also discusses policy implications. Hirschfeld, Alex. “The Multi-Faceted Nature of Crime.”?Built Environment (1978), vol. 34, no. 1, 2008, pp. 4–20.?JSTOR, stable/23289737.This article explores the relationships among crime, land use, and the social environment. The author defines and explores crime and the fear of crime, as well as how those two concepts influence each other. Analysis includes discussion of policy responses, measurement and analysis strategies. Communities that struggle with high levels of crime do so for a range of social and economic reasons, which are augmented by the perceptions and physical elements of the built environment. Land use, therefore, is a central element to understanding crime trends because it defines crime opportunities and therefore can encourage or discourage crime.Source 2: Graddy, Elizabeth A., and Raphael W. Bostic. “The Role of Private Agents in Affordable Housing Policy.”?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, vol. 20, 2010, pp. i81–i99.?JSTOR, JSTOR, stable/20627910.This article focuses primarily on the role of private agents in the housing market as they relate to affordability and quality of housing. But, it also touches upon the federal government’s decision to sell its public housing developments to local agencies as well as private developers, which had definitive negative effect on the quality and maintenance. This reality connects directly to the built environment conditions of neighborhoods which include public housing and high poverty levels. The authors examine these policy issues and recommend strategies which local authorities can use to make policy which addresses this historic negligence. Rothstein, Richard.?The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America. Liveright Publishing Corporation, a Division of W.W. Norton & Company, 2018.Rothstein explores the range of federal, state, and local practices which actively created a housing market which engineered nationwide racial segregation of neighborhoods. Black Americans were denied loans and mortgages, prohibited from living in integrated public housing, sequestered in cramped neighborhoods near industrial production, and relegated to below-standard quality housing. These mechanisms were consciously executed to preserve “harmonious” neighborhoods, and create the realities of residential segregation that we still see in cities across America. Stauffer Kuhn, Catherine E.?Movin' on Out? Toward a Better Understanding of the Residential Outcomes of Low -Income Families Living in Concentrated Poverty, Michigan State University, Ann Arbor, 2006. ProQuest, dissertation studies the relationship between the intended results of Housing Voucher programs and the actual trends of relocation among voucher recipients. While recipients were anticipated to use the benefits of the voucher to move to more affluent neighborhoods than their original place of residence, in reality they tend to stay in relatively the same neighborhoods in terms of socioeconomic status. While the vouchers are meant to improve affordability, the authors examine the reasons for this trend and evaluate the efficacy of these policies in deconcentrating poverty in urban areas. The results indicate a number of factors which prevent low-income families from leaving their original neighborhoods and incentivize them to stay. Given this reality, these finding support the argument that relocation is not the primary course of action in trying to improve conditions of poverty in historically underserved neighborhoods; rather, investment may be a more practical response. Valdez, Avelardo, Charles D. Kaplan, and Russell Curtis Jr L. "Aggressive Crime, Alcohol and Drug use, and Concentrated Poverty in 24 U.S. Urban Areas."American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, vol. 33, no. 4, 2007, pp. 595-603. ProQuest, , doi: study uses longitudinal data and statistical analyses to explain the relationships among variable indicators of poverty and crime rates in neighborhoods with a high prevalence of violent crime. Results supported the authors’ hypothesis that factors like marriage and connection to the labor force had a mediating effect on poverty conditions, reducing the risk of criminal activity. In other words, community-level conditions play a role in shaping criminality and can mitigate crime in some cases. But, where they are inadequate (no job opportunities, poor education), pathways to crime are unmitigated. These findings counter the narrative that crime is an inherent, “indigenous” part of the culture in high-poverty neighborhoods. Wilson, William Julius. “The Political and Economic Forces Shaping Concentrated Poverty.”?Political Science Quarterly, vol. 123, no. 4, 2008, pp. 555–571.?JSTOR, JSTOR, stable/25655565.Among the many political and economic factors which have contributed to concentrated poverty in urban areas, federal housing policy is one that initially produced positive results but in the second wave of policy have perpetuated racial and economic segregation. This report analyzes the policy-based events which segregated cities across the United States, opening doors to the suburbs for white families and relegating black families to underfunded public housing developments in urban areas. The author continues by discussing the economic causes and effects of these practices as they relate to economic opportunity and disparity.Source 3: Graddy, Elizabeth A., and Raphael W. Bostic. “The Role of Private Agents in Affordable Housing Policy.”?Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory: J-PART, vol. 20, 2010, pp. i81–i99.?JSTOR, JSTOR, stable/20627910.This article focuses primarily on the role of private agents in the housing market as they relate to affordability and quality of housing. But, it also touches upon the federal government’s decision to sell its public housing developments to local agencies as well as private developers, which had definitive negative effect on the quality and maintenance. This reality connects directly to the built environment conditions of neighborhoods which include public housing and high poverty levels. The authors examine these policy issues and recommend strategies which local authorities can use to make policy which addresses this historic negligence. Source 4: Rothstein, Richard.?The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America. Liveright Publishing Corporation, a Division of W.W. Norton & Company, 2018.Rothstein explores the range of federal, state, and local practices which actively created a housing market which engineered nationwide racial segregation of neighborhoods. Black Americans were denied loans and mortgages, prohibited from living in integrated public housing, sequestered in cramped neighborhoods near industrial production, and relegated to below-standard quality housing. These mechanisms were consciously executed to preserve “harmonious” neighborhoods, and create the realities of residential segregation that we still see in cities across America. Source 5: Davis, William A. II.?Concentrated Poverty in U.S. Cities: Can We Fix it? Wake Forest University, Ann Arbor, 2014. ProQuest, article explores the social, economic, and political factors which not only contribute to concentrated poverty in urban areas but perpetuate the inequity present in these neighborhoods. Why do residents of high-poverty areas continue to struggle with inadequate infrastructure, neighborhood quality, and opportunity? The author explores these factors and evaluates the governmental actions which have been taken to address the issue in the last 25 years. Generally, we see that these actions have improved life for relatively few low-income residents, and have failed to alleviate conditions in areas of concentrated poverty. Source 6:Dansie, Elizabeth J., and Jamison D. Fargo. "Individual and Community Predictors of Fear of Criminal Victimization: Results from a National Sample of Urban US Citizens."?Crime Prevention and Community Safety, vol. 11, no. 2, 2009, pp. 124-140. ProQuest, , doi: report examines the relationship between fear of crime and factors which inform these fears and make residents feel as though they could become victims of crime. The survey incorporated data from 12 U.S. cities, three main constructs were related to this fear; law enforcement, neighborhood environment, and neighborhood crime. The authors describe the complex dynamics among these factors, noting (among other findings) that knowledge of negative characteristics of the neighborhood decreased preventative efforts to improve the neighborhood on the behalf of residents. The results support recommendations that reformative efforts need to focus on all three of these areas in order to improve perceptions of safety. Source 7: Valdez, Avelardo, Charles D. Kaplan, and Russell Curtis Jr L. "Aggressive Crime, Alcohol and Drug use, and Concentrated Poverty in 24 U.S. Urban Areas."American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, vol. 33, no. 4, 2007, pp. 595-603. ProQuest, , doi: study uses longitudinal data and statistical analyses to explain the relationships among variable indicators of poverty and crime rates in neighborhoods with a high prevalence of violent crime. Results supported the authors’ hypothesis that factors like marriage and connection to the labor force had a mediating effect on poverty conditions, reducing the risk of criminal activity. In other words, community-level conditions play a role in shaping criminality and can mitigate crime in some cases. But, where they are inadequate (no job opportunities, poor education), pathways to crime are unmitigated. These findings counter the narrative that crime is an inherent, “indigenous” part of the culture in high-poverty neighborhoods. Source 8:Stauffer Kuhn, Catherine E.?Movin' on Out? Toward a Better Understanding of the Residential Outcomes of Low -Income Families Living in Concentrated Poverty, Michigan State University, Ann Arbor, 2006. ProQuest, dissertation studies the relationship between the intended results of Housing Voucher programs and the actual trends of relocation among voucher recipients. While recipients were anticipated to use the benefits of the voucher to move to more affluent neighborhoods than their original place of residence, in reality they tend to stay in relatively the same neighborhoods in terms of socioeconomic status. While the vouchers are meant to improve affordability, the authors examine the reasons for this trend and evaluate the efficacy of these policies in deconcentrating poverty in urban areas. The results indicate a number of factors which prevent low-income families from leaving their original neighborhoods and incentivize them to stay. Given this reality, these finding support the argument that relocation is not the primary course of action in trying to improve conditions of poverty in historically underserved neighborhoods; rather, investment may be a more practical response. Source 9: Grohe, Bonnie. "Measuring Residents' Perceptions of Defensible Space Compared to Incidence of Crime."?Risk Management, vol. 13, no. 1-2, 2011, pp. 43-61. ProQuest, , doi: this study, the author examines perceptions of crime and “defensible space” among residents in order to identify the factors which influence resident perceptions of safety in their neighborhoods. Their feedback, collected through personal recounts of their experiences observations, was compared to official (scholar-supported) concepts of what defines defensible and indefensible space. Results showed that environmental and social characteristics were significant to residents, supporting the idea of second-generation crime prevention through environmental design. The author also discusses policy implications. Source 10:Bassanese, Sandro.?Property Crime in Townhouse Developments: An Assessment of Physical Design and Crime Rates, University of Guelph (Canada), Ann Arbor, 1999. ProQuest, researchers constructed an experiment in order to study the relationship between the built environment and crime rates. Using a group of townhouse developments, the authors developed a list of design variables meant to capture the principles of the built environment that relate to crime. Each townhouse received a different magnitude of these design principles and was ranked on a scale accordingly. Results showed that townhouses with lower rankings on this scale, meaning they had fewer of the design element incorporated, had approximately six times more incidences of crime than developments with a higher prevalence of these design principles. Each set of principles had a unique strength of correlation to crime prevention, which is also discussed. Source 11:Hirschfeld, Alex. “The Multi-Faceted Nature of Crime.”?Built Environment (1978), vol. 34, no. 1, 2008, pp. 4–20.?JSTOR, stable/23289737.This article explores the relationships among crime, land use, and the social environment. The author defines and explores crime and the fear of crime, as well as how those two concepts influence each other. Analysis includes discussion of policy responses, measurement and analysis strategies. Communities that struggle with high levels of crime do so for a range of social and economic reasons, which are augmented by the perceptions and physical elements of the built environment. Land use, therefore, is a central element to understanding crime trends because it defines crime opportunities and therefore can encourage or discourage crime.Source 12: Boone, Christopher G., et al. “Parks and People: An Environmental Justice Inquiry in Baltimore, Maryland.”?Annals of the Association of American Geographers, vol. 99, no. 4, 2009, pp. 767–787.?JSTOR, stable/20621242.The authors examine the distribution and access to parks through the lens of economic and environmental justice. Using census data, Boone et al. demonstrated the proximity of parks to white and black residents as measured by walking distance. Results showed that while black residents are more likely to be within walking distance of a park than white residents, white residents have access to more acreage of parks. High-need areas have access to less acreage than low-need areas. The authors argue that conceptions of equity have to consider these disparities as created by historical policy-based residential segregation. These racially discriminatory practices incorporated infrastructural elements like green space and neglected black neighborhoods, providing inferior resources compared to those of white neighborhoods. These disparities directly affect opportunity and community resources in low-income, concentrated poverty neighborhoods. Section II: Specific Literature and EvidenceCissner, Amanda B. “Making Peace in Syracuse, NY: A Process Evaluation of the Near Westside Peacemaking Project.”?Center for Court Innovation, Jan. 2019, HYPERLINK "" report was composed as an overview of the Near Westside Peacemaking Project by the Center for Court Innovation. The author defines and discusses the theoretical base of Peacemaking and its indigenous principles, and outlines the services NWSPP provides in Syracuse. It also analyzes the profile and needs of the Near Westside neighborhood and evaluates the efficacy of the peacemaking practices thus far. Cozens et al. Geographical Juxtaposition: A New Direction in CPTED.?Social Sciences. 2019; 8(9):252.This study evaluates the practices and applications of CPTED with regard to its consideration of Geographical Juxtaposition. The authors conclude that further research on GJ is required in order to optimize the potential of CPTED principles, and that so far researchers in this area have not fully done so. GJ is relevant to the spatial dynamics not only immediately surrounding a CPTED project but in the larger context of the neighborhood or region. Projects should be located and designed with consciousness towards how they will change the space they inhabit, and what kinds of crime they are meant to discourage. This factors into maintenance and management of CPTED projects, a stage which is vital for sustainable positive community growth. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design Guidebook. National Crime Prevention Council, Singapore, Oct. 2003, HYPERLINK "" guidebook was curated and published by the National Crime Prevention Council in Singapore as a template for CPTED implementation throughout the country of Singapore. The guidebook includes definitions of the CPTED principles and background on their intended effects. It also describes basic implementations of each principle to provide foundational examples for users of how the theoretical aspects of CPTED translate in a practical sense. Implicit in these projects is the necessary consideration of surrounding space, and general mistakes that CPTED projects should seek to avoid. The guidebook covers some of the preliminary hurdles that these projects face, and applications of each principle that are incorrect.Hansen, Benjamin, et al. Reducing Crime through Environmental Design: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment of Street Lighting in New York City. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2019, doi:10.3386/w25798.This report summarizes a study conducted by the authors in partnership with academic and bureaucratic partners. In a randomized study of 80 public housing units in New York City, half of the sampling frame received improved lighting for a set period of months, and the control group stayed the same. Over a period of months, the treatment group reported significant decreases in violent crime and property crime compared to the control group. Complaints and reports of illicit behavior were greatly decreased. These decreases as a result of improved lighting were determined to be statistically significant, and therefore stand as powerful evidence in support of CPTED principles as effective crime prevention strategies. Katyal, Neal Kumar. “Architecture as Crime Control.” The Yale Law Journal, vol. 111, no. 5, 2002, pp. 1039–1139. JSTOR, HYPERLINK "" stable/797618.This study explores the intersection of architecture and crime prevention in order to evaluate a number of CPTED strategies. CPTED principles are supported by the author as effective methods of crime prevention. The structures of buildings contribute directly to how conducive they are to crime, so when designing residential or commercial spaces it is important to maintain a layout which allows for clear lines of sight, ample lighting, and eliminates corners or hidden entrances/exits whenever possible. Considering these principles in advance of construction saves tremendous time and resources, but CPTED principles can be a delicate balance to maintain with conventional building processes. Kraus, Neil. "Local Policymaking and Concentrated Poverty: The Case of Buffalo, New York." Cities, vol. 21, no. 6, 2004, pp. 481-490.This research develops an understanding of policymaking processes in which local governing bodies play a significant role in shaping regional and national trends of housing policymaking. The case study of Buffalo is the central example. The author demonstrates that this dynamic could be a causal factor in concentrated poverty and the inefficacy of state and federal policy to improve quality of life for Americans. This concept of policymaking emphasizes the importance of local government, and shows how engagement with local policy can have a significant impact on housing policy, among other types, for neighborhoods across the country. Landman, Karina. “Boundaries, Bars, and Barricades: Reconsidering Two Approaches to Crime Prevention in the Built Environment.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 26, no. 3, 2009, pp. 213–227. JSTOR, HYPERLINK "" stable/43030870.This study analyzes examples of CPTED implementation in South Africa in order to compare the two primary schools of thought which govern CPTED. These are integrated and segregated approaches, and both have appropriate applications in the built environment. The two are not mutually exclusive, rather they are both usually present in any CPTED landscape. A successful implementation includes both principles, because while some aspects of a space require defined boundaries and segregated space, others require open sight lines and pathways. The author evaluates the interactions and tensions between these two principles in CPTED implementation. MacDonald, John. “Community Design and Crime: The Impact of Housing and the Built Environment.”?Crime and Justice, vol. 44, no. 1, 2015, pp. 333–383.?JSTOR, stable/10.1086/681558.This article explores the correlational and causational effects of the built environment on crime rates. Changes in street figurations and improved access to public transit, among other factors, are shown in preliminary experiments to have a positive effect on crime rates. The results are not conclusive, but at this early stage in the study of this field the initial impressions are promising. Relevant factors include targeting specific areas in the neighborhood in question, and working to minimize criminal opportunity; when these factors are not optimized to reduce crime, they can have the opposite effect. The author discusses other research which shows these factors can actually increase crime when inadequately designed. McNally, Steven W. Exploring Strip Mall Crime Prevention through Environmental Design: A Qualitative Single Case Study, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2015.This dissertation analyzes the unique challenges and needs of commercial spaces when it comes to crime prevention. CPTED principles guide owners of commercial spaces towards a number of methods, which the author evaluates through aggregated data including interviews and surveillance footage. There were five main principles that were effective in deterring crime: shared surveillance, green spaces, maintenance of lighting, installation of cameras, and imposing regulations. The physical design as well as the structural capacities of the space were equally significant to crime prevention. This research shows the distinctions between the CPTED applications in residential and commercial spaces, which are crucial to successful implementation. Minnery, John R., and Bill Lim. “MEASURING CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN.”?Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 22, no. 4, 2005, pp. 330–341.?JSTOR, stable/43030751.The authors examine the principles of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design, or CPTED, so as to verify the efficacy of their foundational ideas. In a field experiment of incidental CPTED in residential areas, the authors found that CPTED design elements do have some effect on crime and victimization, particularly in areas with multiple dwellings on a single street. CPTED’s effect on perceptions of safety, however, may be limited. This study serves as an initial example that CPTED principles can be directly linked to positive safety results in residential neighborhoods. Near West Side Peacemaking Project, TCI Syracuse. “Kitchen Table Talk Report: Physical Activity Discussions with NWS Residents.” April 2019, Syracuse, NY.This report compiles notes from community discussions about physical activity among residents of the Near West Side. Most of the information relates to the kinds of activities residents like to do, and what additional resources they would need to do them on a more regular basis, which they currently lack. The most significant finding of the report, however, is that residents repeatedly said that they do not think of the parks as a resource for safety reasons. They would feel safer if these areas were better lit and had updated equipment. “good lighting and cameras” would make them feel safer and make them more likely to bring their children and families to the parks. Russell, Leah, and Anna Henderson. “Westside CPTED Report: April 2018-January 2019; Rowland Street Cut-Through Audit, Westside Walkthrough Audit and Streetlight Mapping.” Syracuse, NY.This report was prepared by NWSPP as part of NWSPP’s community development work through its Take Back the Streets initiative. This provides a current look at what the CPTED conditions are on the Westside, and where lighting needs are and are not being met. There are significant visibility issues that need to be addressed, including clearing debris from walkways, reducing blockage from foliage, improving the physical appearance of some lots and popular areas, and ensuring that new lights are installed where current lamps are broken or need repair. There were specific notations related to improving travel conditions for residents walking at night, and other visibility needs. Saville, Gregory. “SafeGrowth: Moving Forward in Neighbourhood Development.”?Built Environment (1978-), vol. 35, no. 3, 2009, pp. 386–402.?JSTOR, stable/23289760.This report was written by Gregory Saville, who worked with NWSPP in 2017 to hold a Visioning Voices community development event and share CPTED principles with local service providers. The author outlines the principles of SafeGrowth; it aims for sustainable urban renewal, which incorporates CPTED principles and community engagement practices to improve the utility of the built environment for residents. It includes a case study of a neighborhood Saville worked on and saw success in crime prevention as well as community cohesion. This report also cites Rigakos (2006), which provided important insight into measuring criminality as well as perceptions of safety among residents and how those variables are related. Schneider, Richard H. “Introduction: Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED): Themes, Theories, Practice, and Conflict.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 22, no. 4, 2005, pp. 271–283.?JSTOR, HYPERLINK "" stable/43030746.This article builds upon the previous work of Minnery and Lim on the translation Of CPTED from theory to practice. Themes covered the importance of the public sphere and its role in maintenance of CPTED principles in residential and commercial spaces. Part of this process includes cultivating community ownership of the space. The author also builds upon Minnery and Lim’s discussion of measuring CPTED and its success. The article covers these topics and more, all contributing to a better understanding of CPTED in practice—its features and requirements for success. Schneider, Richard H., and Ted Kitchen. “Putting Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design into Practice via Planning Systems: A Comparison of Experience in the US and UK.” Built Environment (1978-), vol. 39, no. 1, 2013, pp. 9–30. JSTOR, HYPERLINK "" stable/43296830.In this assessment, the authors conduct a comparative analysis of CPTED implementation strategies in the United State and in the United Kingdom. They identify a number of common trends, including the risks of securitizing boundaries through fences and cameras, as well as some fundamental differences in the structures of U.S. and U.K. neighborhoods and municipalities. The conclusions of the study contribute to broader evaluations of CPTED as a form of crime prevention, and the specific needs of American neighborhoods. Zahm, Diane. “Learning, Translating, and Implementing CPTED.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 22, no. 4, 2005, pp. 284–293. JSTOR, stable/43030747.This study discusses some of the forms which CPTED implementation can take, and the methods of public deliberation that each have benefits to engaging the surrounding neighborhood with a CPTED project. Maintenance is one of the primary foci when structuring the implementation process, because in order to execute a project it must be clear whether it is meant to be a single instance or structure a long-term program or policy. The public engagement and training methods have a range of benefits, mostly differing on the type of program and how actively participants are engaged (and for how long). Some methods are better at engaging residents than others, but those programs can be costly, and may be less practical dependent on budgeting. This article presents a clear overview of these options, and contributes to the discussion of best practices for CPTED implementation. Ziegler, Edward H. “American Cities, Urban Planning, and Place-Based Crime Prevention.” The Urban Lawyer, vol. 39, no. 4, 2007, pp. 859–875. JSTOR, HYPERLINK "" stable/23800959.This article discusses some of the theoretical and historical origins of CPTED principles, beginning with Newsome’s idea of Defensible Space (1973). The author analyzes the basic concepts and evidence supporting place-based crime prevention, first building off of a historical foundation of CPTED and its growing relevance in the world of urban planning, then moving to a list of basic applications of the principles. These applications include public deliberation and discussion, particularly in the context of city policymaking and municipal processes. Source 1: Minnery, John R., and Bill Lim. “MEASURING CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN.”?Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 22, no. 4, 2005, pp. 330–341.?JSTOR, stable/43030751.The authors examine the principles of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design, or CPTED, so as to verify the efficacy of their foundational ideas. In a field experiment of incidental CPTED in residential areas, the authors found that CPTED design elements do have some effect on crime and victimization, particularly in areas with multiple dwellings on a single street. CPTED’s effect on perceptions of safety, however, may be limited. This study serves as an initial example that CPTED principles can be directly linked to positive safety results in residential neighborhoods. Source 2:MacDonald, John. “Community Design and Crime: The Impact of Housing and the Built Environment.”?Crime and Justice, vol. 44, no. 1, 2015, pp. 333–383.?JSTOR, stable/10.1086/681558.This article explores the correlational and causational effects of the built environment on crime rates. Changes in street figurations and improved access to public transit, among other factors, are shown in preliminary experiments to have a positive effect on crime rates. The results are not conclusive, but at this early stage in the study of this field the initial impressions are promising. Relevant factors include targeting specific areas in the neighborhood in question, and working to minimize criminal opportunity; when these factors are not optimized to reduce crime, they can have the opposite effect. The author discusses other research which shows these factors can actually increase crime when inadequately designed. Source 3: Russell, Leah, and Anna Henderson. “Westside CPTED Report: April 2018-January 2019; Rowland Street Cut-Through Audit, Westside Walkthrough Audit and Streetlight Mapping.” Syracuse, NY.This report was prepared by NWSPP, my community partner, as part of NWSPP’s community development work through its Take Back the Streets initiative. Anna Henderson, another CCE student who did her placement there, worked with Leah Russell to do an updated audit of key parts of the neighborhood including the streetlights. This provides a current look at what the CPTED conditions are on the Westside, and where lighting needs are and are not being met. There are significant visibility issues that need to be addressed, including clearing debris from walkways, reducing blockage from foliage, improving the physical appearance of some lots and popular areas, and ensuring that new lights are installed where current lamps are broken or need repair. There were specific notations related to improving travel conditions for residents walking at night, and other visibility needs. Source 4:Near West Side Peacemaking Project, TCI Syracuse. “Kitchen Table Talk Report: Physical Activity Discussions with NWS Residents.” April 2019, Syracuse, NY.This report compiles notes from community discussions about physical activity among residents of the Near West Side. Most of the information relates to the kinds of activities residents like to do, and what additional resources they would need to do them on a more regular basis, which they currently lack. The most significant finding of the report, however, is that residents repeatedly said that they do not think of the parks as a resource for safety reasons. They would feel safer if these areas were better lit and had updated equipment. “good lighting and cameras” would make them feel safer and make them more likely to bring their children and families to the parks. Source 5: Saville, Gregory. “SafeGrowth: Moving Forward in Neighbourhood Development.”?Built Environment (1978-), vol. 35, no. 3, 2009, pp. 386–402.?JSTOR, stable/23289760.This report was written by Gregory Saville, who worked with NWSPP in 2017 to hold a Visioning Voices community development event and share CPTED principles with local service providers. The author outlines the principles of SafeGrowth; it aims for sustainable urban renewal, which incorporates CPTED principles and community engagement practices to improve the utility of the built environment for residents. It includes a case study of a neighborhood Saville worked on and saw success in crime prevention as well as community cohesion. This report also cites Rigakos (2006), which provided important insight into measuring criminality as well as perceptions of safety among residents and how those variables are related. Source 6: Cissner, Amanda B. “Making Peace in Syracuse, NY: A Process Evaluation of the Near Westside Peacemaking Project.”?Center for Court Innovation, Jan. 2019, HYPERLINK "" report was composed as an overview of the Near Westside Peacemaking Project by the Center for Court Innovation. The author defines and discusses the theoretical base of Peacemaking and its indigenous principles, and outlines the services NWSPP provides in Syracuse. It also analyzes the profile and needs of the Near Westside neighborhood and evaluates the efficacy of the peacemaking practices thus far. Source 7: Cozens et al. Geographical Juxtaposition: A New Direction in CPTED.?Social Sciences. 2019; 8(9):252.This study evaluates the practices and applications of CPTED with regard to its consideration of Geographical Juxtaposition. The authors conclude that further research on GJ is required in order to optimize the potential of CPTED principles, and that so far researchers in this area have not fully done so. GJ is relevant to the spatial dynamics not only immediately surrounding a CPTED project but in the larger context of the neighborhood or region. Projects should be located and designed with consciousness towards how they will change the space they inhabit, and what kinds of crime they are meant to discourage. This factors into maintenance and management of CPTED projects, a stage which is vital for sustainable positive community growth. Source 8: Crime Prevention through Environmental Design Guidebook. National Crime Prevention Council, Singapore, Oct. 2003, HYPERLINK "" guidebook was curated and published by the National Crime Prevention Council in Singapore as a template for CPTED implementation throughout the country of Singapore. The guidebook includes definitions of the CPTED principles and background on their intended effects. It also describes basic implementations of each principle to provide foundational examples for users of how the theoretical aspects of CPTED translate in a practical sense. Implicit in these projects is the necessary consideration of surrounding space, and general mistakes that CPTED projects should seek to avoid. The guidebook covers some of the preliminary hurdles that these projects face, and applications of each principle that are incorrect. Source 9: Hansen, Benjamin, et al. Reducing Crime through Environmental Design: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment of Street Lighting in New York City. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2019, doi:10.3386/w25798.This report summarizes a study conducted by the authors in partnership with academic and bureaucratic partners. In a randomized study of 80 public housing units in New York City, half of the sampling frame received improved lighting for a set period of months, and the control group stayed the same. Over a period of months, the treatment group reported significant decreases in violent crime and property crime compared to the control group. Complaints and reports of illicit behavior were greatly decreased. These decreases as a result of improved lighting were determined to be statistically significant, and therefore stand as powerful evidence in support of CPTED principles as effective crime prevention strategies. Source 10: Katyal, Neal Kumar. “Architecture as Crime Control.” The Yale Law Journal, vol. 111, no. 5, 2002, pp. 1039–1139. JSTOR, HYPERLINK "" stable/797618.This study explores the intersection of architecture and crime prevention in order to evaluate a number of CPTED strategies. CPTED principles are supported by the author as effective methods of crime prevention. The structures of buildings contribute directly to how conducive they are to crime, so when designing residential or commercial spaces it is important to maintain a layout which allows for clear lines of sight, ample lighting, and eliminates corners or hidden entrances/exits whenever possible. Considering these principles in advance of construction saves tremendous time and resources, but CPTED principles can be a delicate balance to maintain with conventional building processes. Source 11: Kraus, Neil. "Local Policymaking and Concentrated Poverty: The Case of Buffalo, New York." Cities, vol. 21, no. 6, 2004, pp. 481-490.This research develops an understanding of policymaking processes in which local governing bodies play a significant role in shaping regional and national trends of housing policymaking. The case study of Buffalo is the central example. The author demonstrates that this dynamic could be a causal factor in concentrated poverty and the inefficacy of state and federal policy to improve quality of life for Americans. This concept of policymaking emphasizes the importance of local government, and shows how engagement with local policy can have a significant impact on housing policy, among other types, for neighborhoods across the country. Source 12: Landman, Karina. “Boundaries, Bars, and Barricades: Reconsidering Two Approaches to Crime Prevention in the Built Environment.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 26, no. 3, 2009, pp. 213–227. JSTOR, HYPERLINK "" stable/43030870.This study analyzes examples of CPTED implementation in South Africa in order to compare the two primary schools of thought which govern CPTED. These are integrated and segregated approaches, and both have appropriate applications in the built environment. The two are not mutually exclusive, rather they are both usually present in any CPTED landscape. A successful implementation includes both principles, because while some aspects of a space require defined boundaries and segregated space, others require open sight lines and pathways. The author evaluates the interactions and tensions between these two principles in CPTED implementation. Source 13: McNally, Steven W. Exploring Strip Mall Crime Prevention through Environmental Design: A Qualitative Single Case Study, ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, 2015.This dissertation analyzes the unique challenges and needs of commercial spaces when it comes to crime prevention. CPTED principles guide owners of commercial spaces towards a number of methods, which the author evaluates through aggregated data including interviews and surveillance footage. There were five main principles that were effective in deterring crime: shared surveillance, green spaces, maintenance of lighting, installation of cameras, and imposing regulations. The physical design as well as the structural capacities of the space were equally significant to crime prevention. This research shows the distinctions between the CPTED applications in residential and commercial spaces, which are crucial to successful implementation. Source 14: Schneider, Richard H., and Ted Kitchen. “Putting Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design into Practice via Planning Systems: A Comparison of Experience in the US and UK.” Built Environment (1978-), vol. 39, no. 1, 2013, pp. 9–30. JSTOR, HYPERLINK "" stable/43296830.In this assessment, the authors conduct a comparative analysis of CPTED implementation strategies in the United State and in the United Kingdom. They identify a number of common trends, including the risks of securitizing boundaries through fences and cameras, as well as some fundamental differences in the structures of U.S. and U.K. neighborhoods and municipalities. The conclusions of the study contribute to broader evaluations of CPTED as a form of crime prevention, and the specific needs of American neighborhoods. Source 15: Schneider, Richard H. “Introduction: Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED): Themes, Theories, Practice, and Conflict.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 22, no. 4, 2005, pp. 271–283.?JSTOR, HYPERLINK "" stable/43030746.This article builds upon the previous work of Minnery and Lim on the translation Of CPTED from theory to practice. Themes covered the importance of the public sphere and its role in maintenance of CPTED principles in residential and commercial spaces. Part of this process includes cultivating community ownership of the space. The author also builds upon Minnery and Lim’s discussion of measuring CPTED and its success. The article covers these topics and more, all contributing to a better understanding of CPTED in practice—its features and requirements for success. Source 16: Zahm, Diane. “Learning, Translating, and Implementing CPTED.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 22, no. 4, 2005, pp. 284–293. JSTOR, stable/43030747.This study discusses some of the forms which CPTED implementation can take, and the methods of public deliberation that each have benefits to engaging the surrounding neighborhood with a CPTED project. Maintenance is one of the primary foci when structuring the implementation process, because in order to execute a project it must be clear whether it is meant to be a single instance or structure a long-term program or policy. The public engagement and training methods have a range of benefits, mostly differing on the type of program and how actively participants are engaged (and for how long). Some methods are better at engaging residents than others, but those programs can be costly, and may be less practical dependent on budgeting. This article presents a clear overview of these options, and contributes to the discussion of best practices for CPTED implementation. Source 17: Ziegler, Edward H. “American Cities, Urban Planning, and Place-Based Crime Prevention.” The Urban Lawyer, vol. 39, no. 4, 2007, pp. 859–875. JSTOR, HYPERLINK "" stable/23800959.This article discusses some of the theoretical and historical origins of CPTED principles, beginning with Newsome’s idea of Defensible Space (1973). The author analyzes the basic concepts and evidence supporting place-based crime prevention, first building off of a historical foundation of CPTED and its growing relevance in the world of urban planning, then moving to a list of basic applications of the principles. These applications include public deliberation and discussion, particularly in the context of city policymaking and municipal processes. Appendix IIii. Assessment of OrganizationOrganization: Near West Side Peacemaking ProjectMission: The organization’s primary mission is to provide an alternative to traditional justice in the form of “free, community-based conflict resolution” based on Native American traditions, rather than punishment. The ultimate goal is to achieve more meaningful conflict resolution among neighbors. Secondarily, the Take Back the Streets initiative focuses on “place-based” community building and development. Structure: NWSPP is one of two peacemaking programs run by the Center for Court Innovation; it has been in operation as a nonprofit organization since 2015. CCI applies research-based processes to develop solutions and support justice reform around the world. NWSPP is funding through a BCJI grant. Leah Russell works as one of the primary project coordinators and directors at NWSPP, as well as Sarah Reckess and Michelle Aliyeva who constitute the full-time staff. The Community Impact Team and trained Peacemakers participate on a volunteer basis. The organization reports to the main office in New York City, and prepares grant reports on a regular basis.Size: As discussed above, the staff of NWSPP includes 4-5 full-time professional staff. Some recent hires have made this number a bit fluid. There is a strong base of community members who are involved on a volunteer basis. Over a 28-month period, NWSPP took on just under 50 peacemaking cases, which is a bit below ideal capacity but indicates some room for improvement with managing logistics. NWSPP actively collects data on community events and uses a logic model to index success for these programs. CCI Syracuse Programs are allocated $650,000 annually in addition to the BCJI grant which funds NWSPP specifically. Contacts: Leah Russell, one of the program coordinators and my former supervisor, is my main contact. She and I have a stable working relationship and have agreed that NWSPP has the capacity to support me in my Action Plan. Leah works closely with the community development and TBTS initiatives, and helped to organize the CPTED event on which I worked in 2017. She is invested in the community and is happy to support me in a plan which will help the residents of her neighborhood. Leah also has contacts in city government and other service providers, which will be immensely helpful going forward. Other Contacts Outside of NWSPP: Michelle Sczpanski, a CCE graduate, works for the City Department of Neighborhood and Business Development. She worked closely with me to develop the idea for this manual, and has provided invaluable expertise on some of the community development projects that have been implemented on the NWS. She is continuing to help with the process of designing and revising this manual. Paul Driscoll, Planning Director at Home Headquarters and adjunct faculty in the Public Affairs Department, has also provided insight and helped develop this Action Plan. He is an expert on the policymaking processes by which the city government operates, and the realities of local-scale renovations in the neighborhoods throughout Syracuse. Appendix IIIiii. MAX 401 Opinion EssayInvesting in Our Neighborhoods to Reduce CrimeShonnard Street residents of the Near Westside neighborhood live next to a “cut-through”, a channel of vacant lots that allow foot traffic between streets. These “cut-throughs” are popular pathways for pedestrian traffic throughout the neighborhood, but unfortunately are also hotspots for illicit activity and resident efforts to combat it have been met with vandalism. Lights broken and damaged, litter reappearing after a cleanup. They are at their wits’ end. Residents of the Near Westside have stated in public forums that they do not feel safe in parks and sidewalks because of poor lighting. These problems only escalate at night and during times of inclement weather which also impair visibility. Participants say they would spend more time in parks and outside their homes if their environment was better constructed for safety and visibility. John MacDonald studies Community Design and Crime and, in his research on the relationship between the two, found that poor visibility in public areas like sidewalks and parks can actually encourage crime. These parts of the infrastructure are a big part of the inequality that still defines the City of Syracuse, and as we can see it is built into its physical foundations: the division of the city around I-81, sidewalks in disrepair, and of course the famous plague of potholes. But what if there was a way to change that?CPTED, or Crime Prevention through Environmental Design, is a set of design principles that optimize the built environment for crime prevention and safety. Instead of expensive city-wide initiatives, CPTED is scalable to the needs of local projects on a parcel-by-parcel basis. The only issue is that local organizations usually need to hire a consultant to implement these broad principles on a local level. I am designing a process manual that will clearly outline the process for local initiatives and eliminate that cost almost entirely. There are always particularly tricky projects that require expert advice, but many of the issues we see on the Near Westside are straightforward enough that a set of instructions could replace that need. In the case of cut-throughs, CPTED principles as described in my manual will guide local organizations through the process of identifying problematic elements of the space, and my process manual would outline the “nuts and bolts” of navigating city policy. It will provide clear examples of these implementations so that local groups can easily implement them. A study by UrbanLab Chicago tested the concept of visibility and crime in a randomized study with public housing developments in New York City. Developments with improved lighting reduced serious crimes by 36%—this includes felony crimes like murder and aggravated assault—compared to the developments whose lighting stayed the same. CPTED principles have been shown in a number of case studies to improve safety and reduce crime in neighborhoods while remaining cost effective. This process manual addresses the main issue with implementing them: that it is a specialized and complex process. With examples and suggested designs, local organizations can avoid hiring a consultant and get to work quickly to improve the infrastructure of their neighborhoods. On the Near Westside this will also include a public engagement piece, which is vital to any successful CPTED project. Neighborhood forums will identify areas that need attention, and the Near West Side Peacemaking Project’s Community Impact Team can help organize volunteers to help. CPTED only works if the changes made are sustainable and desirable to residents. For Near Westside residents, it is so important to be involved in this process. It is the quickest way to improve the streets you walk on each day. The city government can (and should) open its perspectives to more innovative design principles like CPTED which are not only effective, but remarkably cost-efficient. By engaging with this process, our city government can help CPTED principles reach neighborhoods across the city. Appendix IViv. Reflections on Developing this ProjectThe defining theme of my Action Plan has been, undoubtedly, constant evolution. I began with a broad idea: that I was interested in structural inequality and housing, and that I wanted to work with a community partner on the Near Westside. But I took a number of twists and turns to get there. My first ideas were jumbled and broad, and eventually I honed my focus to lighting and visibility as they relate to crime. Housing is an enormous and complex issue, and I quickly realized that a semester was not enough time to truly tackle such a structurally entrenched aspect of Syracuse. I began to think about housing as related not only to individual structures, but as intricately linked to the infrastructure that is the foundation of any neighborhood. A crumbling infrastructure like the one I saw on the Near Westside was an equally pressing issue, and one closely related to the housing opportunities NWS residents experienced. My research on this topic reminded me of an event we hosted at my Community Placement, which was a Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) seminar. CPTED principles are widely supported by empirical research, and are shown to reduce crime with remarkable efficacy. Why not continue to develop that?My partner was the Near Westside Peacemaking Project, the organization where I had done my Community Placement. I already knew that the city government was and still is in the process of installing new streetlamps across the entire city. This combined with my thoughts about CPTED led me to the idea of conducting an audit of the current lighting layout on the Near Westside. I wanted to evaluate these data using Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles, and make recommendations for modified or additional light in the neighborhood. The historic disinvestment and concentrated poverty manifests in inadequate infrastructure in a neighborhood which has consistently suffered from inadequate lighting and poor accessibility. But, the city departments in charge of this installation were far enough into the process that my idea was not feasible for their time frame. It also didn’t seem that my Action Plan at this point was addressing a pressing need, considering the lamps were already in the process of being replaced. In search of a new Action Plan, I had conversations with community members and service providers on the Near Westside at the NWS Peacemaking Project. Through these conversations, I realized that community organizations desperately wanted to implement CPTED principles—they just didn’t know how. Consultants for that kind of project can be way above budget, and without an expert it was difficult for local organizations to scale the broad principles of CPTED to local projects with confidence or precision. So, with the help of my community partner, we changed focus to this problem. I was focusing in the same neighborhood with the same community partner, but on an issue organically sourced from the residents and service providers themselves. My Action Plan eventually developed into its final form: A Process Manual for CPTED Implementation on a Local Scale. This manual summarizes and clarifies the theoretical bases of CPTED, providing annotated examples of other projects. This gives local organizations like the NWS Peacemaking Project the ability to mirror other, successful projects, while avoiding the costliness of a consultant that is likely not proportional to the size of a local project. The manual also explains relevant ownership, policy compliance, and funding recommendations that simplify some of the most cumbersome stages of designing and implementing a CPTED project. This will make it easier for local organizations like Peacemaking to actively improve the built environment, while remaining cost efficient and proactive against crime. The process of finding and refining an Action Plan or a research topic is never perfect. Both in my independent research and in this process, I have gone through what at times felt like countless trips back to the drawing board, and the process of refining a mediocre idea into an excellent one does not usually go smoothly. But, ultimately I developed an Action Plan that represented me and accomplished what I aimed to. Most importantly, the quality of my Action Plan is directly derivative of the work I did to pull it out of my initial, rough concepts. I would not change the experience I had, except to have conversations with my community partner and Near Westside residents sooner. Their input was crucial to shaping an idea with a conscious mind towards sustainable and deliberate change, and allowed me to create a manual that will hopefully be of genuine help, in the NWS neighborhood and potentially in others. Appendix Vv. CCE Action Plan Fall 2019 Presentation: ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download