Implementing CPTED Crime Prevention Design Principleson a Community Project-Based Scale:

Syracuse, New YorkA Process Manual for Identification, Planning, and Implementation

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of theRequirements of the Renée Crown University Honors Program at

Syracuse University

Lila Nazarian

Candidate for Bachelor of Artsand Renée Crown University Honors

Political Science, Citizenship and Civic EngagementSpring 2020

Honors Thesis in Political Science, Citizenship and Civic Engagement

Thesis Advisor: _______________________ Dr. Anne E. Mosher,

Department Chair, Citizenship and Civic Engagement

Thesis Reader: _______________________ Professor Margaret S. Thompson,

Associate Professor of History and Political Science

Honors Director: _______________________ Dr. Danielle Smith, Director

1

Implementing CPTED Crime Prevention Design Principles on a Community Project-Based Scale:

Syracuse, New YorkA Process Manual for Identification, Planning, and Implementation

1

2

Lila NazarianPolitical Science and Citizenship and Civic Engagement

Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs Renée Crown Honors ProgramSyracuse University, April 2020

1 Photo courtesy of Mark Weiner, Syracuse.com.2 Photo courtesy of NWI website, https://community-wealth.org/content/near-west-side-initiative

2

Abstract:

For families and residents in neighborhoods like Syracuse’s Near Westside, crime is a persistent reality. 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 streets have contributed to one of the highest rates of concentrated poverty in the nation. These infrastructure deficits are shown to actually encourage crime as a result of low visibility and poor accessibility. Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles are an innovative way to improve infrastructure 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 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 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.

3

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.3 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

3 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.

4

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.

5

Table of ContentsAcknowledgements ………………………………………………….……………..(7)

Section I. Academic Material ………………………………………………….. (9)

1. Assessment of the Problem and Population ………………...(9)

2. Description of the Action Plan ………………..…..…..………..(13)

3. Expanding the Scope of this Manual …………………..……..(19)

Section II. Process Manual ……………………………………………….……..(22)

1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………….……(23)

2. Definitions ………………………………………………………..……………..(24)

3. The Theory of CPTED and Supporting Evidence …….…………….……(25)

4. The Kinds of Crime CPTED Can Address …..……………………........….(30)

5. Building a Community-Based Process……………………………………..(31)

a. Forming a CPTED Action Team …………...………………………..(33)

b. Selecting Viable Parcels and Developing a CPTED Plan …..….(36)

i. Parcel Ownership ……………..……..(37)ii. Syracuse Resources ..………..…......(38)iii. Funding and Cost ………...……...….(38)iv. Zoning and Other Regulations ........(49)v. Design Options ………………………(40)

6. Examples of CPTED Design: Case Studies ..…………………….……….(41)

7. Organizations involved in Syracuse, NY ………………………………….(51)

8. Evaluation Tools for the Near West Side ………………………………….(54)

9. Appendices ……………………………………………………………………..(56)

a. Appendix I: Annotated Bibliography …………………..…….…(56)b. Appendix II: Assessment of Organization ..............................(64)c. Appendix III: MAX 401 Opinion Essay ……………………......(66)d. Appendix IV: Reflections on Developing this Project………...(69)e. Appendix V: CCE Action Plan Fall 2019 Presentation……....(72)

Acknowledgements:

6

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.

7

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 Research Material

Assessment of the Problem and Population:

8

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 of these policies go beyond simple geographic divisions. Poor families,

especially families of color, were systematically prevented from investing in homes;

additionally, developers were incentivized away from multi-family minority housing.4 As

a result, the infrastructure in low-income neighborhoods, including walkways, power

lines, and lighting, is underdeveloped and insufficiently maintained. We can attribute

these conditions to the lack of investment capability 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.5

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.”6 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, such as in infrastructure, in such areas. Elements of

the built environment like vacant homes and visibility are key parts of this process;

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, 2018.5 Sackett, Chase. “Neighborhoods and Violent Crime: HUD USER.” Neighborhoods and Violent Crime | HUD USER, Office of Policy Development and Research, 2016, https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/em/summer16/highlight2.html6 See Sackett, 2018.

9

Cozens et al., MacDonald, Zahm, and others demonstrate the undeniable correlation

between increased crime rates and dysfunctional infrastructure.7

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.8 The neighborhood reports the highest number of shots fired, violent crimes, and

drug crimes in the city.9 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 affecting

the quality of life and safety of the neighborhood’s residents. Following evidence-based

principles, it is reasonable to conclude that they contribute to the problem by shaping an

infrastructure which is not designed 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 7 See Cozens et al. 2019, MacDonald 2015, and Zahm 2005 in Appendix i: Annotated Bibliography. See also Ziegler 2007, Minnery & Lim 2005, and Saville 2009 in the same section. 8 Greenlar, Michael. “Syracuse Neighborhoods: The Near Westside.” Syracuse.com, Syracuse.com, 12 Nov. 2014, https://www.syracuse.com/living/2014/11/syracuse_neighborhoods_the_near_westside.html.9 Cissner, Amanda B. “Making Peace in Syracuse, NY: A Process Evaluation of the Near Westside Peacemaking Project.” Center for Court Innovation, Jan. 2019, https://www.courtinnovation.org/publications/syracuse-peacemaking.

10

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 affected

The Near West Side Neighborhood is home to approximately 7,000 residents

with median household incomes of about $14,000. Over half of residents (54%) live

below the poverty line.10 An amalgamation of refugees, immigrants, and Syracuse

natives, the diversity of the neighborhood includes a large Puerto Rican component, 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 shots fired,

violent crime, and drug offenses. Residents report concern about violence and personal

safety, showing that the environment of the neighborhood contributes negatively to

perception of safety.11 The service provider network is well-developed, and includes

collaboration among school administrators, the Syracuse Housing Authority, the Near

10 See Cissner, 2019. 11 See Cissner, 2019.

11

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.12

In the 13th poorest city in the nation, the Near West Side stands out as a

particularly distressed neighborhood.13 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 infrastructural needs and take steps

towards a better working relationship with city government, which has been an issue in

the past.14 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 is 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 Organizations

12 See the NWSI’s website: https://community-wealth.org/content/near-west-side-initiative13 See Cissner, 2019. 14 See Cissner, 2019.

12

My 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, An Outline of the Broad Social Issues being addressed, Case Studies of Completed Projects, Public Engagement, Relevant City Codes and Policies, Cost and Funding, Management/Maintenance, as well as Important Community Figures, Organizations Who Are Working on These Issues, and Evaluation Methods and Resources.

This information can help local organizations improve their communities through

sustainable and effective crime reduction and prevention. There is significant research

that establishes empirical support for the efficacy of CPTED Theory in addressing the

structural issues at hand. Studies have worked to establish basic 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—this

manual will incorporate more than one of these to ensure it includes a representative

range of interpretations and perspectives. In addition to basic definition of the four

principles of CPTED, this part of the manual aims to explain why each principle is

13

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 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 manual could include more case studies, but these

three are able to show succinctly 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 an important example to

show and analyze so that a successful design can 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

14

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 available15 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 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 city codes. Doing

so would require the project to stop or undergo significant alterations. These regulations

relate to 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

15 Grant funding is available at the federal and state levels. Examples specific to Syracuse include the Central New York Community Foundation (https://cnycf.org/Grants#.XnObP63MzUo), HUD funding distributed by the City Department of Neighborhood and Business Development, and the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (http://www.syrgov.net/NBD_Apply_for_funding.aspx). See p.34 of this document for full funding information.

15

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

spheres, 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 community organizations

will want to see those crime statistics.

16

My community partner, The Near Westside Peacemaking Project (NWSPP), is

deeply engaged in the Near Westside neighborhood and has an established community

presence. In fact, it hosted a CPTED seminar in 2017 before I began this 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 Surge16. I discussed my Action Plan 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 indicated that a manual for CPTED implementation would be

helpful 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 City

code compliance was put into the specific context of Syracuse neighborhoods and local

organizations.

16 See Baker, Chris. “Walsh Outlines Syracuse Surge: 'Biggest Economic Growth' Plan in City History.” Syracuse, 17 Jan. 2019, www.syracuse.com/news/2019/01/walsh-outlines-syracuse-surge-the-biggest-economic-growth-plan-in-city-history.html.

17

The Case Studies section is the most practical section and therefore is the

central focus of the manual; users will 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 are also included in these

case study descriptions, so that users can gauge these factors as well.

Expanding the Scope of this Project

The intentional design of this Process Manual is adaptable to neighborhoods

18

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

19

are 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 likely 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 bodies. If the

city budget is limited, as is the case in the city of Syracuse, the government is limited in

20

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 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, the nature of CPTED is to cultivate a sustainable and positive quality of life

for all neighbors, 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.

21

Section II. CPTED Process Manual

Introduction:

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 procure 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.

22

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 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.

Definitions

For the purposes of this document, the words “local organizations” and

“service providers” are synonymous. They refer to nonprofit or community-based

23

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 Evidence

Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles are a set of

concepts which engage the built environment to discourage criminal activity and

24

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.”17 Oscar Newman’s Defensible Space (1972)

contributed to exploring the importance of physical design to crime prevention.18 Others

have studied the idea of defensible space and territorial markings, culminating in four

basic principles of CPTED19:

I. Natural Access Control

II. Natural Surveillance

III. Territorial Reinforcement

IV. Maintenance

These principles overlap in concept and practice, but for purposes of clarity they are

separated here. 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 environment.

Natural Access Control relates to elements of the environment which operate

as barriers.20 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.

17 See MacDonald, John. "Community Design and Crime: The Impact of Housing and the Built Environment." Crime and Justice, vol. 44, no. 1, 2015, pp. 333-383.18 MacDonald, 2015.19 See Zahm, Diane. “Learning, Translating, and Implementing CPTED.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 22, no. 4, 2005, pp. 284–293. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/43030747.20 “Crime Prevention through Environmental Design Guidebook.” Crime Prevention through Environmental Design Guidebook, Singapore National Crime Prevention Council, Oct. 2003, https://rems.ed.gov/docs/Mobile_docs/CPTED-Guidebook.pdf.

25

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.20

Natural Access Control is closely related to Natural Surveillance, which

engages with 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

26

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.21

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.

Criminological studies have spurred important developments to these original

principles but have not been applied them 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

21 Singapore Guidebook, 2003.

27

environment.22 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 goes beyond the physical

place itself, and also shows how it fits into the neighborhood around it. It 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 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 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.

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 correlate with crimes usually committed by youth—low-

grade vandalism, disorderly conduct, perhaps underage drinking. Designing a space

22 Cozens, et al. “Geographical Juxtaposition: A New Direction in CPTED.” MDPI, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, 3 Sept. 2019, https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/8/9/252/htm.

28

near a school means that 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:

Crime Needs Shown to be Positively Affected by CPTED

Implementation23

Suburban and Urban Crime Environments, as well as Nighttime and Daytime Outdoor

Crime, are shown to be positively affected by CPTED designs.

Specific Crime Categories:

23 Hansen, Benjamin et al. Reducing Crime through Environmental Design: Evidence from Randomized Experiment of Street Lighting in New York City. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2019, doi:10.3386/w25798; and Rigakos, G.S. 2007. The San Romanoway Community Revitalization Project: Final Report. Available Online: http://srra.ca/about-us/rigakos

Allow 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).

Use 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.

29

Nonviolent Crime:

Property Crime

Index crimes: burglary, grand larceny, vehicle theft

Violent/Felony Crime:

Index Crimes: Murder, non-negligent manslaughter, robbery**, felony assault**

Sexual Assault

Feelings of Safety:

Walking, using public transportation alone, walking or driving past unknown strangers,

being alone at home

Building a Community-Based Process

An 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 with marginalized identities have been and continue to be

systematically oppressed by policy in zoning, housing, infrastructure, and other areas.

30

The only way to avoid adding to that injustice is to be respectful of those with whom

designers and municipal authorities 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 equitably among racial, ethnic,

socioeconomic, disabled/abled, and religious demographics throughout the

neighborhood, and weigh their concerns appropriately. This process must be

accessible and transparent for community members with regard to 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. The 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.

31

Forming the CPTED Action Team

The community engagement in the process of completing a CPTED

implementation and social activation of the space 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

needs to be an integral component of the community.

32

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 neighborhood

At 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 implementation

33

Identify ownership constraints for the parcel itself and neighboring properties

Construct 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.24

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.24 SAVILLE, GREGORY. “SafeGrowth: Moving Forward in Neighbourhood Development.” Built Environment (1978-), vol. 35, no. 3, 2009, pp. 386–402. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/23289760.; Zahm, Diane. “LEARNING, TRANSLATING, AND IMPLEMENTING CPTED.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, vol. 22, no. 4, 2005, pp. 284–293. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/43030747.

34

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 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 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 Plan

Identifying Parcel ownership and evaluating the condition of the parcel itself are

crucial first steps to selecting an area of the neighborhood in which to implement a

CPTED design. Many city governments have a departments and/or website function

that allows 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 the team

determine where workable parcels are. This process is one of the key roles of the city

35

officials on your CPTED Action Team. In cases where homes are seizable, a CPTED

Design requires their expertise and resources to procure the parcel(s) in question.

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.

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.25 See the section on GJ 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.

25 See the section on GJ and general community engagement information earlier in this section for explanation as to why this is so important.

36

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 the 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 city codes and zoning laws for more information on this

status. If the parcel you are interested in is deemed seizable, the city officials on the

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: http://ipsweb.syrgov.net

Greater Syracuse Land Bank: https://public-gslb.epropertyplus.com/

Syracuse Zoning Ordinances: http://www.syrgov.net/Zoning_Ordinances.aspx

Syracuse Zoning Department: http://www.syrgov.net/Zoning.aspx

Evaluating Costs/Resources:

37

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.26 The Central New York Community Foundation is

another source of funding for community development projects.27 The HOME

Investment Partnerships Program also provides funding for home development and

improvement.28

Home Headquarters, a Syracuse nonprofit, is one of the most experienced and

robust loan resources 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.29

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

26 HUD funding distributed by the City Department of Neighborhood and Business Development 27 See Central New York Community Foundation (https://cnycf.org/Grants#.XnObP63MzUo). 28 HOME Investment Partnerships Program (http://www.syrgov.net/NBD_Apply_for_funding.aspx).29 https://www.artplaceamerica.org/funded-projects/saltquarters

38

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 Regulations

Resources 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:

http://www.syrgov.net/Do_I_Need.aspx.

Full Zoning Regulations Document: http://www.syrgov.net/Zoning_Ordinances.aspx

However, some ordinances apply rather universally:

Signage Articles: Part C, §VI

39

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-9

Design Options

The 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 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 Studies

Fig 1: Residential Implementation: Cut-through on Shonnard Street

40

Image Courtesy: Google Maps

Background: 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.

41

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:

http://www.syrgov.net/Do_I_Need.aspx.

For Residential Codes: Part B §I, Articles B-I-1 through 9.

City Codes30: 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

30 Syracuse Zoning Ordinances Rules and Regulations Resource: http://www.syrgov.net/Zoning_Ordinances.aspx

42

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 remains consistent across

the entire walkway. Foliage and vegetation are 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:

43

a.

b.

Images Courtesy: Google Maps

44

Background: 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:

http://www.syrgov.net/Do_I_Need.aspx.

For Commercial and Business ordinances, see Part B §III-V for Local Business

District (III), Central Business District (IV), and Commercial District (V) codes.

45

City Codes31: 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-9

See also the Syracuse Parks Department for Permits and Information about

sanctioned City parks. Contact for Parks Planning and Development:

CMcClain@syrgov.net , (315)-473-4330, Ext. 3024

Focus 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.

31 Syracuse Zoning Ordinances Rules and Regulations Resource: http://www.syrgov.net/Zoning_Ordinances.aspx

46

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.

47

Fig. 3: Business/Commercial Space Implementation:

Fig. a

Fig. b

48

Fig. c

Images Courtesy: SALTQuarters website, Google Maps

Background: 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).32 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 2013.33

32 https://www.artplaceamerica.org/funded-projects/saltquarters

33 https://www.artplaceamerica.org/funded-projects/saltquarters/blog/saltquarters-1

49

Cost: $400,000

Primary Agency and Involved Partners: Near Westside Initiative, ArtPlace

Focus 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 Resources

Near Westside Peacemaking Project, Center for Court Innovation

50

Website: https://www.courtinnovation.org/programs/peacemaking-program

Background: “Building on a traditional Native American approach to justice, the

Center’s peacemaking programs focus on healing and community restoration

rather than punishment.”34 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: 315-266-4349

601 Tully Street, Syracuse NY 13204

Leah Russell, Peacemaking Coordinator

Near Westside Initiative

Website: https://community-wealth.org/content/near-west-side-initiative

Background: “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.”35

34 From the NWSPP website. See the link above this quotation.35 NWI website, see above this quotation.

51

Primary Services: Real estate development, social enterprise, health partnership,

cultural development. Part of the University and Community Partnerships sector.

Contact: 350 W Fayette St

Syracuse, NY 13202

United States

City Dept. of Neighborhood and Business Development

Website: http://www.syrgov.net/neighborhood_and_business_development.aspx

Background: “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.”36

Primary Services: Housing and Community Development, Property purchasing,

Funding, Permit program, SURA Urban Renewal.

Contact: Stephanie Pasquale, Commissioner

City Hall Commons, 6th Floor

201 E. Washington St. – Syracuse, NY 13202

(315) 448-8100

Home Headquarters

Website: https://www.homehq.org

36 From NBD Department website. See above this quotation.

52

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)-474-1939

info@homehq.org

Evaluation

53

Conventional 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.37 Grohe describes how resident perceptions of

defensible space contribute to perceptions of safety.38 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

37 Cited in Saville, 2009. Rigakos, G. 2007. The San Romanoway Community Revitalization Project, Executive Report 2006. Ottowa; Carleton University Department of Law. See Appendix i. 38 See Grohe, 2011. Appendix i.

54

reports, for example, involve candid conversations with residents of the neighborhood

about their perspectives on the community.39 From these kinds of media 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 overall.40

Compiling 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.41 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 I. Annotated Bibliography Section I: General Literature

39 See Appendix i: Near West Side Peacemaking Project, TCI Syracuse. “Kitchen Table Talk Report: Physical Activity Discussions with NWS Residents.” April 2019, Syracuse, NY.40 See Appendix i: 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; Saville, Gregory. “SafeGrowth: Moving Forward in Neighbourhood Development.” Built Environment (1978-), vol. 35, no. 3, 2009, pp. 386–402. JSTOR41 See Appendix i: ProQuest; Saville, Gregory. “SafeGrowth: Moving Forward in Neighbourhood Development.” Built Environment (1978-), vol. 35, no. 3, 2009, pp. 386–402. JSTOR

55

Armstrong, Anthony. “Deconstructing Segregation in Syracuse: The Fate of I-81 and the Future.” Poverty and Race Research Action Council, Make Communities, May 2018, prrac.org/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, https://search.proquest.com/docview/304532818?accountid=14214.

The 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, www.jstor.org/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, https://search.proquest.com/docview/232178331?accountid=14214, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/cpcs.2009.3.

56

This 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, https://search.proquest.com/docview/1562524758?accountid=14214.

This 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, www.jstor.org/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, https://search.proquest.com/docview/871124564?accountid=14214, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/rm.2011.1.

In 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, www.jstor.org/stable/23289737.

57

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.

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, https://search.proquest.com/docview/305307358?accountid=14214.

This 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, https://search.proquest.com/docview/19470922?accountid=14214, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00952990701407637.

This 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

58

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, www.jstor.org/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.

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, https://www.courtinnovation.org/publications/syracuse-peacemaking.

This 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, https://rems.ed.gov/docs/Mobile_docs/CPTED-Guidebook.pdf.

This 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

59

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, www.jstor.org/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, www.jstor.org/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

60

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, www.jstor.org/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, www.jstor.org/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

61

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, www.jstor.org/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, www.jstor.org/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, www.jstor.org/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

62

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, www.jstor.org/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, www.jstor.org/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 II. Assessment of Organization

Organization: Near West Side Peacemaking Project

63

Mission: 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 punishment42. 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 201543. 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 City44, 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 logistics45. NWSPP actively

collects data on community events and uses a logic model to index success for these

42 https://www.courtinnovation.org/upstate-new-york43 The BCJI Grant was awarded in 2013, and the organization began operation after a 2-year planning and design period. Cissner, Amanda B. “Making Peace in Syracuse, NY: A Process Evaluation of the Near Westside Peacemaking Project.” Center for Court Innovation, Jan. 2019, https://www.courtinnovation.org/publications/syracuse-peacemaking44 It is not clear if there is a designated CCI person or department to which NWSPP would report, but it is likely one of the project managers or directors of criminal justice initiatives. 45 See Cissner, 2019.

64

programs. CCI Syracuse Programs are allocated $650,000 annually in addition to the

BCJI grant which funds NWSPP specifically46.

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.

46 https://www.courtinnovation.org/publications/annual-report-2018

65

Appendix III. MAX 401 Opinion Essay47

Investing in Our Neighborhoods to Reduce Crime48

Shonnard 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

47 This editorial-style paper was assigned during my CCE Senior Action Plan Seminar as a way to focus on “selling” our plan to the target community. Completed Fall 2019, Syracuse University.

48 Target Outlet: Syracuse.com, Syracuse Post Standard Intended Audience: Syracuse City Government officials, particularly those in the Innovation and Planning departments. The Department of Neighborhood and Business Development has been contributing to this project.

66

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

67

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.

68

Appendix IV. Reflections on Developing this Project

The 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

69

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,

70

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.

71

Appendix V. CCE Action Plan Fall 2019 Presentation49:

49 This public presentation was a required and culminating part of the MAX 401 Senior Action Plan Seminar. Fall 2019, Syracuse University.

72

73

74