Reducing crime in Brooklyn neighborhoods: not as hard as you think

After the shooting on Parkside last month, quite a few people on the Lefferts list expressed concerns about an uptick in crime. We've seen this all before: people demand more cops on the street, there's scattered talk about organizing a "citizen's watch," and after a couple of weeks things revert back to normal.

The problem, as I see it, is that people keep focusing on the wrong solutions. Having cops on every block isn't the answer. Nor is expecting residents to regularly patrol the streets, vigilante-style. But there are a few things the average person can do that don't require transforming into a Chuck Norris character... and that's because one of the best ways to deter crime is to create an environment inhospitable to it. Changing the environment is both more efficient and more effective than relying on individual manpower.

PERCEPTION IS REALITY

A place that feels safer is likely to BE safer. That's because people are more likely to frequent areas that feel safe, and the presence of people helps makes them safe. Thus, one way to improve places is to eliminate things that make them look scary (boarded up store-fronts, broken windows, vandalism) and to encourage a human presence.

Left: No lights on at home makes a street more foreboding and crime-friendly. Right: Residential lights contribute a sense of "eyes on the street."

LIGHTING

A well-lit street is a safer one. If you notice a street light is out, call 311 and report it. Outdoor lights in front of private homes on residential blocks also helps.

Even having lights on inside your place can make a difference on the block. Along some blocks in PLG, all lights are off in front of homes at night and window shades are drawn, conveying a sense that no one is home. If people can easily walk down your street and feel invisible, that's a ripe environment for crime.

LEAVE YOUR WINDOW SHADES OPEN

Many years ago, I lived in a rowhouse in Park Slope and one night while getting ready for bed I realized my curtains were up and that someone on the block behind us could conceivably see me naked. When I turned around to draw the curtain, my imagined paparazzi was no where in sight. There was, however, a middle-aged woman standing topless in front of her window putting her jammies on. I stopped worrying about open windows.

Let's be honest: no one wants to see you naked or watch you watch TV. On the other hand, if you live in a small building or private home, keeping your window shades open communicates to the world outside that the street is being watched. Visible windows, particularly when lit, add to that sense of "eyes on the street." They also serve as indicators that if someone screamed, someone would hear it.

Even having windows visible to empty storefronts makes a difference. The City provides financial incentives, for example, to encourage business owners to use "see through" security gates instead of the solid metal variety. Having rows of closed metal gates along a commercial strip makes a street feel as if it's in lockdown.

Left: Metal security gates can make a street feel scary at night. Right: See-through gates look better, provide a sight line into stores, and can even give the illusion that the street is being watched.

ENCOURAGE FOOT TRAFFIC AND OUTDOOR ACTIVITY

Hair salons, restaurants, and other businesses that keep people out on the streets at night inadvertently make neighborhoods safer.

When the weather is warm, a lot of people on our block sit out on their stoops.  That kind of activity also helps keep blocks lively and crime-free.

REDUCE VISIBLE VANDALISM

Report (badly done) graffiti and hold property owners accountable for fixing storefronts and other buildings. You've heard of broken windows theory, yes? It works. Places that look abandoned and unkempt are more likely to draw crime. If you know of a property owner that isn't properly maintaining a building (leaving trash on sidewalks, ignoring graffiti, etc.) report it to 311.

CONCLUSION

So those are the bullet points. Want to know more? Read Architecture as Crime Control by Neal Kumar Katyal or Jane Jacobs' classic The Death and Life of Great American Cities.

The upshot of improvements like the ones above is that they not only make places safer, they make them friendlier, cleaner, and more lively as well.

Comments

[Bob Marvin]

Thank you--this is a great post. I like your common sense approach

[Pete]

Great article.

While I hate to refer to Rudy Giuliani, another sure fire way to reduce crime is to focus strongly on casual crimes such as subway fare beating and graffiti. Those participating in these crimes statistically almost always are involved with or proceed to more serious crimes. This was one thing Giuliani did right.

I would also strongly disagree with the statement that: "Having cops on every block isn't the answer. Nor is expecting residents to regularly patrol the streets, vigilante-style."

That is most definitely part of the answer. While you sort of bias it by describing neighborhood patrols as vigilantes, police or neighborhood watch presence is a definite deterrent to crime.

[diak]

Certainly some good ideas in this post but I want to disagree with 2 points:
Window shades up at night? No thanks. (definitely not on the lower floors) To me it says "check out all the nice stuff in my house... come back another time and steal it!"
And report only "badly done" graffiti? Is vandalism now judged on an aesthetic basis? To anyone who likes "artsy" graffiti, I suggest you invite the "artists" over to paint your house.

[Jack]

And... what if people can't afford to (well, for one thing buy a home) put out lights in their area... Wait. Window shades, leaving lights on, foot traffic? Get real. The only one I agree with is graffiti, that can be dealt with cheaply. I don't have the answers, but these are for suburbanites and the middle class. How do you combat a liquor store, a pay phone, and a dead end street with broken/fake security cameras all around? If the majority of the general populous is too poor, too tired, and doesn't give a damn, how can you combat crime without a steady badge presence? Wait they're bought off.

[Charles Star]

diak: I suggest you put your Faberge eggs in the back of the house so you can keep the windows open without fear of theft. As for graffiti, report whatever you want but... yeah, aesthetics matters.

Jack: If you can afford to buy, yeah, you can afford to leave the lights on. If you can't, it probably isn't your decision to make ... but your landlord should leave the lights on. The rest of your post is a combination of defeatist resignation and a knee-jerk refusal to believe that things that worked in the past can work in the present for no other reason than the unfamiliarity of the idea.

[ceelledee]

Jack, the majority of the population of PLG is actually working class and middle class. And yes, most us are very tired and overwhelmingly concerned about crime. That goes especially for those who are the poorest ones amongst us and who tend to bear the brunt of criminal activity after all. BTW, did you attend Senator Adam's recent community meeting on crime? Did you see who came out and who told the stories of sons lost to street violence? If you did, then you should know who is most concerned about crime in our nabe. Hint: For the most part, it was not people like you and me who are here discussing it on a blog!!

I agree with Charles that these suggestions are good ones and worth a try. On our block, most of the homeowners have illuminated stoops and backyards. We also called the City in to remove graffiti which had been sprayed on our properties. Since we did that some 5 years ago, it has not returned (knock on wood!) Many of the homeowners leave their window shades open at night on the upper floors (not so much on the parlor and street levels). We also keep an eye out on our neighbor's homes, especially when they are away, accept deliveries on their behalf, etc. All these actions (and more) are what it means to not just live in a community but to actually be part of it. I am certain these collective efforts to keep the peace also help to reduce crime.

[Pete]

"As for graffiti, report whatever you want but... yeah, aesthetics matters."

I do not believe you'd be happy to wake up and find graffiti on your private property, regardless of the aesthetics.

Nice try, though.

[LC Arnett]

With respect to lighting, I'd just add the following food for thought. If you have members of your family that are coming home after dark, having a light outside over the door provides safety and security for them, not just a deterent to crime generally.

I was raised in NYC during the 70's and my parents always kept a light burning outside at night. It was my beacon, and a signal that all was well on the homefront. I never worried about my personal safety when I saw that light because I knew someone would be there to protect me if there was ever any trouble. While its not cheap to keep one or two lights burning all night, even people that are struggling to make ends meet should consider it a matter of safety and not an option.

[whynot]

How about the basics?
1. Don't display cell phones or gadgets.
2. Be generally sober and aware.

...part of why crime is happening is that there are move very attractive/naive targets in the neighborhood.

Hunters go where there is easy prey.

[carrie]

Diak and Pete,

Your metaphor regarding graffiti is off. A storefront or other building along a commercial strip is not only a privately owned building, it is part of public space.

As long as corporations are plastering 8 story billboards of naked twentysomethings (or, closer to home, sky high ads for Coors and malt liquor), I have a hard time telling street artists that they can't do anything in public space. Aesthetic judgments aren't objective, nor all that rational, but they're the best answer I can come up with.

[diak]

"A storefront or other building along a commercial strip is not only a privately owned building, it is part of public space."

I simply don't understand how this (or billboards) justifies a person taking over the public space for own his self-satisfaction, repeatedly scribbling their chosen nickname. Call it an art form if you must, but if so, it seems clearly an art form for those with nothing to say...

(Tell you what: if an artist like Banksy decides to make PLG his canvas, I'll reconsider.)

And Charles, no Faberge eggs here... I was thinking more of my computer. I'd hate to see it get stolen and miss out on the neighborhood blog!

[Pete]

"Your metaphor regarding graffiti is off. A storefront or other building along a commercial strip is not only a privately owned building, it is part of public space. As long as corporations are plastering 8 story billboards... I have a hard time telling street artists that they can't do anything in public space."

Long response!

The key difference is that the corporation received the permission of the owner of the property to put up the billboard.

This is not a discussion about the validity of street art. It's about property rights. You seem to feel that a commercial property is somehow "public" but your own residence is not part of the public space.

In other words, if someone owns a private commercial building, it's okay with you if people tag it... but it's not okay if they tag your home... because it's "not in the public space."

This sounds a little bit like NIMBY to me. As I wrote previously, I do not believe you'd be happy to wake up and find graffiti on your private property, whether it's your home or if tomorrow you opened up a t-shirt shop in the neighborhood.

I think your arguments reflect an ideal but not a practical reality. I believe that graffiti looks like vandalism to some of us and to many others reflects a number of cultural messages and communications that give the artists a sense of ownership in a city where they very often feel disenfranchised. The graffiti is not a message to me and I don’t judge it or presume to tell others how to express themselves.

That being said, I believe you idealize the graffiti artists somewhat. Some artists are respectful; some artists vandalize. Some respect other tagger’s work; some put graffiti anywhere and everywhere, including people’s homes and businesses. Ultimately, regardless of the value of the work I have to weigh the greater interest of the community and the property owners in believing that they have a right to not have their property tagged and/or painted without their permission.

This is such a big topic that it is thrilling to discuss it because it raises so many questions. But I think you have to be careful when you bring up aesthetics. Because the implication is that it’s easy to distinguish which art is aesthetically valuable and which is graffiti. But it’s impossible to do that. I would hazard a guess that much of what many would consider art might be considered completely invalid by taggers. In fact, I think to bring the graffiti into our world and try to categorize it might be dangerously ethnocentric.

Finally, I’m a bit confused. Didn't you just write an article complaining about the conditions of 205 Parkside? Including its graffiti?

I think you’re trying to say we should only clean the “bad graffiti” and leave the “art.” But I think it’s a very dangerous idea to start saying who can make those decisions. You? Me? The PLG Graffiti Evaluation Commission? You write that “I have a hard time telling street artists that they can't do anything in public space.” And I would say that I would have a hard time telling someone that their work should be cleaned up, but that other guy's work is awesome. How can I presume to tell any street artist that?

I guess, if you really want to go there, maybe you’d have to have street artists evaluate what should stay and what should go.

[Pete]

In fact, I’m starting to think that taking down any of the graffiti might be wrong. These are cultural communications from people living right amongst us they most of us cannot decipher or understand. At best, we try to subsume some of the work into our own value system by identifying some of it as “art.”

It’s not art; it’s communication. It’s just as valid as a Mayan hieroglyph.

I don’t think it can be both ways. Either we respect this communication system and learn about it – or we erase it. We can’t project our values onto it.

[carrie]

Pete,

When a property owner leases the side of his building to an advertiser, he is essentially selling something that doesn't belong to him: the eyeballs of passers by. Sure, he may own the physical surface, but that surface would be worthless if it were facing a dead alley. The public's attention is what makes it valuable.

This is part of the reason why I don't thing property owners have a right to sell billboard space wherever they see fit. I could say more but I'm getting off topic... and, frankly, I have no interest in debating graffiti aesthetics or value with you. I'm simply saying that cleaning up graffiti can be a deterrent to crime, and am expressing some ambivalence about the fact because some graffiti (though very little in our nabe) is pretty great.

[diak]

The ambivalence about graffiti is certainly interesting... I'd like to add another aspect of the topic I never hear discussed but which helped crystalize my objection with all graffiti.

In 2001, my wife and I were vacationing in Montreal. After living in NYC for 20 years, the cleanliness of Montreal could not have been more obvious to us. No litter anywhere. And, we thought, no graffiti...
One day we were wandering around on foot, and got a little lost, when we spotted a kiosk with a tourist map. But when we got to the map we found that it had been rendered almost completely useless by a graffiti vandal with a marker who had obscured the entire area we were in. My first reaction was utter surprise—such vandalism was so unlike everything else we'd seen in Montreal. Then I was frustrated; we were still lost and this map wasn't any use to us. But then my thoughts switched to the people who made the map. I'm a graphic designer myself; I've created maps and I know how much work can go into one. It was clear from the unmarked periphery of the map that the designer(s) had labored long and hard to create an elegant and informative display. And in a matter of seconds one selfish moron had obliterated all their work.

While it's rarely something we think about, every building, subway car, van, bridge overpass, lamppost, storefront, or whatever was designed by someone... be it an architect, a designer, a planner. It is the result of many hours of thought and creativity. And all those structures were built by craftsmen and laborers who presumably took pride in their work. My point is that graffiti is objectionable not only because if its quality (or lack of it) or as an affront to property rights, but also because it utterly disrespects the WORK of others.

So the next time you want defend graffiti, imagine the work that YOU produce -- it doesn't matter if it's a brief, a report, a script, or a double cheeseburger -- and then think of how you'd feel if all your efforts were thoughtlessly ruined by someone with a marker or a can of spray paint.

[babs]

The "communication" of gang members as to where to meet and what is their turf is not culture, or art, it's an invitation to crime. And much of this "indeciperable" (to you) graffiti is placed there by gangs and needs to be removed immediately to deter further gang violence.

[Pete]

"When a property owner leases the side of his building to an advertiser, he is essentially selling something that doesn't belong to him: the eyeballs of passers by."

Carrie, when you sell t-shirts you are essentially selling something that doesn't belong to you: the eyeballs of people who look at your t-shirts when people wear them.

If I want to wear your t-shirt, it's my body. And if they want to put a billboard up, it's their building.

We live in a property-based consumer society.

"I could say more but I'm getting off topic... and, frankly, I have no interest in debating graffiti aesthetics or value with you."

I can see why. In my opinion, a lot of your argument is projecting values onto others that you do not wish to adhere to personally.

I actually came to post a link to this story

http://tiny.cc/pWVbm

which encompasses some of the issues raised in this discussion. I'm sorry you don't wish to debate the issues, that's certainly your choice. But this is of course a blog and your readers will debate.