Today crime, and the fear that accompanies it, is destroying the quality of life and the economic vitality of neighborhoods across the country. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, nearly 14 million serious crimes were reported to law enforcement agencies in 1995. This included 1.8 million violent crimes (homicide, rape, robbery and aggravated assault) and 12.1 million property crimes (burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft and arson). Sadly, less than a third of these crimes will ever be "solved." Even worse, many of these crimes might never have occurred in the first place, had appropriate steps been taken to create safe neighborhoods and communities.
This paper will examine some general principles that planners can use to guide decisions regarding land use. The principles, collectively known as Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, or CPTED (sep-ted), have been employed successfully in several communities in the United States. The experiences of three communities, Sarasota, Florida, Phoenix, Arizona, and Wood Ranch, California, are offered here to show how a well-designed CPTED program can respond to the threat of crime.
Her message set in motion a new wave of interest in the link between the environment and crime which was borne out in parallel programs of research and evaluation -- in design and planning, and in criminology.
Likely the most well-known of the designers is architect Oscar Newman, whose book, Defensible Space, gave greater definition to the concepts we know today as crime prevention through environmental design. Newman's concepts were tested in a series of demonstration programs funded by the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) in the 1970's, as was the environmental security work of landscape architect Richard Gardiner.
Government interest in the crime/environment relationship died along with federal funding at the end of that decade, but rising crime and fear brought the concept back into vogue in the late 1980s and early 90s. For example, in 1987 the Florida Legislature passed the Safe Neighborhoods Act, which provided funds for the development of local neighborhood improvement plans employing CPTED, defensible space or environmental security strategies. Toronto, Ontario, initiated its Safer Cities Programme to address concerns about the violence against women in an urban environment. Many other communities successfully instituted small-scale collaborations between designers, planners and the police in response to public concerns.
Second, it means that crimes will occur where the daily routines (of both the offender and the potential victim) -- going shopping or to work or school -- make targets available when no one is around to witness an offense. Consider, for example, the single family subdivision where everyone goes to work or school for many hours during the day, leaving homes unattended and ripe for burglary. Or the local hospital with predictable shift changes and travel to/from staff parking lots.
These facts suggest the need for some basic strategies that can be used to (a) increase the effort required to commit a crime and (b) increase the likelihood that an offender will be detected because someone is always present to see and report unusual activity. This is the approach adopted in CPTED.
CPTED differs from traditional crime and security approaches in two ways. First of all, the CPTED process examines crime risk at the planning stage and attempts to reduce or eliminate any opportunities for crime as part of the design process. Most crime prevention/security measures are employed only after crimes have been committed and a location is deemed unsafe.
Second, unlike traditional "target hardening" where locks and alarms offer security, CPTED reduces opportunities for crime by considering the proper location and design of buildings and other facilities. CPTED offers a "natural" approach to crime prevention, i.e., design elements define or assign space, allow opportunities to see and be seen, and enhance the desire for legitimate use while eliminating opportunities for crime. Three basic principles, or strategies are employed in the process: natural access control, natural surveillance, territorial reinforcement.
Natural access control uses design elements -- entrances and exits; sidewalks and paths; landscaping, lighting and signs -- to direct and control movement and to define appropriate behaviors. Though fences or other landscape barriers may result in real access control, more subtle cues, or psychological barriers, are often equally effective.
Consider for example a site where well-lit entries and paths are defined by paving and landscaping. On this site a would-be offender must use the intended walkways, thereby increasing the amount of time it takes to commit a crime and leave the scene. An offender who chooses to cut across lawns and through landscaping is likely to be noticed and possibly reported.
At the same time, a legitimate visitor who uses the entries, paths and signs finds the site easy to understand and feels comfortable moving from place to place. This sense of security often results in greater legitimate use over time -- and the higher volume of intended activity reduces opportunities for offending by increasing the number of witnesses on the site.
Because legitimate users have a role to play in safety and security, site and building design must ensure that users can see and be seen. Landscaping, lighting and windows create opportunities for natural surveillance. Tall shrubs, or thick and overgrown planting strips can become places to hide. They also reduce opportunities for regular users to view activity from one area of the site to another, or for passers-by to see what's going on from the street. Nighttime activities require adequate lighting, i.e., enough light to allow for identification (including accurate color rendition), and without very bright and very dark areas on the site (since this may create hiding places for offenders).
Decisions regarding the location of specific activities on the site or in a building can also contribute to opportunities for surveillance. "High risk" activities, such as children playing, should be located in areas where the children can be easily monitored. Reception areas should be oriented so that someone can observe people approaching and entering a building.
Overall, planners should strive for a mix of activities that assures the neighborhood or the site will potentially have observers/witnesses present 24 hours a day. This increases the likelihood that an offender will be detected.
When the third concept of CPTED, territorial reinforcement, is employed, site layout and landscaping combine to define public and private spaces. Private spaces show signs of ownership, such as artwork or lawn furniture. This serves as a warning and deters entry by an offender. At the same time, legitimate users experience a sense of arrival or welcome and know they belong.
Though many activities might be undertaken as part of a local CPTED program, planners should strive to:
Over time three major changes took place. The 2-lane "blacktop" was widened to a 4-lane divided highway -- taking a large percentage of front yards. The motels aged and became obsolete in comparison with more modern chain hotels. New land development regulations were adopted that reduced density; required greater setbacks, parking, landscaping and storm water retention; and restricted land use.
The new regulations created many non-conformities and severely restricted redevelopment. Maintenance, improvements and building activity dropped, commerce suffered and crime increased. The area became characterized by aging structures, prostitutes and drug dealers. Migrant farm workers were bused in from surrounding counties to stay in the old motels. By 1990 many considered it the worst area in town.
Public outcry from area residents caused the city to complete a study of the North Trail as a condition of the 1989 Sarasota City Plan. The results of the study were to be used to develop land use policies that would encourage revitalization of the area.
The team drew upon literature from the National Crime Prevention Institute (NCPI) and adopted a working definition of CPTED and its principles. In addition to the three strategies discussed above -- natural access control, natural surveillance and territorial reinforcement -- they added a fourth principle, maintenance. Maintenance would be essential to the continued use of a space for its intended purpose. It would serve as an additional expression of ownership, and it would assure continued visibility by controlling the growth of landscaping and repairing or replacing inoperative lighting. Field surveys indicated that lack of maintenance was an important issue in the sector.
To guide the efforts of the task team a goal and several objectives were adopted. The team's goal was to "Employ Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles to reduce crime and the perception of crime in Sarasota." The North Trail area would serve as a pilot project for implementation. Existing crime and perception of crime would be evaluated and recommendations would be made accordingly. Additional objectives included reviewing city and private development projects, reviewing and adjusting existing codes and ordinances, and providing education to decision makers and the community at large. Attractive and feasible solutions would be of prime importance.
To encourage the participation of the development community and lay the groundwork for amendments to ordinances the City Commission adopted a resolution instituting the concept and principles of CPTED as defined by the task team.
The Sarasota City Plan, the comprehensive plan required by the Florida Growth Management Act (Chapter 163 F.S.) was amended to create an Impact Management Area (IMA). The IMA included the majority of parcels fronting North Tamiami Trail. The amendment proposed a new district, allowing a mixture of uses with the inclusion of CPTED principles.
Planning staff identified three major constraints to expansion, redevelopment and renovation:
During the study process, business owners and merchants formed "The North Trail Merchants Association" with the intention of promoting business on the Trail. Members of the association joined in all the public processes. A representative from the association sat as a board member of Gateway 2000.
Planning staff held a series of eight public workshops. The first three dealt with neighborhood, business and institutional concerns. These were followed by three meetings on transportation, urban design, and future land uses. The last two meetings were used for developing a consensus on a plan of action. The major concerns identified by the public were crime (particularly prostitution), urban design (it was ugly), future land uses (more goods and services) and code enforcement (lack of maintenance). The character and history of the area, cultural and educational facilities, established neighborhoods and trees were listed as assets. The desired future was to improve the area, not change it.
The urban design workshop was by far the most popular. It began with a staff presentation on CPTED, followed by the results of the USF Urban Design Study. The combination visually demonstrated design possibilities that responded to citizen desires for a safe and attractive gateway. The architectural students promoted traditional neighborhood concepts such as reduced setbacks and mixed use. Their recommendations provided a basis for eliminating restrictive setbacks and thus non-conformities, as well as allowing a mixture of uses rather than the existing segregation of uses.
Four interrelated responses were initiated by the Police Department: (1) high visibility patrol to disrupt loitering and prostitution, (2) undercover officers targeting violations by both prostitutes and Johns, (3) undercover and reverse sting operations for street level crack cocaine violations, and (4) a hotel/motel interdiction program where police officers partnered with owners to profile, identify and apprehend offenders.
According to the 1989 crime analysis the North Trail area incurred 85 percent of city wide prostitution calls, but only 25 percent of all calls for service. Given that the area is 18 percent of land area and 19 percent of the city's population, along with several major facilities, 2200 students and an average daily count of 34,000 cars a day, the numbers were surprisingly low.
The presence, response and full participation of the police department in the planning process dramatically increased the public's confidence and this relationship with the community assisted planning staff during the lengthy process of amending the comprehensive code and adopting new land development regulations.
The following provisions were included within the normal requirements:
One original objective of the task team was to provide attractive and feasible recommendations. As this is often a matter of opinion or judgment and must be weighed against factors the reviewer may not fully understand, it rests with the Planning Board and City Commission to make the final determination of whether public safety concerns have been adequately addressed.
The following is an excerpt from City of Sarasota Ordinance 92-3562:
Sec. 8-323. Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) review requirements.Ordinance 92-3562, creating the North Trail District, may be obtained from the City of Sarasota Planning & Development Department. The City is currently reformatting the entire Zoning Code. Major changes are not anticipated for this district.A CPTED review for conditional rezoning petitions, special exception petitions, and development plans is required. The CPTED development plan review must be completed and signed by one Law Enforcement and one designated CPTED trained Planner or Building Official assigned to the petition prior to the petition being scheduled before the Planning Board. The development plan presented to the Planning Board and City Commission by the petitioner shall respond to all concerns noted by the CPTED reviewers.
It is the intent of the guidelines listed below to assist in the creation and maintenance of a built environment that decreases the opportunity for crime and increases the perception of safety. The CPTED review performed by the individuals listed above shall encompass but not be limited to the following principles:
- Provision for natural surveillance:
- The placement and design of physical features to maximize visibility. This will include building orientation, windows, entrances and exits, parking lots, walkways, guard gates, landscape trees and shrubs, fences or walls, signage and any other physical obstructions.
- The placement of persons and/or activities to maximize surveillance possibilities.
- Lighting that provides for nighttime illumination of parking lots, walkways, entrances and exits.
- Provision for natural access control:
- The use of sidewalks, pavement, lighting and landscaping to clearly guide the public to and from entrances and exits.
- The use of fences, walls or landscaping to prevent and or discourage public access to or from dark and/or unmonitored areas.
- Provision of territorial reinforcement:
- The use of pavement treatments, landscaping, art, signage, screening and fences to define and outline ownership of property.
- Maintenance:
- The use of low-maintenance land-landscaping and lighting treatment to facilitate the CPTED principles of natural surveillance, natural access control and territorial reinforcement.
|
Table 1 North Trail Crime Comparison Chart: 1990 to 1996 |
||||||
|
|
CFS (1) 1990 |
CFS 1996 |
% Change 90-96 |
Part I (2) 1990 |
Part I 1996 |
% Change 90-96 |
|
Citywide |
72,601 |
82,230 |
13.26 |
9,228 |
8,426 |
-8.69 |
|
NT Sector |
14,557 |
15,420 |
5.93 |
2,182 |
1,537 |
-29.56 |
|
NT Corridor |
8,843 |
8,853 |
.11 |
1,395 |
827 |
-40.72 |
|
(1) CFS, or "calls for service" includes all requests to the Police Department. (2) Part I crimes include murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft and arson. |
||||||
Members of Gateway 2000 and the North Trail Merchants Association are rightfully proud of the improvements. They continue to participate in government actions and promote private investment.
Sarasota's success can be attributed to several factors -- active citizen involvement, a responsive planning process, education and awareness. The program shows how planners, law enforcement officers and architects can work together to solve the complex problems of an aging urban area.
For the Encanto and the Central City VPCs, the issue was crime. A city planning department report, Urban Infill Strategies, Phase I: Opportunities, Barriers, Process, identified crime as the number one barrier to infill development. The VPCs believed the problem was the perception of crime, not actual criminal activity, and so they decided they needed to improve the image of their respective Villages. The VPCs recommended developing a marketing campaign to promote the Villages; improving neighborhood networking; building jurisdictional partnerships; identifying potential funding sources; and strategic planning for this purpose.
Other central area VPCs expressed similar concerns, so the City of Phoenix Planning Department created a program to help the VPCs address their community safety and crime prevention issues. Safe Communities uses strategic planning and inter-departmental coordination to reinvigorate the central city and improve community safety. The effort has six major components:
Village Outreach and Collaboration to identify safety concerns, review and evaluate available resources, and learn crime prevention and safety strategies.
Public Awareness and Community Education serve as a common thread linking all elements of the Safe Communities program.
Inter-Departmental and Inter-Agency Coordination is fundamental to the public safety planning effort and assures that necessary resources are provided to Villages and their neighborhoods.
Standards Assessment and Modifications, i.e., incorporating CPTED principles into design standards, zoning regulations and General Plan provisions, is necessary to complement the comprehensive nature of the Safe Communities Program.
The Safe Communities Guidebook of crime prevention tools, design guidelines, case studies, contacts, funding sources, etc., specific to Phoenix, and critical for addressing neighborhood crime and safety issues.
A Safe Communities Symposium brings together members of the community, City departments, professional experts and public officials so they may understand the safety issues facing the Villages and their neighborhoods and develop solutions to solve these problems.
Currently, emphasis is being placed on Village outreach, public awareness, and inter-departmental coordination -- the foundation for the Safe Communities program. Efforts are also gaining momentum in the City's Planning Department and Development Services Department to identify opportunities to include CPTED principles into land use plans, zoning provisions and the design review process. It is anticipated that once the Safe Communities program, including the CPTED principles, gains additional exposure and acceptance, the City's Villages and neighborhoods will have a comprehensive package of tools with which to address their crime and safety problems.
A popular model for suburban development is the "gated" community, a single family residential subdivision surrounded by a fence or wall, and fronted by a gate (possibly with a guard) to prevent access by nonresidents. Though in great demand and therefore gladly provided by developers, the security value of the gate and the guard may be insignificant. Even worse, gated communities are the source of great consternation on the part of planners, human rights advocates, emergency services providers and others who question the need to maintain such strict control over the neighborhood environment. The question, then, is not whether to gate but how to establish control without the wall and the gate.
The site is divided into four compact Villages (population 12,000), each with its own design and landscaping theme, and each surrounded by open space. A 17-acre commercial facility at the community center satisfies most resident shopping needs. Wood Ranch's road network provides good regional connections while minimizing the need for local streets through clustering and grouping of developments. While much of the open space remains natural, uses such as neighborhood parks, biking, hiking and equestrian trails, a golf course, and an equestrian center provide linkages and activity centers for the community.
The Development Design Committee for Wood Ranch, which included police and fire personnel as well as other City departments, met regularly to review and critique the development plans. According to Randy Jackson, ASLA, Principal and Director of Design Services for The Planning Center,
One of the significant concerns at the outset of the Wood Ranch project was the potential impacts on the provision of services and the quality of life, especially public safety. The Wood Ranch master-planned community represented a 25% increase in the size and service demands of the City of Simi Valley. We responded to this area of concern by investing up-front energy in hands-on involvement of the public and City departments, including police and fire, in the planning and design of the new community. Additionally, funding for infrastructure and services was secured prior to need to ensure the successful integration of Wood Ranch into the existing community fabric. Now, fifteen years into the development plan, and nearing 70% completion, Wood Ranch serves as a model for collaboration and public safety planning involving master-planned communities.
In fact, Wood Ranch won an award for Sensible Growth from the National Association of Homebuilders for this project. Following are descriptions of key elements of Wood Ranch which have contributed to its safe place design.
Design elements such as paving patterns, landscaped medians and narrowed street widths establish a clear hierarchy of roads exists and define territory. Paving materials change at key locations to slow traffic speeds and define the transition to a new area. Well-design entry points give travellers a sense of arrival into an orderly and well-maintained environment.
Considerable thought also was given to minimizing the potential for graffiti/vandalism. Deep-cut split-face blocks were used in walls or pillars to minimize flat surface area and accommodate sand blasting while enhancing aesthetics. The community, in conjunction with the City, has an active abatement program and promptly removes any graffiti.
Public seating is provided at key locations to facilitate surveillance and overall safety -- at intersections and school bus stops, in parks, and along the recreation trail. The seating is within clear view of all adjacent streets, and provides natural access control, activity support, and territoriality in addition to natural surveillance.
Streets define the edges of all major open space areas in Wood Ranch. Many of the open space areas have extreme fire hazard properties, i.e., vegetation and steep slopes that require careful maintenance and management. The location of roadways adjacent to the open space areas facilitates police and fire access and surveillance.
Landscaping throughout Wood Ranch focuses on providing a strong visual corridor, with high tree canopies and low ground cover to allow for natural surveillance. The landscape maintenance program for the community conveys a sense of ownership, which enhances the community's sense of territoriality.
Several elements are critical to a program's success. First, the problem identification and problem solving process requires active citizen participation as well as the participation of local design professionals. Citizens offer an important perspective on local problems, issues and needs, and will ultimately be called upon to implement and maintain some aspects of the program. Design professionals can be helpful in identifying appropriate (and cost-effective) solutions; their participation during the planning phases ensures they will consider CPTED in future design projects and this will facilitate the CPTED review process.
Second, the most successful programs are those that have the support of the city council/commission and city manager. Without this, professional staff will also not have the time or resources to devote to in-depth study, nor will they be successful in modifying local codes and ordinances to reflect the CPTED goals.
Third, the program must include a collaboration by those departments and agencies actively involved in land use and community development activities -- planning, code enforcement, public works, law enforcement, housing, and others -- because each brings a unique perspective and potential resources to the table.
Crowe, T.D., Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. Butterworth-Heinemann, Stoneham, MA, 1991.
Newman, O. Defensible Space. Macmillan, New York, 1972.
Brantingham, P.J. and P.L. (Eds.), Environmental Criminology. Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, 1981.
Taylor, R.B. and Harrell, A.V., "Physical Environment and Crime: A Final Summary Report Presented to the National Institute of Justice". U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, May 1996.
Eck, J., "A Police Guide to Surveying Citizens and Their Environment" (Bureau of Justice Assistance monograph). U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, October 1993.
Wekerle, G. and Whitzman, C., Safe Cities: Guidelines for Planning, Design and Management. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1995.
Diane Zahm, Ph.D., AICP, Virginia Tech College of Architecture and Urban Studies
Sherry Carter, AICP, Carter & Carter Associates
Al Zelinka, AICP, The Planning Center