Primary Schools in Manhattan:
A study of the relationship between School Quality and Race
Kirthana Sudhkakar. Geographic Information Systems. MSUP. Fall 2018
METHODOLOGY
“The racial and other socio-economic consequences of ‘physical decisions’ such as location of schools and housing projects have been immense, but city planners, while acknowledging the existence of such consequences, have not sought trained themselves to understand socio-economic problems, their causes or solutions.”
PHASE ONE
OBTAIN DATA SETS AND CLEAN DATA
FILTER OUT ALL DATA FOR MANHATTAN BOROUGH
CALCULATION OF SCHOOL SCORES
DOWLOAD DEMOGRAPHIC DATA BY CENSUS TRACT
DASYMETRIC ESTIMATION AGGREGATE TO SCHOOL ZONES
Data Sources NYC OPEN DATA: AMERICAN FACT FINDER: School point locations Family median income School zones Population aged 5 to 9 census tracts school survey data Subway and library locations
PHASE TWO
DETERMINING SCHOOL QUALITY 1. Teacher’s Experience 2. Student Attendance 3. Academic Expectation 4. Class Size 5. Student Engagement 6. Communication 7. Suspensions 8. Racial Diversity
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS 1. Distance from libraries 2, Distance from subways Stations 3. Distance from Parks 4. Distance from incidences of Crime 5. Family median income 6. Population bw the ages of 5 to 9
Primary School Locations, Manhattan
PHASE THREE
CREATION OF A SCORED RASTER DECISION MAP The map is scored from low scores which indicate: high population densities of racial minorities, Low Quality schools, Unfavourable environmental conditions To high scores indicating the opposite.
STUDY OF AREAS WITH LOW & HIGH SCORES This step of the process confirmed that there exists a relationship between high quality primary schools, favourable environmental conditions and high population densities of White population.
MANHATTAN
RACIAL DISTRIBUTION Population density of: 1. Black population 2, Asian population 3. Hispanic and Latino population 4. White population (Scored inversely as the majority group)
Legend
Research Question This study aims to determine the relationship between the quality of Primary schools & provision of neighbourhood amenities in Manhattan; and the racial distribution, within school zones.
Primary Schools SchoolZones 0
0.45
0.9
1.8 Miles
LIMITATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS While determining a geographical map unit for the analysis, it became necessary to aggregate data from the level of the Census tract to the School Zone level. This process is represented diagrammatically in the figure alongside. Within the study, the data used to create the “ENVIRONMENTAL” map required us to aggregate data. This was because data containing information regarding: Populations between the ages of 5 to 9 years; and Median Family Income was available at the census tract level. This data was downloaded from the American fact finder website, at the census tract level. The method of dasymetric estimation was used in order to aggregate it to the level of the Primary School zone.
School Zones
In the process we faced the challenge of addressing the Modifiable Areal unit Problem, which leads to statistical estimation which aggregating data.
Census tracts
0
0.5
1
2 Miles
QUALITY OF PRIMARY SCHOOLS
Teacher’s level of Experience
Student Attendance
Class size
Student Engagement
Academic Expectation
Communication
Racial Diversity
A raster decision map to determine the quality of Primary Schools was created by combining raster decision maps based on the following data-sets: A. School Zones Scored by: 1. Teacher’s Experience 2. Student Attendance 3. Academic Expectation 4. Class Size 5. Student Engagement 6. Communication 7. Suspensions 8. Racial Diversity
Suspensions
These datasets were selected based on the method of ranking created by Mayor DeBlasio’s revised factors to determine the quality of schools.
1
LOW QUALITY
2 3 4 5
HIGH QUALITY
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS A raster decision map to determine the quality of the school zone was created by combining raster decision maps based on the following data-sets: A. Kernel density maps: 1. Distance from libraries 2, Distance from subways Stations 3. Distance from Parks 4. Distance from incidences of Crime B. Maps scored by School zone: 5. Family median income 6. Population between the ages of 5 to 9 Family Median Income by Census tract
Population density between ages 5 and 9
Distance from libraries. (Search Radius= 1/2 mile)
Distance from Subway Stations (Search Radius= 1/4 mile)
Distance from incidents of Crime Distance from Parks (Search Radius= 1/4 mile)
1 2
UNFAVOURABLE ENVIRONMENT
3 4
FAVOURABLE 5 ENVIRONMENT
0
0.5
1
2 Miles
low scoring School zones have high population densities of racial minority groups. As well as fewer amenities.
CLUSTERING OF HIGH AND LOW QUALITY SCHOOLS: LOOKING AT NEIGHBOURHOOD CONDITIONS Racial distribution within the study area indicates that low scoring School zones have high population densities of racial minority groups.
0
0.125
0.25
Racial Density map: Areas with a score of 1: Indicate high population densities of racial minorities Areas with a score of 5: Indicate high population densities of racial majority group.
A final scored map displays the relationship between school quality, environmental factors and Racial distribution
0.5 Miles
Legend Primary Schools Libraries Subway Entrances After School Programmes Parks
These datasets were selected based on the method of ranking created by Mayor DeBlasio’s revised factors to determine the quality of schools.
0
1 Miles
low scoring neighbourhoods have high population densities of racial majority groups.
1 2 3 4
high scoring School zones have high population densities of racial majority groups. and access to more amenities.
5
Low Quality Schools, Unfavourable Environment High concentrations of Racial minorities High Quality Schools, Favourable Environment, High Concentrations of Racial Majority groups
2009 – 2020 ANNUAL DEVELOPMENT REPORT The Office of the Bronx Borough President Ruben Diaz Jr.
Source: Daniel Donovan
2020 DEVELOPMENT HIGHLIGHTS TOTAL INVESTMENT:
$ 3,811,783,953
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: 79,317,256 sft.
ADDRESSES ISSUED:
430
SQUARE FOOTAGE BY LAND USE:
Investment by Land Use:
Residential:
6,085,668 sft.
Mixed-Use:
2,722,878 sft.
Commercial:
60,146,502
Institutional:
10,362,208
Residential:
$2,141,487,879
Mixed-Use:
$1,396,753.600
Commercial:
$86,164,050
Unsubsidized:
5,301 units
Institutional:
$187,250,424
Subsidized:
2,987 units
Residential Units:
2009 – 2020 DEVELOPMENT HIGHLIGHTS TOTAL INVESTMENT:
$ 26,457,516,824
ANNUAL AVERAGE:
$ 2,204,000,000
INVESTMENT BY LAND USE: • Residential:
ANNUAL AVERAGE:
10,485,154 sft.
SQUARE FOOTAGE BY LAND USE: Residential: 82,509,742
• Commercial:
66%
Commercial: 27,309,687 21%
• Institutional: RESIDENTIAL UNITS:
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE: 125,821,850
63,583 units
• Unsubsidized:
33,463 or 53%
• Subsidized:
30,120 or 47%
Institutional: 16,002,420 13%
* Using estimated figures for years 2009-2012 as square footage was not separated by land use for those years
2009 – 2020 DEVELOPMENT IN THE BRONX
2009 – 2020 TOTAL SQUARE FEET 2009 - 2020 Total Square Feet 1,80,00,000 1,60,00,000
3%
9%
1,40,00,000 17%
23%
13% 6%
1,20,00,000 16%
1,00,00,000
10%
80,00,000
16%
60,00,000
22%
40,00,000 20,00,000 -
62%
16% 16%
22%
17%
14%
62% 52%
62%
78%
30%
26%
62%
33%
22%
22% 16% 22%
21%
21%
76%
74% 66%
51%
74%
49%
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Institutio nal
14,06,126
6,44,353
12,61,434
14,57,385
13,60,600
18,78,206
10,30,386
23,44,813
15,35,124
18,54,640
7,23,736
5,05,617
Comme rcial
19,40,199
8,89,090
17,40,551
20,10,926
15,80,600
27,00,796
13,74,211
46,29,879
20,38,148
19,63,970
26,35,158
38,06,159
Reside ntial
54,60,290
25,02,162
48,98,422
56,59,339
32,00,800
43,18,697
76,61,863
72,29,561
1,26,90,682
75,20,280
93,66,244
1,20,01,402
2009 – 2020 INVESTMENT BY COMMUNITY DISTRICT $7,00,00,00,000 $6,00,00,00,000 $5,00,00,00,000 $4,00,00,00,000 $3,00,00,00,000 $2,00,00,00,000 $1,00,00,00,000 $-
CD 1
CD 2
CD 3
CD 4
CD 5
CD 6
CD 7
CD 8
CD 9
CD 10
CD 11
CD 12
2020
$1,43,00,96,5
$33,52,31,612
$9,47,13,614.
$37,81,65,381
$16,65,15,250
$21,26,11,780
$21,18,40,113
$9,28,62,100.
$55,52,58,323
$5,70,59,000.
$5,71,94,345.
$22,02,35,897
2009 - 2019
$5,02,14,27,7
$96,11,67,318
$2,18,21,62,5
$2,13,08,17,6
$1,32,98,24,9
$2,40,37,62,7
$2,60,52,41,5
$1,08,78,18,9
$1,84,08,48,6
$1,22,18,79,0
$1,65,60,92,1
$92,94,51,209
2009 – 2020 INVESTMENT BY LAND USE $4,00,00,00,000 $3,50,00,00,000 $3,00,00,00,000 $2,50,00,00,000 $2,00,00,00,000 $1,50,00,00,000 $1,00,00,00,000 $50,00,00,000 $-
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Reside ntial
$91,00,72,282
$28,14,29,767
$54,55,10,314
$64,49,04,939
$60,45,09,502
Comme rcial
$11,86,30,000
$2,76,19,660
$13,15,37,510
$61,21,87,739
$12,12,59,567
Institutio nal
$73,86,24,228
$27,58,03,447
$17,65,09,446
$45,55,65,550
$17,16,12,524
Residential
2015
2016
$71,46,07,806
$2,07,91,50,3
$1,70,38,44,6
$2,29,93,45,6
$12,81,24,353
$16,97,04,184
$1,33,86,30,6
$17,12,08,636
$44,97,16,900
$13,66,21,600
$22,85,09,418
$23,79,77,170
$48,89,51,802
Commercial
Institutional
2017
2018
2019
2020
$2,63,12,61,8
$2,98,02,61,3
$3,53,82,41,4
$36,23,46,516
$92,12,31,044
$8,61,64,050
$28,81,52,996
$18,72,50,424
2009 – 2020 NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS 12,000
10,000
8,000
40% 36%
48%
6,000
34% 58%
4,000 58%
2,000
53% 42%
Subsidized Unsubsidized
2009 2,337 1,693
73%
32%
51% 49% 2010 635 610
38%
74% 26% 2011 1,710 601
47% 2012 1,448 1,284
62% 2013 1,097 1,791
60% 52%
66% 42%
68% 2014 1,166 2,478
64%
27% 2015 2,371 4,603
2016 3,821 1,413
2017 4,299 3,080
2018 4,225 4,660
2019 4,023 5,950
2020 2,987 5,301
2020 DEVELOPMENT IN THE BRONX LOCATION BASED DATA
Commercial Institutional Residential
residential
Land Use Commercial
LAND USE CATEGORY 2020
Land LANDUse USE
INVESTMENT Investment $5,000,001 - $20,000,000 $20,000,001 - $100,000,000 $100,000,001 - $250,000,000 $250,000,001 - $450,000,000
INVESTMENT RANGE 2020
$0 - $5,000,000
NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS
NEWResidential UNITS New Units 0 - 25 26 - 75 76 - 150 151 - 300 301 - 550 551 - 950
2020
New Residential Units
Number of Floors NO. OF FLOORS 3-5 6 - 10 11 - 15 16 - 30
NUMBER OF STOREYS 2020
0-2
2020 DEVELOPMENT IN THE BRONX BY COMMUNITY DISTRICT
INVESTMENT
INVESTMENT RANGE 2020
2009 – 2020 TOTAL INVESTMENT $4,50,00,00,000.00
$4,00,00,00,000.00
$3,50,00,00,000.00
$3,00,00,00,000.00
$2,50,00,00,000.00
$2,00,00,00,000.00
$1,50,00,00,000.00
$1,00,00,00,000.00
$50,00,00,000.00
$2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014 Investment
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2020
NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS
NEW UNITS
2009 – 2020 NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS
AREA (SFT.)
SQUARE FOOTAGE 2020
2009 – 2020 SQUARE FOOTAGE DEVELOPED
2020 TOP TEN DEVELOPMENTS IN THE BRONX
RESIDENTIAL 1. 1016 Fox Street
3. 200 East 135th Street 4. 1223 Spofford Avenue 5. 1017 Olmstead Avenue 6. 202 east 135th Street 7. 227 East 134th Street 8. 2520 Jerome Avenue 9. 1323 Boston Road/Clinton Ave 10. 625 Brook Avenue
RESIDENTIAL 2020 TOP TEN
2. 1040 East 180th Street
COMMERCIAL 3651 Bruckner Blvd
2.
776 East Gun Hill Road
3.
1665 Jerome Avenue
4.
1 Bowne Street
5.
581 Austin Place
6.
1332 East Bay Avenue
7.
1330 East Bay Avenue
8.
3113 Westchester Avenue
9.
1366 East Bay Avenue
10. 307 Drake Street
COMMERCIAL 2020 TOP TEN
1.
1. 2336 Walton Avenue 2. 2040 Lafayette Avenue 3. 1479 Macombs Road 4. 1095 Southern Boulevard 5. 1701 Tomlinson Avenue 6. 808 Cauldwell Avenue
INSTITUTIONAL 2020 TOP TEN
INSTITUTIONAL
1. 101 Lincoln Avenue
3. 431 Westchester Avenue 4. 1164 River Avenue 5. 430 Westchester Avenue 6. 1020 East Tremont Avenue 7. 1016 Fox Street 8. 1040 East 180th Street 9. 200 East 135th Street 10. 1223 Spofford Avenue
2020 TOP TEN
2. 2401-2403 Third Avenue
DEVELOPMENTS IN THE BRONX
2020 TOP TEN
2020 TOP 10 BY INVESTMENT VALUES #1: ONE BANKSIDE, 101 LINCOLN AVENUE Developer: Brookfield Properties Architect: Hill West Architects Units: 920 rental apartments Floors: 25 Size: 133,000 square feet Investment: $450,000,000
2020 TOP 10 BY INVESTMENT VALUES #2: THIRD BANKSIDE, 2401 THIRD AVENUE Developer: Brookfield Properties Architect: Hill West Architects Units: 450 rental apartments Floors: 25 Size: 133,000 square feet Investment: $250,000,000
2020 TOP 10 BY INVESTMENT VALUES
Developer: HPD/HDC ELLA Architect: MHG Architects PC Units: 281 Floors: 13 Size: 384,888 square feet Investment: $180,860,000
#3: LA CENTRAL BUILDING A, 556 BERGEN
2020 TOP 10 BY INVESTMENT VALUES
Client: HPF Architect: Aufgang Architects Units: 500 dwelling units Floors: 17 Size: 449,754 square feet Investment: $150,000,000
#4: 1164 RIVER AVENUE
2020 TOP 10 BY INVESTMENT VALUES Developer: HPD/HDC ELLA Architect: MHG Architects PC Units: 215 Floors: 12 Size: 297,604 square feet Investment: $149,140,000
BUILDING B BUILDING A
#5: LA CENTRAL BUILDING B, 600 BERGEN
2020 TOP 10 BY INVESTMENT VALUES #6: SECOND FARMS AFFORDABLE HOUSING, 2080 BOSTON ROAD Client: Phipps Houses Architect: Dattner Architects Units: 319 rental apartments Floors: 15 Size: 296,722 square feet Investment: $147,000,000
Source: Dattner Architects
2020 TOP 10 BY INVESTMENT VALUES Partner: HPD-SARA Architect: GF55 Architects Units: 278 Floors: 15 Size: 284,771 square feet Investment: $140,000,000
#7: 1016 Fox Street
2020 TOP 10 BY INVESTMENT VALUES #8: COMPASS 6, 1040 EAST 180TH STREET Architect: Dattner Architects Units: 271 rental apartments Floors: 16 Size: 335,184 square feet Investment: $110,000,000
2020 TOP 10 BY INVESTMENT VALUES #9: 200 EAST 135TH STREET Architect: Woods Bagot Units: 139 Floors: 24 Size: 102,165 square feet Investment: $90,000,000
2020 TOP 10 BY INVESTMENT VALUES
Architect: Claire Weisz Architects LLP Units: 224 dwelling units Floors: 16 Size: 179,200 square feet Investment: $87,109,920
#10: THE PENINSULA, 1223 SPOFFORD AVENUE
