CPTED: Addressing Crime Through Urban Design and Programming in the Tenderloin Neighborhood of SF by Rogelio Foronda

‘1

R 5

AD U D IN RB RE O TH AN SS F SA E T DE ING SA N SI C E N JO N SÉ FR D GN RI ST M E AT A A R E E N N U L N CI O D TH IV ER SC IN P R SI TY O NE RO OU ,M AS R IG GR GH TE O R G H AM O E BO F U LI M RB O R AN F H ING PL O O AN R O O N IN N D G D

C PT ED :

Page left intentionally blank.

CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN: ADDRESSING CRIME THROUGH URBAN DESIGN AND PROGRAMMING IN THE TENDERLOIN NEIGHBORHOOD OF SAN FRANCISCO A Planning Report Presented to The Faculty of the Department of Urban and Regional Planning

San José State University

In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Urban Planning

Rogelio Foronda, Jr. May 2015

01 1.0 CPTED

15 2.0 TENDERLOIN

31 3.0 CRIME

55 4.0 ASSESSMENT

79 5.0 FINDINGS

87 6.0 APPENDICES

Photo Source Google Earth, 2014

To my mom Rosalinda, my partner Jac, my boss Seth, and all who made this possible. Thanks for your patience and support.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 01 03 04 07 11 13 13

17 17

Section 1.0 Crime Prevention through Environmental Design 1.1 Overview of Report 1.2 The Principles of CPTED 1.2.1 What is CPTED? 1.2.2 CPTED Principles 1.3 CPTED Applications 1.3.3 Crime Hot Spots 1.3.4 Temporary Urbanism and CPTED 1.4 CPTED and the Planning Profession 1.4.1 CPTED Constraints 1.4.2 Alternative Theories 1.5 Research Question 1.6 CPTED and San Francisco 1.6.1 Policy Linkage: Natural Surveillance 1.6.2 Policy Linkage: Natural Access Control 1.6.3 Policy Linkage: Territorial Enforcement 1.7 Voices 1.8 Hypothesis

Section 2.0 15 The Tenderloin 16 2.1 Physical and Social Evolution 16 2.2 Neighborhood Profile 2.2.1 Methodology 2.2.2 Demographics 2.2.3 Urban Form 31 32 32 50

iii

Section 3.0 Spatial Analysis of Crime 3.1 Methodology 3.2 Crime in The Tenderloin 3.3 Crime in San Francisco

55 56 58 61 65 67 70 73 76

Section 4.0 CPETED Assessment 4.1 Methodology 4.2 Ellis Street 4.3 Eddy Street 4.4 Turk Street 4.5 Leavenworth Street 4.6 Jones Street 4.7 Taylor Street 4.8 CPTED Assessment Conclusions

79 80 84 85

Section 5.0 Findings 5.1 Recommendations 5.2 Study Constraints 5.3 The Big Picture

87 88 92 93 94

Section 6.0 Appendices Appendix A: Bibliography Appendix B: CPTED Assessment Matrix Appendix C: CPTED Evaluation Rubric Appendix D: Interview Questions

TABLE OF FIGURES 21 23 25 26 27 28

Figure 2.1: Median Household Income, 2010 Figure 2.2: Percentage of Low Income Households, 2010 Figure 2.3: Percentage of Low Income Housing, 2010 Figure 2.3: Land Use, 2014 Figure 2.4: Zoning, 2014 Figure 2.5: Special Use Districts

34 Figure 3.1: Crime, 2014

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 51 52

Figure 3.2: Assault, 2014 Figure 3.3: Assault Hot Spots, 2014 Figure 3.4: Burglary, 2014 Figure 3.5: Disorderly Conduct, 2014 Figure 3.6: Drugs/Narcotics, 2014 Figure 3.7: Drugs/Narcotics Hot Spots, 2014 Figure 3.8: Drunkenness, 2014 Figure 3.9: Prostitution, 2014 Figure 3.10: Robbery, 2014 Figure 3.11: Robbery Hot Spots, 2014 Figure 3.12: Sex Offenses (Forcible), 2014 Figure 3.13: Trespassing, 2014 Figure 3.14: Vandalism, 2014 Figure 3.15: Vehicle Theft, 2014 Figure 3.16: Weapons Violations, 2014 Figure 3.17: San Francisco Crime Hot Spots, 2014 Figure 3.18: Statistical Significance, Crime 2014

57 Figure 4.1: CPTED Assessment Street Segments

TABLE OF TABLES 60 63 68 69 72 75 76

4.2: CPTED Evaluation Rubric: Ellis Street 4.3: CPTED Evaluation Rubric: Eddy Street 4.4: CPTED Evaluation Rubric: Turk Street 4.5: CPTED Evaluation Rubric: Leavenworth Street 4.6: CPTED Evaluation Rubric: Jones Street 4.7: CPTED Evaluation Rubric: Taylor Street 4.8: CPTED Assessment Summary

Page left intentionally blank.

“I understand CPTED to essentially involve building and property design to be done in such a way as to discourage or prevent potential criminal activity.” -Scott Ecker, 15 years employed in the Tenderloin

1.0 CPTED

Ro g

el io

a, J

CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN

CPTED // 01

SANCTUARY: Glide Memorial Church at the corner of Ellis and Taylor Streets in the Tenderloin provides social and worship services to the neighborhood. The awning of the churchâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s facade provides refuge from the elements.

02 // CPTED

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

Through an assessment of the physical environment, a review of current municipal documents, and interviews with people who live or work in the neighborhood, this report aims to investigate how criminal activity in the Tenderloin can be potentially mitigated by providing a toolkit of recommended CPTED policies and guidelines to implement in or adopt for the neighborhood. 1.1 OVERVIEW OF REPORT The project focuses on the Tenderloin, about which little to no research that evaluates the potential for Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) implementation exists. CPTED is A concept rooted in the assumption that manipulations of and uses in the built environment can reduce the fear, opportunity, and incidence of crime and improve quality of life.1 Methodologies selected include GIS crime and demographic mapping, CPTED site evaluation, and semi-structured interviews with voices from the community. Through a literature review on seminal CPTED texts and peer reviewed journal articles an auditing tool was formulated for use in field observations and CPTED Assessments of the Tenderloin. These methods are key to identifying successful CPTED strategies for the Tenderloin and will improve the validity of my research and conclusions. Although there are many complex social and economic factors that play a role in the high concentration of crime in the Tenderloin, an important factor to investigate is how the natural physical and man-made built environments foster crime and how proactive design-based strategies might reduce crime. This report is further intended to contribute to the current bodies of literature on CPTED because it looks at a neighborhood well known for its crime, but has never been evaluated against CPTED, be it for political reasons or the lack of support or funding. 1 Timothy D. Crowe, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design: Applications of Architectural Design and Space Management Concepts – 2nd Ed. (Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000), 1.

Definition of Terms • Crime: Due to the broad range of activities that would qualify as criminal, for the purposes of this study, crime will be defined to include the following offenses which have resulted in an arrest verified by the San Francisco Police Department, in which the built environment could be a contributing factor: Assault, Burglary, Drug/ Alcohol Violation, Homicides, Robbery, Theft/Larceny, Sex Crimes, specifically Sexual Assault or Indecent Exposure, Vandalism, and, Vehicle Break-Ins. • Effectively mitigate: A reduction in crime after implementation of measure. • Long-term urban design measures: public realm capital improvements or investment in infrastructure. • Short-term program measures: single events or short-term uses of property or facilities; also known as tactical or temporary urbanism. • Tenderloin: The Tenderloin is located within San Francisco Planning Department’s designated neighborhood of Downtown/Civic Center. Neighborhood groups, including the North of Market-Tenderloin Community Benefit District, have self defined the neighborhood to include upwards of 23 blocks. For the feasibility of this study and streamlining the collection of Census data, the boundaries for the Tenderloin were defined by the 4-block inclusive Census Tract 125.02 (2010 US Census) bound by Leavenworth, Turk, Taylor and Ellis Streets and is further divided by Eddy and Jones Streets. Other Definitions • Activate: Increase activity and visibility of a space. Examples include temporary uses for special events, increased pedestrian activity, or CPTED // 03

increased utility of sidewalks (including café seating or retail activity that spills out into the public realm). • Better Streets Plan: A municipal document adopted by the San Francisco Planning Department which is based on a multi-modal approach to streetscape design that gives priority to pedestrians. The San Francisco Better Streets Plan took effect on January 16, 2011. • Defensible Space: Similar in theory to CPTED, but focusing on the neighborhood scale and specifically residential buildings and layouts as coined by Oscar Newman.2 See Section 1.5.2 • Low-Income: Median household income between 0% and 60% of Area Median Income (AMI). • Problem-Oriented Policing: In contrast to reactionary policing, Herman Goldstein defines this theory as a means to improve policing through extending to and focusing on the end product of policing, its effective and fairness.3 See Section 1.5.2 • Public realm: public rights-of-way including, but not limited to sidewalks, streets, alleys, and public gathering spaces (such as parks and plazas). • Social capital: a measurement of community connectivity, pride, and sense of ownership. • Temporary uses: single events or short-term uses of property or facilities; also known as tactical or temporary urbanism. Abbreviations • AMI: Area Median Income • CCSF or City: City and County of San Francisco • CPTED: Crime Prevention through Environmental Design • SFDPW: San Francisco Department of Public Works • SFMTA: San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency • SFPD: San Francisco Police Department 1.2 THE PRINCIPLES OF CPTED The preeminent voice of CPTED, criminologist Timothy Crowe, defines CPTED as a concept rooted in the assumption that manipulations of and the uses in the built environment can reduce fear, opportunity, and incidence of crime and improve quality of life4 in the 1990 seminal text Crime Prevention through Environmental Design: Applications of Architectural Design and Space Management Concepts. While the term CPTED was first coined by Oscar Newman in 1970, it was Crowe’s 2 Oscar Newman, Defensible Space: Crime Prevention through Urban Design (New York: McMillan Publishing Co., 1973). 3Herman Goldstein, Problem-Oriented Policing (New York: McGraw-Hill Publishing, 1990),1. 4 Crowe, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, 1.

04 // CPTED

model that has become the most popular and influential. 1.2.1: WHAT IS CPTED? CPTED is a multi-disciplinary mechanism established during the mid 20th century to mitigate criminal behavior through manipulations in the built environment. The concept behind CPTED “is that the physical environment can be manipulated to produce behavioral effects that will reduce the incidence and fear of crime.”5 Defensible Space theory (see Section 1.4.2), developed in the 1970s by Oscar Newman similar in concept, predates CPTED as an established term. Since its inception, several municipalities have adopted CPTED policies and guidelines by incorporating elements, albeit sometimes not explicitly, into their zoning, planning, building, and streetscape design guidelines. 1.2.2: CPTED PRINCIPLES As one of the original researchers to further investigate Newman’s CPTED theory, Crowe expanded on the idea that the “proper design and effective use of the built environment can lead to a reduction in the fear of crime and the incidence of crime, and to an improvement in the quality of life through his own work.”6 In a study conducted in 2005 by Zham, she states that to properly assess CPTED it was necessary to focus on specific crimes in specific locations and examine neighborhood uses and routines and how they may foster crime.7 Zahm’s approach further influenced the methodologies used in this report including the focus on specific crimes, understanding of land use, zoning, and the physical environment, as well as history and neighborhood demographics. The three main CPTED principles of natural surveillance, natural access control, and territorial enforcement have remained relevant to how cities can plan around crime prevention today.8,9

Natural Surveillance The CPTED principle of natural surveillance is similar to Jane Jacobs’ concept of “eyes on the street.” The increased presence of pedestrians and the continual use of sidewalks can contribute to an increase in both sense of community and surveillance.10 In 1996 Taylor and Harrel further conclude that natural surveillance is conducive to the 5 Crowe, Crime Prevention through Environmental Design, 3. 6 Ibid. 7 Dianne Zham, “Learning, Translating, and Implementing CPTED,” Journal of Architectural & Planning Research 22, No. 4 (Winter 2005): 284-293. 8 Ralph B. Taylor and Stephen Gottfredson, “Environmental Design, Crime, and Prevention: An Examination of Community Dynamics,” Crime and Justice 8 (1986): 387-416. 9 John R. Minnery and Bill Lim, “Measuring Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design,” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 22, No. 4 (Winter 2005): 330-341. 10 Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities (New York: Random House, Inc., 1961), 30.

potential to mitigate certain types of criminal offenses and has positive implications on the increase economic development.11 Presumably, eyes on the street equates to more foot traffic, resulting in an increased patronage of a neighborhood’s businesses. Investigating the level of natural surveillance in the Tenderloin was worth exploring since it is a relatively cost-effective way to implement CPTED compared to longterm physical changes that CPTED typically suggests. These costeffective measures include organizing community events or activities that occur at times when a neighborhood is lacking activity. In addition to actually providing surveillance, these types of events have the potential to change the perception of personal safety and the willingness of bystanders intervene in offenses. As the 2002 Katyal study pointed out: the greater the number of people present in an area, the less bystanders believe that their intervention poses a risk to themselves.12 Arguably, this contradicts the social psychological phenomenon often referred to as “bystander effect” or “Genovese syndrome,” referring to the 1964 murder of Kitty Genovese in Queens, New York. It was originally understood that Genovese was attacked by knife two times in the span of approximately 30 minutes around 3 in the morning by Winston Moseley. It was further understood that 37 people “witnessed” the crime and did nothing to stop it. The New York Times further sensationalized the crime with a front page headline, “37 Who Saw Murder Didn’t Call the Police: Apathy at Stabbing of Queens Woman Shocks Inspector.” However, a 2014 New Yorker article revisited the case to find that the recounts of the event and apathy of Genovese’s neighbors was inaccurate. A man had yelled from his window in an effort to stop the crime and Moseley ran away; he did however return to attack Genovese again. Further, the ambulance that had eventually arrived at the crime scene was responding to a call from a neighbor who had witnessed the crime occuring.13 This clarification further bolsters Katyal’s conclusions.

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

A POSITIVE ENVIRONMENT: The recently renovated Alfred E. Boeddeker Park in San Francisco was improved to make the park more desirable for everyone to use. Once a magnet for violence and crime, the Park is now utilized by families during the day and is better protected at night.

Natural Access Control The principle natural access control addresses the permeability of neighborhood boundaries.14 A study conducted by Taylor and Gottfredson in 1986 explained that permeability refers to the physical attributes of a neighborhood which make it easier for offenders to enter. 11 R.B. Taylor and A.V. Harrel,”Physical Environment and Crime”, National Institute of Justice, US Department of Justice, Washington, DC (1996): 13. 12 Neal Kumar Katyal, “Architecture of Crime Control,” Yale Law Journal 111, No.5 (2012): 1039-1139. 13 Nicholas Lemann, “A Call For Help: What the Kitty Genovese Story Really Means,” The New Yorker, March 10, 2014, accessed April 22, 2015, http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/03/10/a-call-for-help?currentPage=all. 14 Minnery and Lim, “Measuring Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design,” 330-341.

CPTED // 05

These physical attributes include: adjacency to a main artery, proximity to freeway exits and entries, or an isolated lighting path that leads toward it,15 these can be either walking or bike paths. By definition, because the streets in and around the Tenderloin are arranged in a traditional grid, it can be considered a neighborhood with high permeability and a potential attractor to offenders. Alternatively, a similar study conducted by Taylor and Harrell in 1996 came to the conclusion that permeability could provide higher escape potential for the legitimate user from an offender.16 With this in mind, the Tenderloin’s permeability also affords the legitimate user an additional level of security by providing additional escape routes when confronted with an offender. Depending on the crime being committed, permeability can either benefit the offender or the victim. When considering permeability on a building scale, for example, an offender committing a property crime would benefit from increased permeability.

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

EMPTY WALLS ON EMPTY BUILDINGS: A postmodern building anchors the corner of Ellis and Taylor Streets. While its exterior finishes are well kept, its lack of windows and minimal numbers of doors creates a blank wall void of activity and natural surveillance.

Territorial Enforcement Although studies have shown that territorial enforcement is more relevant to fear reduction and neighborhood confidence17 it also provides tangible (physical) and intangible (social) clues for potential offenders during their site selection process. By creating delimited, semipublic spaces that are easily overseen by normal users or observers, it builds on natural surveillance by involving more people in the neighborhood.18 An example of territorial enforcement includes café style seating in the public realm or encouraging the personalization of private spaces within public view. A 2005 Minnery and Lim study found a statistically significant relationship between measures of street-level CPTED, including territorial enforcement, and victimization.19 The study concluded that higher levels of victimization correlated with low levels of street level CPTED, and vice versa. Intangible clues included “routine activity patterns of residents and the degree of observable social cohesion among neighbors.”20 Specific potential measures, like improved street lighting, may fall under the category of territorial enforcement or natural access control. Lighting’s categorization is not necessarily relevant and its condition should be measured in the Tenderloin. Street lighting 15 Taylor and Gottfredson, “Environmental Design, Crime, and Prevention,” 387-416. 16 United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. “Physical Environment and Crime.” Ralph B. Taylor and Adele V. Harrell. Washington DC: United States Department of Justice (January 1996). 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid. 19 Minnery and Lim, “Measuring Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design,” 330-341. 20 Taylor and Gottfredson, “Environmental Design, Crime, and Prevention,” 387-416.

06 // CPTED

has been proven to discourage offenders who benefit from the cover of darkness.21 The amount of lighting directly affects susceptibility to crime since lighting is directly related to visibility22,23. The 2011 Foster et al study determined the correlation between natural surveillance through higher pedestrian activity and fewer opportunities for crime to take place in Perth, Australia24. 1.3 CPTED APPLICATIONS 1.3.1 CRIME HOT SPOTS Studies conducted over the last fifty years on the correlation between the built environment and the occurrence of offenses provide little empirical evidence that design alone causes or prevents crime, rather it enhances or diminishes opportunity potential for offenses to occur.25,26 Generally, these areas that enhance opportunity potential for offenses or enhance the attractiveness of the place to offenders27 share similar characteristics. They allow offenders to “hide in the shadows” or shield them from view of being caught. Offenders are conscious of architectural features when selecting a target and favor features like pathways that are narrow and enclosed, where visibility is poor and witnesses are nonexistent.28 Further, it is generally understood that some areas are the location for a disproportionate number of crimes.29 These areas, known as “hot spots,” are identified through crime mapping or “hot spot analysis.” Studies identifying “hot spots” found that there were social and physical environmental attributes that bring suitable targets and motivated offenders together and cause clustering of crime.30 As the Anderson et al 2013 study on zoning and crime in Los Angeles points out: the use of law to shape the physical environment to reduce crime is not a product of modern era thought processes. In thirteenth century England, King Edward I required the widening of pathways and the removal of bushes that provided cover to robbers;31 the trend of 21 US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, “Improved Street Lighting to Reduce Crime in Residential Areas,” Ronald V. Clarke (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, December 2008), http://cops.usdoj.gov/Publications/e1208-StreetLighting.pdf (accessed May 10, 2014). 22 Nancye Kirk, “Creating a Crime-Free Property,” Journal of Property Management 77, no. 1 (2012): 28-33. 23 Ibid. 24 Sarah Foster, et al, “Creating Safe, Walkable Streetscapes: Does House Design and Upkeep Discourage Incivilities in Suburban Neighborhoods?” Journal of Environmental Psychology 31, no. 1, 2011: 79-88. 25 Robert Samuels, “After-Dark Design, Nigh Animation, and Interpersonal Interaction: Toward a Community-Security Paradigm,” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 22, No.4 (Winter 2005): 305-320. 26 Katyal, “Architecture of Crime Control,” 1039-1139. 27 Anthony A. Braga, Problem-Oriented Policing and Crime Prevention 2nd Edition, New York: Criminal Justice Press, 2008. 28 Ibid. 29 Edward H. Ziegler, “American Cities, Urban Planning, and Place-Based Crime Prevention,” The Urban Lawyer 39, No.4 (Fall 2007): 859-875. 30 Luc Anselin, Elizabeth Griffiths, and George Tita, “Crime Mapping and Hot Spot Analysis,” in Environmental Criminology and Crime Analysis, ed. Richard Wortley and Lorraine Mazorelle (2008), 99. 31 James M. Anderson, John M. MacDonald, Ricky Bluthenthal, and J. Scott Ashwood. “Reducing Crime By Shaping the Built Environment with Zoning: An Empirical Study of Los Angeles.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 161, No.3 (2013): 698-755.

manipulating pathways to reduce the opportunity of crime has been carried into modern society. Jacobs touted the need for increased permeability of a neighborhood. However a study on gang related crime offenses in Los Angeles referenced by Katyal concluded that increased permeability allowed gang members to access targets and escape quickly afterward. To mitigate the gang related crime offenses, the City of Los Angeles placed traffic barriers on some of these streets and assaults fell from 190 to 163 in the first year and from 163 to 138 in the next year.32 In both thirteenth century England and modern day Los Angeles, manipulations were made to streets or roadways as a means to reduce the opportunity of crime. Capital investments, even when their intent is a direct outcome like reducing the opportunity of crime, have external effects as well. Offenders view capital investment from a city or neighborhood as a form of symbolic territoriality and guardianship.33 This symbolic territoriality and guardianship provides environmental cues that indicate a community that is invested in its safety and cares for its members which can discourage criminal behavior. An SF Weekly article published in March 2015 discussed a grass roots effort to reduce the drug deals seen along Eddy Street in the Tenderloin. A petition was signed to remove on-street parking on Eddy Street between Taylor and Mason Streets which seemed to be providing reduced visibility and increased drug deals as well as drug use. According to the article, parking was similarly removed from Turk Street in 2014 leaving drug dealers nothing to hide behind and nowhere to park, resulting in a decline in drug activity.34 The removal of parking can also result in the increased visibility of potential buyers and increased potential of getting caught. Land-use mix and zoning can also play an important role in the facilitation of crime. Jacobs advocated that land uses that provided natural surveillance in the evening would reduce the opportunity of crime, this included bars and clubs. However, in 2011 Cozen concluded that recreational settings such as bars and clubs are actually hot spots for crimes35 and as Graham and Roman concluded in 2006, bars and clubs are the sites of alcohol related crime and disorder resulting in 32 Katyal, “Architecture and Crime Control,” 1039-1139. 33 Anderson et al, “Reducing Crime By Shaping the Built Environment with Zoning,” 698-755. 34 Sarah Stodder, “Tenderloin Residents Say Eddy Street Parking Encourages Drug Deals,” SFWeekly, March 31, 2015, accessed March 31, 2015, http://www.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2015/03/31/tenderloin-residents-say-eddy-street-parking-encourages-drugdeals. 35 Paul Michael Cozens. “Urban Planning and Environmental Criminology: Towards a New Perspective for Safer Cities,” Planning Practice and Research 26, No.4 (August 2011): 481-508.

CPTED // 07

vandalism and property damage.36 Cozen and Anderson et al point out that urban planners need to be cognizant about how land-use patterns and crime interact and acknowledge that mixed land-use alone will not reduce crime as Jacobs suggests.37,38,39 The Zarabadi et al 2012 study of a neighborhood in Tehran, Iran identified physical attributes in the urban fabric that increased the opportunity for criminal activity. These included unclear definition of entrances, inappropriate lighting systems, and lack of delineation between private, semi-private, and public spaces.40 The 2005 Rondeau et al study came to similar conclusions that these types of physical attributes decrease the effort required to commit a crime, reduce the risk of committing crime, increase the rewards realized from committing a crime, and increase the situation provocations for crime.41 They suggested that focusing on the flow of people along paths between and at activity nodes could be effective.42,43 Zarabadi et al specifically stated that this can be achieved by improving the street network hierarchy, changing through streets to dead-end passages, and locating small commercial land uses such as food kiosks and newsstands in criminally vulnerable areas.44 Locating food kiosks and newsstands increases activation of vulnerable areas, provides more “eyes on the street” and self-policing. 1.3.2 TEMPORARY URBANISM AND CPTED Many CPTED measures rely on long-term implementation and strategic planning. These include the long legal and political battles for rezoning and the significant capital investment needed to make a space more safe, be it through improved street lighting or widened sidewalks. Temporary uses, also known as “temporary urbanism” or “pop-ups,” rely on the concept of interim uses of space.45 This concept of interim uses of space has been growing in popularity in urban areas in recent years. An example includes the popular “parklets” concept that converts on-street parking spaces into mini parks or areas for café 36 Graham Farrell and John Roman, “Crime as Pollution: Proposal for Market-Based Incentives to Reduce Crime Externalities,” Crime Reduction and the Law, edited by Kate Moss and Mike Stephens. London: Routledge, 2006. 37 Cozens, “Urban Planning and Environmental Criminology,” 481-508. 38 Anderson et al, “Reducing Crime By Shaping the Built Environment with Zoning,” 698-744. 39 Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, 30. 40 Sahra Sadat Saideh Zarabadi, Nora Haeri, and Timaz Iarimian, “Reduction of Urban Crimes through Secured by Design Scheme (Case Study: Navab Highway – Tehran),” International Journal of Academic Research 4, No.6 (November 2012): 57-63. 41 Mary Beth Rondeau, Patricia L Brantingham, and Paul J. Brantingham, “The Value of Environmental Criminology for the Design Professions of Architecture, Urban Design, Landscape Architecture, and Planning,” Journal of Architectural Planning and Research 22, No.4 (Winter 2005): 294-304. 42 Zarabadi et al, “Reduction of Urban Crimes through Secured by Design Scheme,” 57-63. 43 Rondeau et al, “The Value of Environmental Criminology for the Design Professions of Architecture, Urban Design, Landscape Architecture, and Planning,” 294-304. 44 Zarabadi et al, “Reduction of Urban Crimes through Secured by Design Scheme,” 57-63. 45 Florian Haydn and Robert Temel. “Temporary Urban Spaces: Concepts for the Use of City Spaces.” Canadian Journal of Urban Research 16, No.2 (Winter 2007): 191-272.

08 // CPTED

seating and social gathering. There is also the Street Food venue in San Francisco, which allowed the nomadic Off-The-Grid food event to have a semi-permanent location. The Street Food semi-permanent venue is located on a long-vacant lot in an undesirable, relatively industrial, part of the South of Market (SOMA) neighborhood in the shadow of the Central Freeway. Street Food attracts hundreds of people every day, specifically in the evenings, to an area perceived as unsafe. Temporary uses of space provide natural surveillance, guardianship, and territorial enforcement. It further fosters social and community development. Vacant lots are seen as physical disorder and provide visible cues in the environment that indicate a lack of control over neighborhood conditions.46 In 2012, Garvin et al conducted 50 semi-structured interviews of residents of Philadelphia, PA on their perceptions of abandoned homes and vacant lots. They concluded that residents felt that vacant lots overshadowed the positive aspects of the community, attracted crime, and caused anxiety and stigma.47 Vacant lots lack territorial enforcement and do little to inspire a community to take guardianship over a space; this in turn provides opportunities for crime to take place. Survey respondents’ temporary solutions included interim uses for vacant lots like playgrounds and small parks; they further suggested that vacant buildings or homes be used for subsidized housing and homeless shelters.48 By fostering communitybased activities and uses on vacant lots, residents are more likely to take ownership and provide a sense of territorial enforcement that deters criminal activity. Similarly in a 2007 study Shah and Kesan explored the idea that architecture can serve as a regulatory force; that architecture can serve as a regulatory force influencing human behavior and perception.49 How the built environment affects social interaction can be linked to the CPTED principle of territorial enforcement, which considers how people exert control over places.50 If vacant lots are cleaned and maintained by community members, they are perceived to be safer because of the increased informal surveillance that result from such activities.51 Additionally, by drawing more residents outside, residents 46 Eugenia Garvin, Charles Branas, Shimrit Keddem, Jeffrey Sellman, and Carolyn Cannuscio, “More Than Just an Eyesore: Local Insights and Solutions on Vacant Land and Urban Health,” Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 90, No.3 (2012): 412-426. 47 Ibid. 48 Ibid. 49 Rajiv C. Shah and Jay P. Kesan, “How Architecture Regulates,” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 24, No.4 (Winter 2007): 350-359. 50 Ibid. 51 Garvin et al., “More Than Just an Eyesore,” 412-426.

will generally experience their neighborhood as a safer place,52 as Brunson et al concluded in their study on CPTED and defensible space in public housing in 2001. The concept of interim or temporary uses addresses the interaction of space and time and its correlation with criminal opportunities as identified by the Grubesic and Mack study in 2008. Jacobs also touched on the idea that land use mix should provide opportunities for formal and informal gathering throughout the day, which in turn would provide natural surveillance at times when it may be lacking. Gubesic and Mack pointed out that crime hot spots flourish in environmental settings that are conducive to criminal behavior.53 Underutilized or vacant lots, particularly at night, provide an opportunity for offenders to be out-of-view and the confidence that they are not likely to get caught. Temporary uses in spaces at times when there is little natural surveillance can reduce the opportunities for crime to occur. Further, as the Garvin et al study concluded, residents preferred to see vacant or underutilized lots filled with purpose, people, and active uses as opposed to a blight eradication policy approach like the demolition of vacant buildings.54 In a 2004 study, Bomley pointed out that guardianship encouraged residents to act in a proprietary way toward public spaces in order to expel anti-social forms of behavior.55 In his study he looked at community gardens and how they established the CPTED measure of territoriality. However, he also points out that territoriality-inducing measures do not work in isolation, but are part of a larger set of interventions that listens to a community’s needs.56 Both Bomley and Garvin et al highlighted the importance that the selection of CPTED measures to implement be decided collectively and democratically by a community, rather than imposed by a municipality. When a community takes pride in their neighborhood and is empowered as a stakeholder in its future, it creates a symbolic boundary that criminals are less likely to cross. This is an external benefit that results from when community takes responsibility for preserving the security of its neighborhood and members.57 Without involvement in the decision making process, communities have no

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

ACCESS DENIED: Driveways, former alleys and paseos have been closed off to pedestrians and public access with iron gates or chain linked fences. This condition occurs in the Tenderloin on Turk Street between Leavenworth and Jones Streets.

52 Liesette Brunson, Frances E. Kuo and William C. Sullivan, “Resident Appropriation of Defensible Space in Public Housing: Implications for Safety and Community,” Environment and Behavior 33, no. 5, 2001: 626-636. 53 Tony H. Grubesic and Elizabeth A. Mack, “Spatio-Temporal Interaction of urban Crime,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology, No. 24 (2008): 285-306. 54 Garvin et al., “More Than Just an Eyesore,” 412-426. 55 Nicholas Bomley, “Un-real Estate: Proprietary Space and Public Gardening.” Antipode 36, No.4 (September 2004): 614-641. 56 Ibid. 57 Gesa Helms, Rowland Atkinson, Gordon MacLeod, “Securing the City: Urban Renaissance, Policing, and Social Regulation,” European Urban and Regional Studies Volume 14, Issue 4, November 2007: 267-276.

CPTED // 09

URBAN MOSAIC: The brutalist Hilton Hotel tower constructed in 1972 rises in contrast to low rise historic buildings. Its location acts as a visual barrier between the Union Square and Tenderloin neighoborhoods.

10 // CPTED

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

stake in guardianship and the idea of territoriality will not come to be; as a result, the interim use would have little effect on reducing the risk of crime or improving the perception of safety. 1.4 CPTED AND THE PLANNING PROFESSION The built environment was a different place during the 1970s when CPTED began to gain traction. The Brutalist architecture of the time also created sterile hardscapes, urban spaces, and physical conditions. On the edge of the Tenderloin the Hilton Hotel, designed in the brutalist style, towers over in stark contrast to its neighboring low-rise, wood frame and brick buildings (page 10). Characterized by massive, blank, concrete facades out of scale with pedestrians, the sterile Brutalist environment has been described as poorly planned with no sense of place or center.58 Additionally, the concept of traditional shared streets had given way to a very segregated streetscape where modes never crossed and the automobile was given priority. CPTED in many ways came to be as a reaction to the built environment of this era. Since cities continue to incorporate CPTED fundamentals into their municipal documents it is appropriate that their efficacy and relevance are regularly assessed through academic and civic research. Further, the utility of the built environment is dramatically different than it was half a century ago. For modern society, technology and social media play an important role in planning our cities: from determining how people get around and where they are congregating, to being a means to communicate, in real-time, with local government on issues ranging from graffiti clean up to and crime reporting. The high concentration of crimes in specific geographic locations of a city can be attributed to the increased opportunities to commit crimes, often referred to as situational crime. These physical locations create a perfect storm that brings together suitable targets and motivated offenders59. Established neighborhoods make it difficult to make significant changes to the physical environment, however there are other CPTED principles that could be implemented that do not require significant financial investment. This includes hosting events that shut down streets to auto traffic and encourage pedestrian use like San Francisco’s Sunday Streets or Oakland’s Art Walks. These types of events provide natural surveillance, another CPTED measure that is predicated on the idea that increased activity provides increased “eyes on the street” or self58 Anthony Vilder, “Troubles in Theory V The Brutalist Movement(s)” Architectural Review Vol. 235, Issue 1404, 2014: 96-102. 59 Anselin et al, “Crime Mapping and Hot Spot Analysis,” 98.

policing of those participating. Jacobs states “sidewalks, their bordering uses, and their uses, are active participants in the drama of civilization versus barbarism in cities. To keep the city safe is a fundamental task of a city’s streets and its sidewalks.”60 Temporary uses are a viable option to reduce crime in a neighborhood by inducing an increase in population in a neighborhood for a short period of time and providing additional “eyes on the street”. Temporary uses are an important contemporary option for city planners to consider because they are more cost effective than capital improvements and in some sense can provide a quicker fix than physical changes or improvements. However, it is worth mentioning that while temporary uses are helpful, they inherently wont provide permanent assistance to neighborhoods. It is important for municipalities to consider cost effective ways to build community and social capital as a means to mitigate crime, an example being the CPTED principle of territorial reinforcement. Territorial enforcement aims to increase the sphere-of-influence of private property, an example being café-style seating along public sidewalks. It can also be a metaphorical sphere-of-influence that can be related to social capital, a measurement of community connectivity. Social capital is a result of natural access control and surveillance that promotes “more responsiveness by users in protecting their territory and promote greater perception of risk by offenders.”61 When a community takes pride in their neighborhood and is empowered as a stakeholder in its future, it creates an intangible boundary that criminals are less likely to cross. This is the benefit when community comes “to represent ‘a geographic and inter-subjective zone,’” and takes “responsibility for preserving the security of its own members.”62 Finally, the World Health Organization estimates by 2050, 7 out of 10 people in the world will be urban dwellers, meaning they will live in urban as opposed to rural areas.63 This number alone stresses the importance of implementing policies and programs to increase the safety of public spaces and circulation around our cities. 1.4.1 CPTED CONSTRAINTS Although there is still little empirical evidence that supports the notion 60 Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, 30. 61 Crowe, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, 1. 62 Helms et al, “Securing the City: Urban Renaissance, Policing, and Social Regulation,” 267-276. 63 “Urban Population Growth,” World Health Organization, (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2014), http://www.who. int/gho/urban_health/situation_trends/urban_population_growth_text/en/ (accessed May 10, 2014).

CPTED // 11

that CPTED has a direct effect on crime reduction, it is generally accepted that principally natural surveillance, natural access control, and territorial enforcement can play a role in reducing the opportunity for crime. However, the most compelling finding from the meta-analysis of CPTED was the importance for design professionals and municipalities not to design places or spaces based solely on their perception or own personal understanding of â&#x20AC;&#x153;fearful places.â&#x20AC;?

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

ELEMENTS OF URBAN DESIGN: The wide sidewalks, street trees, and ground floor retail are just some of the elements of good urban design found in the Tenderloin neighborhood in San Francisco. However, its reputation for crime has stunted its potential.

In order for CPTED to work effectively, the principles need to be selected and implemented democratically and holistically. Urban planners, law enforcement, design professionals, and municipalities often believe that their professional or academic experience justifies the physical changes to the built environment imposed on people. However, as many of the studies suggested and concluded, those who live or work in communities have the most important role in seeing that CPTED works effectively. The top-down approach to implementing CPTED cannot work since it bypasses the buy-in of those who are directly affected or need to be directly involved in maintaining it. For example: temporary uses will do little to reduce the risk of crime if a neighborhood did not want it in the first place. CPTED selection must be a grass-roots effort. In addition to community support, suitability is also important. A crime analysis component should be included in an overall site analysis that identifies crime patterns, criminal behavior, and environmental context so that the suitability of a particular CPTED principle can be evaluated. 1.4.2 ALTERNATIVE THEORIES Defensible Space Defensible Space theory was developed by Oscar Newman in the 1970s. His intent was to develop a range of mechanisms - real and symbolic barriers, strongly defined areas of influence, and improved opportunities for surveillance - that combine to bring an environment under the control of its residents.64 While similar in concept to CPTED, Newmanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Defensible Space theory focused heavily on residential environments including apartment buildings and single-family dwellings. In contrast CPTED focuses primarily on the public realm and the transitional spaces between public and private spaces. Newman believes that the internal layouts of buildings play an important role in creating a defensible space. The principles of Defensible Space include: territoriality, natural surveillance, and image and milieu. 64 Newman, Defensible Space, 3.

12 // CPTED

Problem-Oriented Policing Herman Goldstein of The Center for Problem-Oriented Policing defines problem-oriented policing as “an approach to policing in which discrete pieces of police business are subject to microscopic examination in hopes that what is freshly learned about each problem will lead to discovering a new and more effective strategy for dealing with it.”65 An example includes a better understanding of the physical environment of crime hot spots and specifically looking at what law enforcement, or policing, strategies can be implemented as a response. This is in contrast to the actual manipulation of the elements within a physical environment which is the intent of CPTED and Defensible Space theories. 1.5 RESEARCH QUESTION Based on an assessment of existing public-realm conditions and available research, what long-term urban design and short-term programming Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) measures should city planners and urban designers implement to effectively mitigate crime in San Francisco’s Tenderloin neighborhood? 1.6 CPTED AND SAN FRANCISCO CPTED has been widely received as a means to mitigate crime and its principles are often broadly integrated into municipal documents as guidelines or recommendations. While the agency that manages the Neighborhood Watch program for San Francisco, San Francisco Safety Awareness for Everyone (SF SAFE), provides CPTED assessments for businesses, no formal City-sponsored CPTED assessment of San Francisco’s public realm currently exists. In the range of similar assessments conducted by the cities of Berkeley, CA, San Bernardino, CA, and Colorado Springs, CO, a CPTED assessment of the Tenderloin could set precedent to assess other high-crime areas in San Francisco, providing further justification for the City to prioritize funding and policies that reflect CPTED. Further, whether for political or financial feasibility, the City has never conducted a CPTED assessment of the Tenderloin despite significant perceived presence of criminal activity.

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

BARRIER: A number of businesses in the study area had their gates closed even during what one would presume are regular business hours. When stores were closed, the security gates went up.

The City and County of San Francisco has a comprehensive set of municipal planning documents that guides and regulates its physical growth. To better understand what specific advisory and mandatory policies and programs in the City and County of San Francisco have 65 “What is POP,” Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, (Albany, NY: Center for Problem Oriented Policing), http://www.popcenter. org/about/?p=whatiscpop (accessed September 18, 2014).

CPTED // 13

been integrated into its current municipal documents, a meta analysis of its municipal documents was conducted. The municipal document review was reviewed in the context of the CPTED principles natural surveillance, natural access control, and territorial enforcement. The municipal document further identified the linkages and lack of linkages existing between San Francisco’s policies and programs and the three main CPTED principles. The General Plan states that the framework of the General Plan in its current form became effective in conjunction with the effective date of San Francisco’s 1996 Charter. When adopted by the San Francisco Planning Commission (Planning Commission) and approved by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (Board of Supervisors) in 1995, the General Plan addressed the seven issues (elements) of land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, and safety, as mandated by State of California law. Prior to approval from the Board of Supervisors, General Plan amendments approved by the Planning Commission and presented to the Board of Supervisors are advisory. Only after approval by the Board of Supervisors do General Plan amendments become mandatory, or law.66 Through a number of amendments since its effective date, the General Plan has transformed into its current form. This includes the addition of the Commerce and Industry, Urban Design, Community Facilities, Arts, and Air Quality elements to the overall General Plan. The General Plan also includes a number of Area Plans including Downtown and Civic Center, which the Tenderloin neighborhood is located within. Compliance with the General Plan and the accountability of the local government to further the principles outlined in the General Plan enforced by numerous San Francisco Municipal Codes, including Sec. 101.1(b) of the Planning Code which states that the General Plan “is intended to be an integrated, internally consistent, and compatible statement of objectives and policies and its objectives and policies are to be construed in a manner which archives that intent.”67 The municipal documents reviewed and cited include the Urban Design, Commerce and Industry, Community Facilities, Housing and Transportation elements of the General Plan and applicable amendments. The San Francisco Better Streets Plan (The Plan) and 66 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco General Plan, San Francisco Planning Department, Adopted August 8, 1996, Accessed December 12, 2014, http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/general_plan/index.htm. 67 ibid.

14 // CPTED

its amendments to the General Plan and Municipal Code took effect on January 16, 2011. It is a regulatory document that illustrates best practices and acts as a guiding document for a multi-modal approach to streetscape design that gives priority to pedestrians in public rights-ofway within San Francisco’s boundaries.68 The Plan is broken down into 10 Elements of Better Streets including: Memorable, Supports Diverse Public Life, Vibrant Places for Commerce, Promotes Human Use and Comfort, Promotes Human Health, Safe, Convenient Connections, Ecologically Sustainable, Accessible, and Attractive, Inviting and Well Cared For. Each element includes goals, objectives, and policies. 1.6.1 POLICY LINKAGE: NATURAL SURVEILLANCE Policy 4.1 of the Urban Design Element of the General Plan advises to make use of street space and other unsed public areas for recreation.69 Again utilizing the concept of temporary urbanism, community gardens can be located on undeveloped street rights-of-way, and underutilized vacant public property, public parkland, and rooftops. A specific example that has been implemented is the 16th/Harrison/ Treat Triangle which was implemented as part of the Mission Area Plan of the General Plan. Community gardens also promote principle 2.5 of element 2 of the Ten Elements of Better Streets: facilitate and encourage temporary community use of street space for public life.70 Principle 2.5 also recommends simplifying the process and clarifying the guidelines necessary to obtain temporary use permits for activities in public right-of-ways.71 The goal of Element 2 of The Ten Elements of Better Streets, Supports Diverse Public Life, is for streets to provide opportunities for diverse experiences and encourage and support social interaction and recreational activities.72 This element offers a linkage to the CPTED Principle of natural surveillance, which proposes that the increased presence of pedestrians and the continual use of sidewalks contribute to both sense of community and surveillance (self-policing).73 This Jacobsian concept of eyes-on-the street is again intended to reduce the opportunities for, rather than completely eradicate, crime. The five principles of Element 2 have objectives which support this goal, 68 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Better Streets Plan: Policies and Guidelines for the Pedestrian Realm, San Francisco Planning Department, Adopted July 16, 2011, 45, Accessed December 12, 2014, http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/ BetterStreets/proposals.htm#Final_Plan. 69 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco General Plan 70 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Better Streets Plan: Policies and Guidelines for the Pedestrian Realm, 39. 71 Ibid. 72 Ibid. 73 Crowe, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, 1.

specifically accommodating public events in recognition of streets’ role as a democratic space and providing opportunities for stopping, sitting, conversation and interaction with neighbors.74 Both Element 2 and natural surveillance can be achieved through temporary urbanism projects, “pop ups” or temporary uses, which rely on the interim uses of space.75 In San Francisco, examples of these are the Pavements to Parks and Community Garden programs. An evaluation of San Francisco’s Pavement to Parks Program conducted by Gene Storman in 2014 concluded that there is a high demand for parklets and temporary plazas and the program request for proposal (RFP) intake has grown significantly since the program’s adoption in 2009.76 The Pavements to Parks Program effectively embodies the objective of Policy 4.2 of the Recreation and Open Space Element of the General Plan. Policy 4.2 advises to maximize joint use of other properties and facilities.77 Specifically, streets, alleys, and undeveloped rights-of-way should be seen as opportunity sites for the development of small outdoor spaces. It also promotes the objective of Policy 4.7: provide open space to serve neighborhood commercial districts.78 Induced activity increases natural surveillance and improves public safety, by reducing the opportunity for crime as well as prioritizing the public realm for pedestrians over other modes of transportation. 1.6.2 POLICY LINKAGE: NATURAL ACCESS CONTROL City Pattern Principle 19 of the Urban Design Element of the General Plan suggests that uninterrupted street grids in flat areas, as in the Financial District and SOMA neighborhoods, result in monotonous view corridors and advises impeding or breaking the grid through planters or street closures to create a more comfortable environment.79 In theory, Principle 19 potentially conflicts natural access control. Creating dead ends or cul-de-sacs may provide the opportunity for offenses to be committed, thus creating a crime hot spot. Alternatively, it reduces the options for potential offenders to enter an area (target hardening), but more importantly reduces the options for potential offenders to leave after committing an offense. 74 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Better Streets Plan: Policies and Guidelines for the Pedestrian Realm, 39. 75 Haydn and Temel, “Temporary Urban Spaces: Concepts for the Use of City Spaces,” 191-272. 76 Gene Storman, “Opportunity Mapping San Francisco’s Parklets and Plazas”, San Francisco Planning Department, Spring 2014, Accessed December 13, 2014, http://pavementtoparks.sfplanning.org/docs/Opportunity_Mapping_Report_Stroman_2014.08.pdf. 77 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco General Plan: Recreation and Open Space Element, San Francisco Planning Department, Adopted 2013, Accessed December 13, 2014, http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/general_plan/I3_Rec_and_Open_Space. htm#ROS_NBR_4_1. 78 Ibid. 79 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco General Plan: Urban Design Element.

Permeability also encompasses passive approaches to guiding pedestrian and auto traffic through neighborhoods through the use of street lighting. Policy 10.5 of element 10 of The Ten Elements of Better Street, Attractive, Inviting, and Well-Cared For, aims to ensure adequate light levels for pedestrians and other sidewalk users.80 In addition to reducing the number of poor lit areas that provide opportunities to commit crime, adequate street lights levels, fixture types, heights, and spacing intervals can be used to highlight, prioritize, and enforce street type hierarchy. This street light principle is further emphasized in City Pattern Principle 7 of the Urban Design Element of the General Plan stating that street patterns can be made more visible and apparent to users if lighting schemes differ between major and local streets.81 Similar to street hierarchy, there could also be a street light hierarchy. These can be differentiated by light fixture type, height, as well as luminosity and tint. Street types are classified per The Plan and are intended to create a physical or perceived hierarchy for paths of travel. Street types per the The Plan prioritize pedestrian travel through increased sidewalk widths, pedestrian bulb-outs, raised crosswalks, or curbless Woonerf streets. Woonerf, or shared streets, are characterized by the lack of grade change between sidewalks and streets, with little more than specialty paving or bollards segregating the two, if at all. The street types still accommodate, though less intensely, other modes of travel including public transit, bicycling, and private automobiles. Natural access control, and further a neighborhood or building’s permeability, is ther most complex CPTED principle. Its interpretation has the potential to be the least effective in reducing the opportunity of crime and most difficult to implement depending on the crime being commited and the space the crime is being committed within (building versus neighborhood). Element 7 of The Ten Elements to Better Streets is the element Convenient Connections. The goal of Convenient Connections are for streets to be designed in a way that facilitates safe, accessible, and convenient connections between activity nodes like transit centers, commercial cores, and educational institutions.82 This functions similarly to the goals of natural access control, which addresses the permeability of neighborhood boundaries83 and individual properties, or rather, the ease of access into and out of them. 80 City and County of San Francisco, 50. 81 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco General Plan: Urban Design Element, San Francisco Planning Department, Adopted 1972, Accessed December 13, 2014, http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/General_Plan/I5_Urban_Design.htm. 82 Ibid. 83 Crowe, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design, 1.

CPTED // 15

1.6.3 POLICY LINKAGE: TERRITORIAL ENFORCEMENT By implementing programs and policies that link to the CPTED principles of natural access control and natural surveillance, an external benefit is a linkage to the last CPTED principle of territorial enforcement. Policies and programs that support territorial enforcement provide both physical and mental social cues to offenders that there is an increased risk to commit a crime. These cues include civic investment like improved street lighting, widened sidewalks, and other street furnishings that help define the boundaries of a geographic area or neighborhood, but also exhibit a sense of community and pride of its local residents, businesses, and government. The increased activity in a neighborhood portrays a sense of territoriality. Element 6 and territorial enforcement are aligned with Policy 11.6 of the Housing Element of the General Plan. Policy 11.6 aims to foster a sense of community through architectural design, using features that promote community interaction.84 It further recommends to design buildings, the public realm, and the transitions between them in way that is conducive for informal meetings and interactions and enforces the character, social experiences, and offerings of a neighborhood.85 Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

HIDDEN PAST: San Francisco’s Tenderloin is one of the oldest neighborhoods in the City. Old advertisements once hidden have been exposed along the walls of buildings adding additional character to the neighborhoods urban form.

Policy 6.7 of element 6 of the Ten Elements of Better Streets is to design streets to maximize personal safety.86 More specifically, it provides the following guidelines as they can be interpreted as relating to territorial enforcement: • Design streets for personal security by providing amenities that attract people, rather than discourage their use • Provide adequate light levels on a pedestrian scale the increases pedestrian visibility specifically at dark corners • Locate transit stops in active and visible areas for waiting transit riders87 Temporary urbanism, as previously mentioned, can be implemented as a form of territorial enforcement. While typically it refers to activities and interim uses, it can also come in the form of providing basic social services and amenities that are lacking in a neighborhood and address the needs of the specific neighborhood it is being implemented in. The 84 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco General Plan: Housing Element, San Francisco Planning Department, Adopted 2009, Accessed December 13, 2014, http://www.sf-planning.org/ftp/General_Plan/I1_Housing.html. 85 ibid. 86 City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Better Streets Plan: Policies and Guidelines for the Pedestrian Realm, 44. 87 Ibid.

16 // CPTED

San Francisco Department of Public Works (SFDPW) launched the Tenderloin Pit Stop pilot in July 2014. The Tenderloin Pit Stop program was intended to expand the availability of clean and safe public toilets, provide public safety elements, clean sidewalks, enhanced litter pick up, and decrease the amount of used syringes left in public areas. Pit Stop facilities were made available Monday-Friday between 2PM and 9PM at three locations within the tenderloin. Each facility was equipped with toilets and sinks, a safe needle disposal bin, and even a place to dispose of dog waste. Since the pilot began the average daily usage of toilets has nearly doubled and within the first 20 weeks of the pilot, 391 syringes were deposited in the needle drops located at each station.88 1.7 VOICES While not a primary research method, three (3) informal interviews were conducted with people who live or work in the Tenderloin neighborhood to gain a better understanding of their personal and professional experiences and their perceptions of safety in the neighborhood. The interviews were conducted to inform conclusions and recommendations. Prior to any contact with potential interviewees, interview materials were developed and a Human Subject Protocol was submitted to an authorized thesis advisor and subsequently approved by the San José State University Human Subjects Institutional Review Board. Interview questions (Appendix D) and associated materials were formulated and derived from the findings from literature and municipal document reviews and responses were digitally transcribed. Interviews were assessed individually to identify key themes and shared experiences or perceptions across all interviews. Findings and direct quotes were integrated throughout this report. Interview subjects were selected from a personal and professional network of those living and working in the Tenderloin. The three (3) interview subjects selected provided perspectives of various neighborhood stakeholders including: a housing director for a local non-profit who has worked in the neighborhood for 15-years placing no and low-income individuals and families in temporary or permanent housing, a former resident and playwright who is familiar with the neighborhood’s nightlife and significance to San Francisco’s theatre industry, and a registered nurse who has previously lived and worked in the neighborhood. 88 San Francisco Department of Public Works, “Tenderloin Pit Stop,” (2015), Accessed April 5, 2015, http://sfdpw.org/index. aspx?page=1805.

1.8 HYPOTHESIS San Francisco is known for being at the forefront of innovation in technology, science, and social policy. The acceleration in these fields transcends across all of the City’s industries. First, although there may be no explicit City policies tied to CPTED, there are likely existing design characteristics of the Tenderloin that meet the CPTED principles of natural surveillance, natural access control, and territorial enforcement; attributed to the fact that the Tenderloin was developed during a time when cities inherently embodied many of these principles. Street lighting is likely a characteristic which can be improved. Street lighting has proven to deter “offenders who benefit from the cover of darkness”89 because the amount of lighting directly affects susceptibility to crime since lighting is directly related to visibility90 91. Street lighting can increase visibility, a major tenet of natural surveillance. Street lighting type can also be a form of territorial enforcement if fixtures reflect the character of a district. Additionally, the Foster et al study determined a correlation between natural surveillance through higher pedestrian activity and fewer opportunities for crimes to take place in Perth, Australia92. The activation of the public realm provides more “eyes on the street”, natural surveillance, and self-policing. With regards to territorial enforcement and perception of safety, the Brunson et al study concluded that residents who spend more time outside generally experience their neighborhood as a safer place.93 These studies suggests that the Tenderloin would benefit from more active uses of its public realm which would foster social and community development. Second, based on Field Observations and CPTED Assessment of the Tenderloin, it is anticipated that the City’s policies have not been equitably distributed or implemented within the neighborhood primarily driven by the lack of available public funding for capital improvements and lack of private development opportunities to impose fees and community benefits packages on. Finally, design features consistent with CPTED principles that are found to be lacking in the Tenderloin will be in crime hot spots. 89 US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, Improved Street Lighting to Reduce Crime in Residential Areas, Ronald V. Clarke (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, December 2008), http:// cops.usdoj.gov/Publications/e1208-StreetLighting.pdf (accessed May 10, 2014). 90 Kirk, “Creating a Crime-Free Property,” 28-33. 91 Ibid. 92 Sarah Foster et al, “Creating Safe, Walkable Streetscapes,” 79-88. 93 Brunson et al,“Resident Appropriation of Defensible Space in Public Housing,” 626-636.

CPTED // 17

Page left intentionally blank.

“Those who live in the Tenderloin expect to experience what they’ve heard about it, but would like to see it get better.” -John Caldon, 10 years employed in and former 6-year resident of the Tenderloin

ge l

2.0 TENDERLOIN

TENDERLOIN // 19

Almost every major city has a neighborhood perceived by locals and non-locals as a place generally to avoid out of fear of safety. Los Angeles has Skid Row, Chicago has Englewood, Washington DC has Anacostia, and San Francisco has the Tenderloin. Although not an official neighborhood defined by the San Francisco Planning Department (by definition, the Tenderloin is located within the boundaries of the Downtown/Civic Center neighborhood), its sordid history and reputation precedes it. The Uptown Tenderloin Historic District encompasses over 24 blocks within the Downtown/Civic Center planning neighborhood, however, for the purpose of this study, I will specifically be looking at the 4-block inclusive Census Tract 125.02 (2010 US Census). Census Tract 125.02 is bound by Leavenworth, Turk, Taylor and Ellis Streets. The Tenderloin and its residents have been resistant to change in the past. Further, as evidence through its demographic statistics, it is still a low-income neighborhood, especially when compared to the rest of San Francisco. In many ways, any improvements made to the public realm in the neighborhood can be seen as a precursor to gentrification or as a means to “clean up the streets”. While this study does not aim to address gentrification in the neighborhood in its entirety, it is important to keep in mind that any implementable findings this study does produce are bound by financial and political feasibility. 2.1 PHYSICAL AND SOCIAL EVOLUTION Parts of the Tenderloin were part of the original land survey conducted by Jasper O’Farrell in 1847 which projected a grid of streets from San Francisco’s waterfront westward toward the Pacific Ocean. In its early development, the Tenderloin was a downtown residential and hotel community for gold prospectors and other low-wage workers. Even after the 1906 San Francisco earthquake and subsequent fire destroyed much of the Tenderloin, several new hotels were built including the Cadillac Hotel at the corner of Eddy and Leavenworth Streets. The Cadillac Hotel would eventually become one of San Francisco’s first Single-Room Occupancy (SRO) hotels and one of many which still exist 20 // TENDERLOIN

and define the socio-economic structure of the Tenderloin today.94 The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines SRO housing as an individual residential property with multiple single-room dwelling units and do not necessarily need to contain private kitchens or bathrooms.95 Many construction workers rebuilding the city and those who were working on construction projects related to the 1915 Panama Pacific International Exhibition lived in the Tenderloin, continuing the trend of the neighborhood being populated by low-wage workers. By the 1920s, the Tenderloin was known for its notorious nightlife, including gambling halls, speakeasies, and prostitution. Like most industrial cities after World War II, San Francisco’s downtown, including the Tenderloin, began to deteriorate after people began to leave the urban core for the suburbs. As the neighborhood was vacated, an influx of Asian immigrants began to move in, another economically disadvantage population. Civic leaders viewed the neighborhood as blighted, which triggered urban renewal efforts. Government sponsored policies resulted in the demolition of many SROs or their conversion to different uses, including to office or proper apartments. To combat displacement, Tenderloin residents organized and lobbied the Board of Supervisors to pass the Residential Hotel Demolition and Conversion ordinance, which limits the demolition or conversion of SROs. As a result, residential land use in the Tenderloin still primarily consists of SROs, studios, and one-bedroom apartments. Despite its desirable location within San Francisco, the Tenderloin has been relatively resistant to change in contrast to other neighborhoods in the City like SOMA, Mission, and Mission Bay. The lack of market rate redevelopment opportunities has been further exacerbated by 94 Mark Ellinger, “The Tenderloin,” Up From The Deep (2014), http://upfromthedeep.com/uptown-tenderloin (accessed September 9, 2014). 95 “Understanding SRO,” US Department of Housing and Urban Development (Washington, DC: US Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2001), https://www.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/Understanding-SRO.pdf (accessed October 12, 2014).

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source DataSF.gov, 2010 US Census

2010 US Census MEDIAN HOUSHOLD

INCOME

Downtown - Civic Center

STUDY AREA

Figure 2.1

TENDERLOIN // 21

the Residential Hotel Demolition and Conversion ordinance. However, an article published on March 30 on the local blog Hoodline, has pointed out that the Tenderloin is becoming less of an exception to the construction boom across the City. Six development projects are in the pipeline for the Tenderloin and five of them are market-rate mixed-use developments that will add approximately 346 for-rent and for-sale units. The lone affordable housing project proposed is by the Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation (TNDC) and includes 153 units for low-income households.96 2.2 NEIGHBORHOOD PROFILE 2.2.1 METHODOLOGY To have a better understanding of the socio-economic makeup of the Tenderloin, demographic maps were prepared using ArcGIS and United Sates Census Data for the entire Downtown-Civic Center planning neighborhood, which includes the Tenderloin and the study subarea to provide better context of the study area. Demographic and social characteristics considered included: income, home ownership, owner occupied units, and employment status from the 2010 Census and 2013 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates. Age and gender demographics were not mapped, but are stated within the Demographics section. For all maps, sources for appropriate shapefiles, including city boundaries, streets, and parks were identified. The primary resources for data were the City and County of San Francisco’s GIS website, 2010 US Census, and 2013 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates.

2.2.3 URBAN FORM Land Use According to the most recent information available from the San Francisco Planning Department, there are a total of 2,114 individual parcels within the greater Downtown-Civic Center planning neighborhood as identified in Figure 2.4. The largest land use is Residential with 672 parcels. The next largest uses are Management, Information, and Professional Services, Mixed-Use, and Mixed-Use Residential with 383, 336, and 253 parcels respectively. At the time the data was prepared there were 95 vacant parcels, or roughly 4%. There were approximately 72 single-residency occupancy (SRO) hotels and/or supportive housing establishments within the Downtown-Civic Center Planning Area. Of these, 34 are located inside or within 100 feet of the study subarea. The study subarea includes 74 total parcels on 4 blocks within the Downtown-Civic Center planning neighborhood. The largest use is Residential with 24 parcels followed by Mixed-Use Residential with 22 parcels. The only park within the study subarea is the approximately 19,000 square feet Father Alfred E. Boeddeker Park (Boeddeker Park) located on the northeast corner of Eddy and Jones. While this park has been in existing since 1914, per the San Francisco Planning Department’s Property Information Map, Boeddekker Park was recently renovated and reopened in December 2014. Improvements include new landscaping, fencing, lighting, and play equipment. Further, the park itself has improved sight lines into and out of its facilities.

2.2.2 DEMOGRAPHICS According to the 2008-2012 ACS 5-year estimates, the median age of the neighborhood (as defined by US Census Tract 125.02) was 50 and the median household income was $12,240. The difference is significant compared to the rest of the city as a whole, which had a median age of 38.5 and a median household income of $73,802. The study subarea further had a median household income of less than $10,000 (Figure 2.1) and more than 50% of its population was considered low income (Figure 2.2). Additionally, within the study subarea more than 50% of the population lived in affordable housing units (Figure 2.3).

Board of Supervisor Jane Jim, whose district includes the Tenderloin, has been fighting to bring healthy food options to the neighborhood. A San Francisco Chronicle highlights the problem with food access in the Tenderloin, “where there are 73 corner stores selling alcohol, tobacco, and processed and high-sugar foods”97and no full service grocery store in large part to the inability to attract one to come to the neighborhood. Scott Ecker, Director of Housing for Episcopal Community Services whose office is located and provides services to the Tenderloin further provides a link between corner stores and crime. “The neighborhood is saturated with markets that sell alcohol,” said Ecker, “almost one on every block - which might contribute to excessive incidences involving intoxication, particularly assaults.”98

96 Brittany Hopkins, “Your Tenderloin Residential Real Estate Update,” Hoodline, March 30, 2015, accessed April 5, 2015, http:// hoodline.com/2015/03/your-tenderloin-residential-real-estate-update

97 Joshua Sabatini, “S.F. Aims to Educate Stores on Healthy Food Options,” San Francisco Chronicle, July 30, 2013, accessed April 5, 2015, http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/sf-aims-to-educate-stores-on-healthy-food-options/Content?oid=2527097. 98 Scott Ecker, Interviewed by author, March 8, 2015.

22 // TENDERLOIN

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source DataSF.gov, 2010 US Census

2010 US Census

LOW INCOME Downtown - Civic Center

STUDY AREA

Figure 2.2

TENDERLOIN // 23

Zoning and Zoning Use Districts Zoning for individual parcels exists in San Francisco, as in most municipalities, to regulate and segregate land uses for health, safety, and aesthetics. The City also defines Zoning Use Districts to further regulate permitted land uses within designated areas. Zoning Use Districts provide further prescriptive form based codes and controls to emphasize significance and preserve areas and neighborhoods within the City. These include: Neighborhood Commercial, Community Business, Downtown Commercial, and Light and Heavy Industrial districts. As shown in Figure 2.5, zoning designations in the DowntownCivic Center planning neighborhood are well integrated to include varying uses and densities. Figure 2.6 further identifies all Zoning Use Districts located within the Planning Neighborhood, many of which overlap. However, the study subarea is not within the boundaries of any Zoning Use District with the exception of Fringe Financial Restricted Use. Zoning within the study subarea is limited to Public and ResidentialCommercial, High Density.99

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

A FRESH COAT OF PAINT FOR THE CADILLAC: Once a center piece of San Franciscoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s nightlife, the Cadillac Hotel has been repurposed into a Single-Residency Occupancy (SRO) hotel. A glimmer of hope lies in its future as its ground floor is being converted into the Tenderloin Museum, a move that will no doubt exude territoriality and neighborhood pride.

In 2009, the Uptown Tenderloin was officially designated as a national historic district with the National Register of Historic Places (RHP). According to the official US Department of Interior/National Park Service RHP Registration, 409 resources have been identified within the Tenderloin that contribute to patterns of US History and architectural significance.

99 US Department of the Interior, national Park Service, National Register of Historic Places Registration Form: Uptown Tenderloin Historic District, Approved 2/5/2009, http://pdfhost.focus.nps.gov/docs/NRHP/Text/08001407.pdf (accessed: March 9, 2015).

24 // TENDERLOIN

HOUSING

Downtown - Civic Center

STUDY AREA

Figure 2.3

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source DataSF.gov, 2010 US Census

AFFORDABLE

TENDERLOIN // 25

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source DataSF.gov

LAND USE Downtown - Civic Center

STUDY AREA

26 // TENDERLOIN

Figure 2.4

Downtown - Civic Center

STUDY AREA

Figure 2.5

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source DataSF.gov

ZONING

TENDERLOIN // 27

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source DataSF.gov

ZONING USE

DISTRICTS Downtown - Civic Center

STUDY AREA

28 // TENDERLOIN

Figure 2.6

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

GROUND FLOOR FORTRESS: Cluttered and obstructed windows and doors along Turk Street are further enclosed by security gates. These security measures contribute to a hostile pedestrian environment. TENDERLOIN // 29

Page left intentionally blank.

“The challenges the Tenderloin faces are the homeles and the drug dealing and usage. I don’t know how long it’s been an issue, but it has been for as long as I remember.” -Jac Reedy, former 8-year resident of the Tenderloin

Ph o

lio

3.0 CRIME

CRIME // 31

Crime mapping or “hot spot analysis” is a tool frequently used by researchers, criminologists, and law enforcement to explore the spatial significance of criminal activity. 3.1 METHODOLOGY This tool is often paired with mapping types of social characteristics that may exacerbate the development or persistence of hot spots.100 To spatially analyze criminal activity, identify criminal hot spots, and investigate correlations with neighborhood demographics, crime and demographic maps were prepared. Utilizing existing, publicly accessible San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) 2014 crime and ArcGIS data, crime maps of the study area within the Tenderloin neighborhood were created. Crime data focused on the specific crimes that would be presumably committed in the public realm. The crimes identified in Figures 3.1-3.16 included: assault, burglary, disorderly conduct, drug/narcotics violations, drunkenness, robbery, prostitution, sex crimes (forcible), trespassing, vandalism, vehicle thefts, and weapons law violations. Additional crime categories omitted from the study included: arson, bad checks, bribery, driving under the influence, embezzlement, extortion, family offenses, forgery/counterfeiting, fraud, gambling, kidnapping, larceny/theft, liquor laws, loitering, missing person, non-criminal, other offenses, runaway, secondary codes, sex offenses (non-forcible), stolen property, suicide, suspicious occurrence, and warrants. Additionally, Kernel Density hot spot (Figure 3.17) and Optimized Hot Spot Analysis (Figure 3.18) maps were prepared for identified crimes for all of San Francisco. Kernel density is a statistical tool within ArcGIS that calculates the density rather than static locations of crimes committed. One of the constraints to portraying static locations of crimes committed on a map is that many crimes share the same geographic location, providing a relatively inaccurate account of total crimes committed.

that calculates, categorizes, and projects point data based on their statistical significance or z-score. The tool identified statistically significant spatial clusters of high value (hot spots) and low values (cold spots) for all crime in San Francisco in 2014. As opposed to the Hot Spot Analysis tool, the Optimized Hot Spot Analysis tool automatically aggregated crime incidences, identified a scale of analysis, and corrected for multiple testing and spatial dependence. Multiple testing indicates that the tool performs a test for every feature, in this case crime incidence, in the dataset. Spatial dependency indicates that each feature in the dataset is evaluated within the context of its neighboring data points. Both are false discovery rate controls, which correct for multiple comparisons. The Hot Spot Analysis tool further calculated p-value, z-score, and 90%, 95%, and 99% confidence level, identifying statistical significance. 3.2 CRIME IN THE TENDERLOIN There is perception of the Tenderloin that it is a neighborhood to avoid. Jac Reedy, a former 8 year resident of the Tenderloin only felt safe when he was moving quickly through the neighborhood. “I thought of myself as safe as long as I didn’t linger. I wouldn’t stop and meander,” Reedy said.101 This sentiment was further shared with John Caldon, a former 8-year resident of the Tenderloin and a playwright who has hosted many shows in a number of the Tenderloin’s theatre spaces. “I wouldn’t call it a safe neighborhood,” said Caldon, “but I feel safe because I know the neighborhood. I know the paths to walk on. I don’t walk on the sidewalk at night, I walk in the street because its more visible and I’m constantly keeping watch.”102

Optimized Hot Spot Analysis is another statistical tool within ArcGIS

To provide a better understanding if the crime situation in the Tenderloin is perceived or real, a spatial analysis of crime incidences for the neighborhood was conducted. Between January 1 and December 31, 2014, there were 11,494 reported crime incidences (all crimes) reported by the SFPD Tenderloin substation within its boundaries. Out

100 Anselin et al, “Crime Mapping and Hot Spot Analysis,” 99.

101 Jac Reedy, Interviewed by author, February 12, 2015. 102 John Caldon, Interviewed by author, January 31, 2015.

32 // CRIME

POLICE PRESENCE: The San Francisco Police Department Tenderloin substation is located at the corner of Eddy and Jones Streets. The constant presence of police vehicles particularly around the station acts as a form of territorial enforcement and natural surveillance. Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

of the total crime incidences, 1,163 identified crimes for the study were committed inside or within 100 feet within the study area, or roughly 10%. The Tenderloin substation covers approximately 160 acres, whereas the study area 15 acres, or 9% Crime incidence identified and their counts: • • • • • • • • • • • •

Assault (FIGURE 3.2): 449 incidents Burglary (FIGURE 3.4): 39 incidents Disorderly Conduct (FIGURE 3.5): 9 incidents Drugs/Narcotics (FIGURE 3.6): 324 incidents Drunkenness (FIGURE 3.8): 16 incidents Prostitution (FIGURE 3.9): 3 incidents Robbery (FIGURE 3.10): 121 incidents Sex Offenses (FIGURE 3.12): 22 incidents Trespassing (FIGURE 3.13): 16 incidents Vandalism (FIGURE 3.14): 83 incidents Vehicle Theft (FIGURE 3.15): 33 incidents Weapons Laws (FIGURE 3.16): 48 incidents

Due to the high incidences of Assault (Figure 3.3), Drugs/Narcotics (Figure 3.7), and Robbery (Figure 3.11) related crimes, Kernel density maps were prepared for these crimes as well to identify specific locations within the study area where these crimes are occurring. For Assault, Drugs/Narcotics, and Robbery, the segment of Taylor between Eddy and Turk Streets was identified as a hot spot (Figures 3.3, 3.7, and 3.11). This can be attributed to it being a boundary with the tourist neighborhood of Union Square, providing easy access for potential drug buyers for drug sellers, as well as being a potential location for victims of assault and robbery. Taylor Street also has two surface parking lots within the study area, potentially providing additional opportunities for criminal activity to occur. South of Market Street, Taylor Street continues as 6th Street, another known and perceived area of San Francisco as a place where crime occurs and the homeless loiter. The physical conditions and environment of Turk Street are further identified in greater detail within Section 4.7 of the CPTED Assessment. CRIME // 33

CRIME

US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem Church

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK

TAYLOR

JONES

ORTH

LEAVENW

34 // CRIME

E RK

Figure 3.1

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014

ASSAULT US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem Church

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK

TAYLOR

ORTH

Figure 3.2

JONES

LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd rk a Mini P

E K R

CRIME // 35

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

ASSAULT US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem Church

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend ti Substa on

TURK

TAYLOR

JONES

ORTH

LEAVENW

36 // CRIME

E RK

Figure 3.3

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 HOT SPOTS

BURGLARY US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem Church

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK

TAYLOR

RTH

Figure 3.4

JONES

O LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd rk a Mini P

T E K

CRIME // 37

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

DISORDER US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem h rc Chu

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK

TAYLOR

ORTH

38 // CRIME

JONES

LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd Mini Park

E K R

Figure 3.5

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

DRUGS

US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem Church

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend ti Substa on

TURK

TAYLOR

Figure 3.6

JONES

ORTH

LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd rk a P Mini

E RK

CRIME // 39

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

DRUGS

US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem h rc Chu

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK

TAYLOR

ORTH

JONES

LEAVENW

40 // CRIME

E RK

Figure 3.7

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 HOT SPOTS

DRUNKENNESS US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem h Churc

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker d Alfre E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK

TAYLOR

Figure 3.8

JONES

ORTH

LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd rk a P i in M

E K R

CRIME // 41

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

PROSTITUTION US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem Church

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK e Turk & Hyd rk a Mini P

TAYLOR

ORTH

JONES

LEAVENW

42 // CRIME

E RK

Figure 3.9

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

ROBBERY US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem Church

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK

TAYLOR

Figure 3.10

JONES

ORTH

LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd rk a Mini P

T E K

CRIME // 43

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

ROBBERY US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem h Churc

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK

TAYLOR

ORTH

JONES

LEAVENW

44 // CRIME

E RK

Figure 3.11

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 HOT SPOT

SEX OFFENSE US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem h Churc

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK

TAYLOR

Figure 3.12

JONES

ORTH

LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd rk a P i in M

E RK

CRIME // 45

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

TRESPASSING US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem Church

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker d Alfre E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend ti Substa on

TURK

TAYLOR

ORTH

46 // CRIME

JONES

LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd rk a P Mini

E RK

Figure 3.13

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

VANDALISM US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem Church

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker d Alfre E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend ti Substa on

TURK

TAYLOR

Figure 3.14

JONES

ORTH

LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd rk a P Mini

E RK

CRIME // 47

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

VEHICLE THEFT US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem h Churc

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend on ti ta Subs

TURK

TAYLOR

RTH

48 // CRIME

JONES

O LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd rk a P i Min

E RK

Figure 3.15

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

WEAPONS US Census Tract 125.02

orial Glide Mem Church

ELLIS

Tenderloin Center Recreation Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

EDDY

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

TURK

TAYLOR

RTH

Figure 3.16

JONES

O LEAVENW

e Turk & Hyd rk a Mini P

E RK

CRIME // 49

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

BEATS BY COPS: Police activity is no stranger to the Tenderloin. The Tenderloin substation coverage area is the smallest of any neighborhood in San Francisco. Beat cops continually cruise its streets surveilling for criminal activity.

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

3.3 CRIME IN SAN FRANCISCO The Kernel density map (Figure 3.14) shows that there was a higher concentration of crime in the Tenderloin and surrounding areas as indicated by dark teal. In addition to the Mission and SOMA neighborhoods compared to the rest of San Francisco. Areas with low concentration of crime are void of color (transparent). The Optimized Hot Spot Analysis (Figure 3.15) shows that the clusters of crime incidences in the Tenderloin and the study area to be statistically significant at 99% confidence, reinforcing the notion that either there are higher incidences of crime in the Tenderloin or higher arrests. The 1,163 crime incidences within the study area in 2014 were clustered, or snapped, into 23 incidences due to proximity to create weighted points. Of all crime data points included across the City, the minimum number of incidences was 1 and the maximum was 754. The mean was 4.5 and standard deviation was 11.98. Other neighborhoods with a statistically significant proportion of crime incidences, or hot spots, include the Mission, SOMA, Potrero Hill, and Bayview/Hunters Point, and Sunnydale. 50 // CRIME

HOT SPOTS

Figure 3.17

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

2014 CRIME

CRIME // 51

2014 CRIME

STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE

52 // CRIME

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source SFPD Crime Data, US Census

Marin Co.

Figure 3.18

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

HIDDEN FROM VIEW: Architecture along Leavenworth Street creates â&#x20AC;&#x153;dead spaceâ&#x20AC;? hidden from view to residents above. A basement entrance has provided an opportune place for homeless to loiter. // 53

Page left intentionally blank.

“When I venture into the TL at night, I am always on-guard due to my understanding of the crime that does occur there.” -Scott Ecker, 10-years employed in the Tenderloin

Ph ot

lio

Jr .

4.0 ASSESSMENT

ASSESSMENT // 55

A primary step in addressing the project hypothesis was to conduct field observations and a CPTED Assessment of the high-crime areas identified as a result of the spatial analysis of crime. Based on key the CPTED principles identified through research on CPTED texts and peer reviewed journals, two physical condition assessment forms for qualitative and quantitative observations were created. To ensure personal safety, the researcher was accompanied during the site visits. 4.1 METHODOLOGY A qualitative and quantitative assessment of six different street segments within the Tenderloin were conducted on Sunday February 15, 2015 at 5:30PM and Saturday March 7, 2015 at 12:00PM to understand existing conditions of the public realm and built environment. The weather conditions were 55 degrees (clear) and a balmy 65 degrees (clear/sunny), respectively. The field observations were conducted on two weekend dates and each at different times, one during the day and one in the evening to gain a better understanding of utilization through a given day.

observations, attached as Appendix A, were modeled after the Center for Problem Oriented Policing’s assessment matrices. The qualitative assessment included basic site identification information that included site characteristics, while the quantitative assessment assessed the physical conditions of the sites as they relate to the CPTED principles. The qualitative assessment evaluated land use conditions, pedestrian presence, sidewalk widths, street characteristics, and circulation of traffic. The quantitative assessment evaluated the physical conditions based on a basic rating scale Physical conditions evaluated included streetlight condition, landscaping, and circulation. CPTED principles were rated subjectively on their perceived presence in the neighborhood and not on their efficacy in practice. With the results of the qualitative assessment, the following written summary of my findings were prepared.

Street Segments Assessed as seen shown in Figure 4.1 include: • Segment 1: Ellis Street • Segment 2: Eddy Street • Segment 3: Turk Street • Segment 4: Leavenworth Street • Segment 5: Jones Street • Segment 6: Taylor Street

The rating scale used to conduct the quantitative analysis scored each CPTED principle 1 - 5: • 1: Fail • 2: Below Passing • 3: Passing • 4: Above Passing • 5: Exceed

The Center for Problem Oriented Policing, funded by the US Department of Justice, provided the basic reasoning and methodologies behind CPTED assessments in the 2007 guide Using Crime Prevention through Environmental Design in Problem Solving. The Center for Problem Oriented Policing’s assessment matrix has been adapted and used by law enforcement, planning departments, and academic researchers, including the cities of Berkeley, CA, San Bernardino, CA, and Colorado Springs, CO. The assessment forms for qualitative and quantitative

The results of the quantitative assessment evaluated the physical conditions based on a basic rating scale and assignment of a CPTED score. Assessment tables were compiled for each of the six street segments into a single matrix for comparison.

56 // ASSESSMENT

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source US Census

CPTED ASSESSMENT

STREET SEGMENTS

orial Glide Mem Church

Tenderloin Center Recreation

S1: ELLIS

Father oeddeker d Alfre E. B Park

erloin SFPD Tend ti Substa on

S2: EDDY

OR S6: TAYL

S S5: JONE

S3: TURK

S4: LEAV

e Turk & Hyd rk a P Mini

E RK

H ENWORT

Figure 4.1

ASSESSMENT // 57

Tenderloin Center ec R reation

orial Glide Mem h rc hu C

S1: ELLIS Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

erloin SFPD Tend n io at st ub S e Turk & Hyd Mini Park

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source US Census

4.2 ELLIS STREET (TABLE 4.1) Ellis between Leavenworth and Taylor is a two-way street running east and west. There is one travel lane in each direction as well as metered parallel parking on both sides of the street. It is further bisected by Jones Street. Street blocks are roughly 500 feet. The sidewalk widths are generally 10 feet wide. Pedestrian improvements have been made to the intersection at Leavenworth including decorative, highly visible crosswalks and upgraded ADA compliant crosswalk curb cuts. The intersection at Jones includes the upgraded crosswalks, but not the upgraded crosswalk curb cuts. The intersection at Taylor has standard crosswalks and crosswalk curb cuts. Standard concrete sidewalks are found through out, with the exception of newly installed brick sidewalks at an entry to Boeddeker Park. During both the day and evening site visits there were visible homeless people loitering or sleeping along the streets.

Natural Surveillance While there was an average amount pedestrian activity along Ellis, 58 // ASSESSMENT

it primarily included people who seemed to be loitering in small to medium sized groups. This observation was made during both in the evening and day site visits. While theoretically this would provide natural surveillance, it actually made the area seem less safe, particularly at night and specifically when you would have to walk through the clusters of people to continue along your path. The most prominent evidence of natural surveillance would be the auto traffic, however when signals were red on either end of a block there were voids and there was an absence of natural surveillance. Many of the businesses along the ground floors of the buildings had windows, but they were heavily covered by signs and by security grates. The only activity from businesses that spilled out into the streets to activate it were outside of liquor stores and the queues outside of social service businesses. Further, at night the blank walls (characterized by street frontages without fenestration or doors) provide even less natural surveillance.

Natural Access Control Natural access control along Ellis was present by means of window and front door security grates. While this provides evidence of security of the buildings, residences, and businesses, for pedestrians it provides an environmental cue indicating an unsafe place. The Ellis entrance to Boeddeker Park was also enclosed by an 8 foot tall, access controlled, fence which was closed even during the day observation. Families could be seen utilizing the playground having accessed the Park from the Eddy Street entrance. The traditional street grid provides convenient access in all directions. The few vacant lots along Ellis were covered by temporary walls or fencing. Surface lots were also protected by fencing. Territorial Enforcement There was evidence of territorial enforcement along Ellis, however the territory was not being enforced with positive activity. There was significant loitering on each corner, specifically in front of convenient stores. Almost every window, door, and entryway had some form of security access control. In the evening there were practically no businesses opened. Street light fixtures were poorly spaced. The height of the light fixtures were intended to guide auto traffic, not pedestrian traffic. Building exterior lighting was also sparse and inconsistent, which created dark areas along building facades. In the evening, poorly lit areas had questionable activity occurring within them.

Photos Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

There were approximately 5 street trees located along Ellis along its northern edge between Leavenworth and Jones as well as approximately 5 trees on its southern edge between Jones and Taylor. Trees are located within urban tree wells and in some cases enclosed with decorative brick or permeable grates. The street and sidewalks lacked general cleanliness. There were few public trashcans, private garbage bins were overflowing, and gutters were littered with trash.

TRASH TALKING (L): Trash litters Ellis Street between Leavenworth and Jones. Trash receptacles are only located at corners. >> NOW YOU SEE ME (R): Pedestrian crossings have been designed to increase visibility of pedestrians as well as give the neighborhood a unique, identifiable character.

The decorative crosswalks, upgraded ADA crosswalk curb cuts, and bike racks show evidence of some public investment. However, in general, there is little evidence of positive pride or sense of ownership along the street.

ASSESSMENT // 59

Table 4.1

CPTED EVALUATION RUBRIC: ELLIS STREET LIGHTING

Average Lighting Score

2 2 5 0 2.24

Average Landscaping Score

1 0 4 0 0 1.00

Average Public Space Score

3 2 2 3 3 1 2.33

Average Building Exterior Score

3 1 1 1.67

Building Perimeter Sidewalks Public Space Alleys/Paseos LANDSCAPING

Trees Bushes/Hedges Public Spaces Building Permited Pedestrian Paths PUBLIC SPACES

Trash Bins Active Surveillance Passive Surveillance Access Control Activity Public Restrooms BUILDING EXTERIORS

Window Conditions Prospect Refuge Overall Maintenance

OVERALL CPTED SCORE: 1.81 TOTAL CRIMES IN 2014: 301 60 // ASSESSMENT

orial Glide Mem h rc Chu

Tenderloin Center Recreation

Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

S2: EDDY erloin SFPD Tend n io at st Sub e Turk & Hyd Mini Park

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source US Census

4.3 EDDY STREET (TABLE 4.2) Eddy between Leavenworth and Taylor is a one-way street running west to east. It was further bisected by Jones Street. The street consists of two travel lanes as well as metered, parallel parking on either side of the street. Despite having been a one way street, the fact that the block lengths were approximately 500 feet long and the intersections were signal controlled, no speeding was observed. The sidewalk width were significantly wider than the others observed in this study, at approximately 14’. Consistent decorative crosswalks and upgraded ADA compliant crosswalk curb cuts were found at the Ellis intersections of Leavenworth, Jones, and Taylor. The San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) Tenderloin substation is located at the corner of Eddy and Jones. Caddy corner to the Tenderloin substation is the recently remodeled and opened Boeddeker Park. Traditional concrete sidewalks were found along Eddy with the exception of the area around Boeddeker Park, which had brick paving. The historic Cadillac Hotel is also located at the corner of Eddy and Leavenworth, arguably the first Single Residency Occupancy (SRO) hotel in San Francisco.

Natural Surveillance The area around the Tenderloin substation provided the most natural surveillance in the entire study area. Police cars lined the police station on either side of its corner lot. Additionally, with Boeddeker Park on the opposite corner, there were a significant number of parents and children providing positive activity and ‘eyes on the street’. While there were the characteristic clusters of people around the corner convenience stores, it was not as prevalent or intimidating along Eddy. In general there seemed to be more transient traffic of pedestrians passing through. Natural Access Control Nearly every window, door, and entryway along Eddy was protected by an access controlled security gate. The exception was the main entry to the Tenderloin substation. Boeddeker Park was also enclosed by decorative iron fencing. The larger residential hotels had doormen overseeing all entry into their buildings, specifically at the historic Hotel Herald. Also, what presumably used to be publicly accessible alleyways have since been closed by iron gates and fences. Building construction and renovation work at two locations on Eddy at Leavenworth and Eddy at Taylor were enclosed by scaffolding and temporary fencing, if not properly secure, this is potentially a site for criminal refuge. Sidewalks around Eddy and Taylor had been temporarily diverted onto the street, but were protected by temporary barriers.

Territorial Enforcement There was positive territorial enforcement specifically at the corner of Eddy and Jones where the Tenderloin substation and Boeddeker Park were located. While there were no police officers visibly present, the building itself, and parked police cars made it seem like a protected environment. The presence of parents and children playing at Boeddeker Park provided positive reinforcement. There were approximately 10 mature trees located along the Eddy Street, specifically in close proximity to the Tenderloin substation and Boeddeker Park. Trees were located in standard tree wells, with no decorative permeable grates or enclosures. There was some evidence of territorial enforcement on behalf of private property owners as indication of the small planters located in and around their entryways. Eddy was relatively cleaner than the other ASSESSMENT // 61

Photos Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

SUPER TROOPERS (L): The constant presence of police is reinforced by police cars parked around the clock near the Tenderloin substation. >> FACE LIFT (R): A low-income residential building, owned by the non-profit Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation (TNDC), is undergoing renovation at the corner of Eddy and Taylor Streets. While the long term improvement will benefit the neighborhood, the awning and temporary barricades provide opportunities for criminal activity.

62 // ASSESSMENT

street segments. There were few public trashcans and some street gutters were littered with trash (particularly around public trash cans). Streetlights were generally located at intersections with a 2-3 located mid block. During the evenings, several of the building frontages have more than adequate lighting. Around Boeddeker Park, brand new LED lights have been installed and are sized to a pedestrian scale, versus street lights that are intended to guide traffic. As with the other street segments in the study area, there has been public investment as evident through the decorative crosswalks and upgraded ADA crosswalk curb cuts. Also, Eddy and Jones is anchored by the neighborhoodâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest park.

Table 4.2

CPTED EVALUATION RUBRIC: EDDY STREET LIGHTING

Average Lighting Score

3 2 5 0 2.50

Average Landscaping Score

3 1 5 3 1 2.60

Average Public Space Score

3 1 1 3 1 1 1.67

Average Building Exterior Score

3 1 1 1.67

Building Perimeter Sidewalks Public Space Alleys/Paseos LANDSCAPING

Trees Bushes/Hedges Public Spaces Building Permited Pedestrian Paths PUBLIC SPACES

Trash Bins Active Surveillance Passive Surveillance Access Control Activity Public Restrooms BUILDING EXTERIORS

Window Conditions Prospect Refuge Overall Maintenance

OVERALL CPTED SCORE: 2.11 TOTAL CRIMES IN 2014: 236 ASSESSMENT // 63

BLADES OF GLORY: Turk Streetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s strip of commercial retail actively engages the street. While there the land uses produce little activity outside, the blade signage and sidewalk signs enforce elements of territorial enforcement.

64 // ASSESSMENT

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

orial Glide Mem Church

Tenderloin Center Recreation

Father oeddeker ed Alfr E. B Park

erloin SFPD Tend Substation e Turk & Hyd k ar P i in M

S3: TURK

activity along Turk that provided natural surveillance. Further, most storefronts and street facing residential windows had their blinds partially or completely drawn or were covered up. Several entryways had “No Trespassing” signs indicating that the property was protected by video surveillance. Many bus stop canopies located along Turk were positioned to provide “hidden areas” between it and building facades, impeding pedestrian pathways and creating opportunity sites for crimes to occur. Many of the businesses frontages along Turk were closed or vacant.

Natural Access Control Characteristic of most of the study area: store frontages, windows, doors, and entryways were nearly all access controlled and had security grates. The exception again being the larger residential hotels, which only had doormen controlled access. Also, buildings that were relatively new construction lacked security gates. There were only two surface parking lots along Turk which were enclosed by fencing. In the evening, lighting came primarily from auto centric streetlights at intersections with a few mid-block. Building exteriors also had a significant amount of lighting.

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source US Census

4.4 TURK STREET (TABLE 4.3) Turk between Leavenworth and Taylor is a one-way street running east to west. The street consists of two travel lanes with metered, parallel parking on either side of the street. It is further bisected by Jones Street. Street blocks are roughly 500 feet. Sidewalk widths were measured to be approximately 14’. Intersection design along Turk was inconsistent in design and upgrades. The intersection of Turk at Taylor consists of decorative crosswalks, but lacks the upgraded ADA crosswalk curb cuts. The intersection of Turk at Jones has crosswalks striped in the Continental style and also lacks the upgraded ADA crosswalk curb cuts. The intersection of Turk at Leavenworth had standard crosswalks with white striping, but includes upgraded ADA crosswalk curb cuts. There are no significant landmarks or businesses along Turk with the exception of Aunt Charlie’s Lounge, a gay bar with ties to LGBT history in San Francisco. Also, 9 story mixed-use housing development exists at the corner of Turk and Jones and spans nearly an entire block in either direction of its corner site.

Natural Surveillance Other than transient pedestrian and auto traffic, there was not much

Territorial Enforcement Evidence of territorial enforcement came in the form of murals along walls, which show a sense of ownership and pride in the neighborhood. Along Turk between Taylor and Jones there was a significant amount of horizontal blade signage protruding from building frontages. While this is can be indicative of increased activity, few actually spilled out into the streets. There were street trees located on both sides of Turk located in decorative tree wells with iron enclosures, specifically around the buildings that were more recently constructed. One building along the north Edge of Turk near Taylor had planter boxes outside its doors. Evidence of territorial enforcement also came from the pedestrian scale signage (A-frames) outside of some of the shops along Turk. The evidence of public investment can be seen through the, albeit hodgepodge, implementation of pedestrian improvements. Of each segment within the study area, Turk seemed to include the most territorial enforcement on behalf of property owners. This can be contributed to the fact that this street segment contained some new construction, including 201 Turk Street, a low income housing project owned by the Chinatown Community Development Center. ASSESSMENT // 65

Table 4.3

CPTED EVALUATION RUBRIC: TURK STREET LIGHTING

Average Lighting Score

3 3 0 2 2.00

Average Landscaping Score

1 2 0 1 1 1.00

Average Public Space Score

2 1 1 3 1 1 1.50

Average Building Exterior Score

3 2 1 2.00

Building Perimeter Sidewalks Public Space Alleys/Paseos LANDSCAPING

Trees Bushes/Hedges Public Spaces Building Permited Pedestrian Paths PUBLIC SPACES

Trash Bins Active Surveillance Passive Surveillance Access Control Activity Public Restrooms BUILDING EXTERIORS

Window Conditions Prospect Refuge Overall Maintenance

OVERALL CPTED SCORE: 1.63 TOTAL CRIMES IN 2014: 314 66 // ASSESSMENT

orial Glide Mem h rc hu C

Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

e Turk & Hyd Mini Park

ENWOR

V S4: LEA

Tenderloin Center ec R reation

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source US Census

4.5 LEAVENWORTH STREET (TABLE 4.4) Leavenworth between Ellis and Turk is a one-way street running south to north. There are three travel lanes as well as metered parallel parking on both sides of the street. It is further bisected by Eddy Street. Street blocks are roughly 350 feet. Compared to the east-west streets, there were more restricted parking areas as indicated by yellow, white, and red curb striping. Sidewalks were generally 10 feet wide on either side. There was a slight grade going north toward Nob Hill. The intersections of Leavenworth at Eddy and Taylor had decorative crosswalks and ADA compliant crosswalk curb cuts. The intersection of Leavenworth at Turk, as previously mentioned, had standard crosswalks and upgraded ADA complaint crosswalk curb cuts.

Natural Surveillance During the day there was an increased sense of natural surveillance due to the high auto traffic traveling along Leavenworth toward the Nob Hill neighborhood. Any “eyes on the street” came in the form of cars and some of the transient pedestrians. During the evening, while there was still auto traffic, there was significantly less natural surveillance, with the exception of a beat cop that drove by. Further, when traffic

was stopped at a signal, there was no surveillance mid block. Activity along the streets, specifically at night, was clustered around corner convenient stores. Little positively enforced activity occurred in the public realm. Due to the slight grade the datum for first floor fenestration was not consistent, this created blank walls below the windows where people can be found loitering and even sitting or laying on the sidewalks, hidden from the residences above.

Natural Access Control Access control came in the form of security gates and grilles on windows, doors, and entryways. The traditional grid pattern of the streets provided average permeability, however this was more restrictive due to Turk being one way. Buildings or storefronts, which appeared to be vacant, also contained security gates or fencing. Renovation on the ground floor of the Cadillac Hotel was enclosed temporary fencing. Streetlights located at intersections and mid-block created dark patches even when considering some of the buildings’ exterior lighting. Territorial Enforcement Evidence of positive territorial enforcement came in the form of graffiti that had been painted over and decorative painting along the eastern sidewalk of Turk. There was further public investment as evidence of the improved crosswalks at intersections. Street trees can be found along brief segments of either side of the street, there was no evidence of private territorial enforcement in the form of planters. Negative territorial enforcement came in the form of clusters of people loitering outside of corner convenience stores and along blank walls. Also, the fact that there were vacant storefronts, with some windows boarded up, reflected negatively on the state of private investment on this street segment. The ground floor of the Cadillac Hotel was currently being renovated to accommodate the Tenderloin Museum opening and slated to open Spring 2015. While Boeddeker Park was evidence of significant public investment, the Tenderloin Museum seems to be the most significant private investment in the neighborhood at the time. A museum dedicated to the history of the Tenderloin will can help positively reinforce the study area and surrounding historic Tenderloin neighborhood.

ASSESSMENT // 67

Table 4.4

CPTED EVALUATION RUBRIC: LEAVENWORTH STREET LIGHTING

Average Lighting Score

2 1 0 0 .75

Average Landscaping Score

3 1 0 1 1 1.20

Average Public Space Score

1 1 1 3 2 1 1.50

Average Building Exterior Score

3 2 1 2.0

Building Perimeter Sidewalks Public Space Alleys/Paseos LANDSCAPING

Trees Bushes/Hedges Public Spaces Building Permited Pedestrian Paths PUBLIC SPACES

Trash Bins Active Surveillance Passive Surveillance Access Control Activity Public Restrooms BUILDING EXTERIORS

Window Conditions Prospect Refuge Overall Maintenance

OVERALL CPTED SCORE: 1.36 TOTAL CRIMES IN 2014: 298 68 // ASSESSMENT

CONSTANT TRAVELERS: The study area lacked informal and stationary pedestrian activity. While there were a number of people observed on its streets, most were just transient pedestrians en route to another destination.

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

ASSESSMENT // 69

orial Glide Mem Church

Tenderloin Center Recreation

erloin SFPD Tend Substation

E S5: JON

Father oeddeker Alfred E. B Park

e Turk & Hyd Mini Park

but as with the rest of the study area there was little positive evidence of natural surveillance. Additional natural surveillance comes from the heavy auto traffic.

Natural Access Control While security gates on windows, doors, and entryways were present, the ground floors along Jones seemed not as heavily protected compared to other street segments in the study area. This can possibly be attributed to a number of factors including its proximity to the Tenderloin substation and Boeddeker Park and the fact it is a one-way street. Streetlight placement was primarily at intersection with a few interspersed mid block. While there were blank walls, heavy building exterior lighting was present which, at night, created a relatively safer pedestrian environment. Further, the pedestrian scale LED lighting around Boeddeker Park was a positive reinforcement of access control as well.

Territorial Enforcement There was a high level of territorial enforcement at the intersection of Jones at Eddy. Generally attributed to perceived police presence and activity at Boeddeker Park. Additionally, there was decorative street Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source US Census furniture including a clock and a JC Decaux Public Toilet, which can be 4.6 JONES STREET (TABLE 4.5) Jones between Ellis and Turk is a one-way street running north to south. found throughout San Francisco, at the corner of Jones at Eddy. This There are three travel lanes as well as metered parallel parking on both was the only publicly accessible toilet observed within the study area. sides of the street. It is further bisected by Eddy Street. Street blocks are The northeast corner of Jones at Eddy also had the only observed bulb roughly 350 feet. Sidewalks were generally 10 feet wide on either side. out, which makes shortens the crossing distance to the next corner and There is a slight grade south from Nob Hill. The intersection of Jones at made pedestrians more visible. There were also nearly 10 street trees, Ellis and Eddy have decorative crosswalks and upgraded ADA compliant both newly planted and mature, in decorative tree wells along the two crosswalk curb cuts. As previously mentioned, the intersection of Jones block street segment. at Turk has yellow striped Continental Crosswalks and lack upgraded ADA crosswalk curb cuts. Also, at the risk of overstating, the Tenderloin substation and recently renovated Boeddeker Park are located at the corners of Jones and Eddy. Natural Surveillance The intersection of Jones at Eddy provided the greatest evidence of natural surveillance both from the perceived police presence due to the Tenderloin substation as well as from the highly utilized Boeddeker Park. It is further worth mentioning that at night, while Boeddeker Park is well lit, it lacks natural surveillance at this time. There was a high amount of transient pedestrian activity (people just walking through), 70 // ASSESSMENT

UPHILL BATTLE: A view of Jones Street towards the affluent neighborhood of Nob Hill. Street improvements throughout the study area have been implemented unequitably as visible in the contrasts between the west and east edges of the street.

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

ASSESSMENT // 71

Table 4.5

CPTED EVALUATION RUBRIC: JONES STREET LIGHTING

Average Lighting Score

3 2 5 0 2.50

Average Landscaping Score

3 0 5 1 2 2.40

Average Public Space Score

1 5 4 3 4 1 3.00

Average Building Exterior Score

3 3 4 3.33

Building Perimeter Sidewalks Public Space Alleys/Paseos LANDSCAPING

Trees Bushes/Hedges Public Spaces Building Permited Pedestrian Paths PUBLIC SPACES

Trash Bins Active Surveillance Passive Surveillance Access Control Activity Public Restrooms BUILDING EXTERIORS

Window Conditions Prospect Refuge Overall Maintenance

OVERALL CPTED SCORE: 2.81 TOTAL CRIMES IN 2014: 146 72 // ASSESSMENT

orial Glide Mem h rc hu C

Tenderloin Center Recreation

LO S6: TAY

Father oeddeker ed Alfr E. B Park

erloin SFPD Tend n io at st Sub e Turk & Hyd Mini Park

Created By Rogelio Foronda, Jr. On 8 March 2015 Source US Census

4.7 TAYLOR STREET (TABLE 4.5) Taylor between Ellis and Turk is a one-way street running south to north. There are three travel lanes as well as metered parallel parking on both sides of the street. It is further bisected by Eddy Street. Street blocks are roughly 350 feet. Sidewalks were generally 10 feet wide on either side. There is a slight grade north toward Nob Hill. Taylor is also perceived as one of the perceived â&#x20AC;&#x153;edgesâ&#x20AC;? of the Tenderloin especially among tourists staying in the neighboring Union Square district. This is further justified by the monolithic Hilton Hotel Union Square on the northeast corner of Taylor at Ellis. Another significant landmark on the northwest corner of Taylor at Ellis is the Glide Memorial Church which provides numerous social services for the Tenderloin. The intersection of Taylor at Ellis is further characterized by standard crosswalks and upgraded ADA crosswalk curb cuts. As previously mentioned, the intersections of Taylor at Eddy and at Turk have been upgraded to include decorative crosswalks and partially upgraded ADA crosswalk curb cuts.

Natural Surveillance Evidence of natural surveillance primarily came in the form of transient pedestrian activity. While there were more commercial uses with active store frontages, little to no activity spilled out into the public realm. Restrictive street parking meant there were fewer cars parked along the sidewalks, creating a more open and welcoming environment. This can also be attributed to the two large undeveloped parcels at the corners of Taylor at Eddy and Turk. While undeveloped, they were currently being utilized as surface parking lots. The presence of parking attendants and valets at these locations provided additional positive natural surveillance not found on other street segments in the study area. These corner surface lots also improved site lines at intersections as opposed to walking towards the unknown as you approach a street corner. Along the southern portion of Taylor between Eddy and Turk there were long street frontages of vacant storefronts with boarded up windows and doors. Additionally, occupied buildings with ground floor windows had their windows covered and/or blinds drawn. There were also fewer above grade utility boxes located within the pedestrian right-of-way that provide refuge for criminal activity.

Natural Access Control Nearly all entryways, doors, and windows were observed to have security gates or access control. The two parking lots along Taylor were both enclosed by chain link fences. The presence of surface parking lots made the street segment seem more positively permeable, not to mention the lots themselves were better lit than the sidewalks. Streetlights were concentrated at intersections. However, specialized pedestrian scale street lamps had been installed which were not present anywhere else within the study area. They were further spaced at regular intervals along the sidewalks. Additional lighting was provided from exterior building light fixtures. Generally, Taylor had fewer poorly lit areas than other street segments in the study area. Territorial Enforcement The greatest amount of territorial enforcement occurred around the surface parking lots, which were well lit and open. Some portions of the street felt blighted due to the boarded up vacant storefronts and blank walls, while others were better enforced. The presence of the specialized street lamps and improved intersections was evidence ASSESSMENT // 73

Photos Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

BLANK SPACE (L): A rare underutilized parcel located at the corner of Taylor and Jones Street is currently occupied by a surface parking lot. Redevelopment on these sites would provide opportunities for implementing General Plan and Better Streets Plan elements. >> A TOUCH OF PAINT (R): Public art installations can be found throughout the study area. This visual cue indicates ownership and acts as a reminder of the Tenderloinâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s historic social and cultral significance.

74 // ASSESSMENT

of public investment. There were only four street trees in tree wells located along the west side of Taylor near its intersection with Ellis. A newly constructed building had a single palm tree behind its gated entry foyer, but this was the only evidence of sense of place and ownership present along the segment.

Table 4.6

CPTED EVALUATION RUBRIC: TAYLOR STREET LIGHTING

Average Lighting Score

3 4 0 0 1.75

Average Landscaping Score

0 2 1 1 1 1.00

Average Public Space Score

3 2 1 3 3 1 2.17

Average Building Exterior Score

3 2 1 2.00

Building Perimeter Sidewalks Public Space Alleys/Paseos LANDSCAPING

Trees Bushes/Hedges Public Spaces Building Permited Pedestrian Paths PUBLIC SPACES

Trash Bins Active Surveillance Passive Surveillance Access Control Activity Public Restrooms BUILDING EXTERIORS

Window Conditions Prospect Refuge Overall Maintenance

OVERALL CPTED SCORE: 1.73 TOTAL CRIMES IN 2014: 271 ASSESSMENT // 75

4.8 CPTED ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS Based on the results from the CPTED Assessment Matrix only one of the six street segments within the study area displayed a passing amount of evidence of CPTED techniques (Table 4.7). Jones had the highest CPTED score at 2.81 (rounded up to 3) and Leavenworth had the lowest at 1.36. While overall there was evidence of applicable CPTED techniques throughout the study area, they were by no means consistent. The evaluation criteria with the lowest overall average score was Landscaping which had a score of 1.53. Generally landscaping would fall within the CPTED category of territorial enforcement, since it can be considered an indicator of sense of pride, place, ownership, and investment. The evaluation criteria with the highest overall average score, but still not passing, was Building Exteriors with a score of 2.11. Evaluation criteria under the Building Exterior category can be correlated with all three primary CPTED techniques of natural surveillance, natural access control, and territorial enforcement. There was generally a positive correlation with a higher CPTED Score and lower reported crimes in 2014 within 100 feet of the street segment. Jones had the highest CPTED Score of 2.81 and there were 146 reported crimes. Alternatively, Leavenworth having the lowest CPTED Score of 1.36 had 298 reported crimes.

Table 4.7

CPTED ASSESSMENT SUMMARY SEGMENT Ellis Eddy Turk Leavenworth Jones Taylor 76 // ASSESSMENT

CPTED SCORE (ROUNDED) 1.81 (2) - Fail 2.11 (2) - Fail 1.63 (2) - Fail 1.36 (1) - Fail 2.81 (3) - Pass 1.73 (2) - Fail

2014 CRIME 301 236 314 298 146 271

MIDWEST MEETS WEST: A historic mixed-use residential building designed in the spirit of the Chicago school of architecture rises at the corner of Turk and Jones Streets.

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

WIDE OPEN SPACES: The Jones Street corridor is a three lane, one direction street with metered parking on both street edges. This view looks south towards Market Street and the South of Market neighborhood.

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

Page left intentionally blank.

“The borders of the Tenderloin is so unique. It’s an island surrounded by affluent neighborhoods at every edge.” -John Caldon, 10 years employed in and former 6-year resident of the Tenderloin

ge lio

Fo ro

5.0 FINDINGS

FINDINGS // 79

There are linkages, although not explicit, between adopted policies and programs in San Francisco’s Municipal Documents and the CPTED principles of natural access control, natural surveillance, and territorial enforcement. However, the results of the Field Observations and CPTED Assessment provided evidence that these advisory or mandatory policies have not been implemented equitably across the City, particularly in the study area within Tenderloin. The catch 22 with a city’s municipal documents like San Francisco’s General Plan and Better Streets Plan is that while public works projects are required to comply with them, it relies heavily on the investment of private developers. Public works project priority is primarily determined through a city’s budgetary process. According to the City and County of San Francisco, there is a growing backlog of capital needs totaling nearly $1 billion. However, the two year Capital Budget for Fiscal Years 2014-2016 approved in 2014 only earmarked $310 million for capital projects, roughly 31% of the City’s calculated need. The largest appropriation of 37% ($114.7 million) is for street resurfacing, which does not include pedestrian realm improvements like ADA upgrades and related pedestrian streetscape improvements. For FY 2015, only $3.7 million has been budgeted for the SFMTA to make pedestrian improvements.103 The deficit in funding for public works projects must be supplanted by private developer investment. However, with respects to the Tenderloin, there are limited opportunities for new development (and the public realm improvements that would come with them) due to the neighborhood being nearly completely built out. Additionally, as a Historic District and in conjunction with the SRO demolition moratorium, redevelopment of any existing building within the Tenderloin would lack financial incentive for developers. However, given its location, the neighborhood is still likely experiencing considerable pressure for development for housing, particularly affordable housing. Additionally, the hypothesis stated that design features consistent with CPTED principles that are found to be lacking in the Tenderloin 103 City and County of San Francisco, “FY 2014-15 and FY2015-16 Capital Budget,” July 23, 2014, accessed April 5, 2015, http:// onesanfrancisco.org/category/capital/capital-budget/

80 // FINDINGS

will be in crime hot spots. The crime hot spot analysis portion of this research indicated high concentration of criminal activity on Taylor Street between Eddy and Turk Streets, specifically assaults, drug/ narcotics, and robberies. Through the field observations and CPTED Assessment, Taylor Street and received the third lowest CPTED score. Its lack of positive environmental factors contributed to it receiving a failing CPTED Assessment score. Alternatively, Jones Street which was observed to have the most positive environmental factors received a passing CPTED Assessment Score and it was further found to have lower crime incidences. The CPTED principle of natural access control was found most within the design of the study area. Gates and security fences found on the ground floor of nearly every building in the study area controlled access to businesses and residences. While this creates a secure environment for those within buildings, it also created an environmental cue indicating an unsafe public realm. While the CPTED principles of natural surveillance and territorial enforcement were also found within the design of the study area, their presence was not distributed equitably. 5.1 RECOMMENDATIONS Based on a cumulative synthesis of findings of all research methods there are opportunities for San Francisco to implement the following long-term urban design or short-term land use programming CPTED measures as a means to mitigate crime in the Tenderloin.

Long-Term Urban Design Policies and Guidelines The City and County of San Francisco Planning Department, DPW, and SFMTA should further prioritize allocating funding toward implementation and conformance to long-term capital public realm improvements to improve the safety, health, and well-being of pedestrians and support public place making in the Tenderloin and other

1. Photo Source Evanston Now

2. Photo Source NACTO

3. Photo Source Getty Images

LIGHT BRIGHT: (1) Bollards with built-in lighting and exterior building facade lighting highlights and emphasize pedestrian paths. (2) Pedestrian scale street lamps to supplement auto-oriented street lamps. (3) The use of LED bulbs with high luminosity creates a modern look as well as increases night visibility.

4. Photo Source Urilift

5. Photo Source nudges.com

6. Photo Source thetravelingmogridges.com

EFFICIENT AND STREAMLINED: (4) A mechanical urinal designed by Urilift in Watford, England rises from the ground during high pedestrian traffic times and disappears below the ground during off-peak times. (5) Portable urinals found throughout Europe discourages relieving oneself on buildings and public property. (6) A permanent public urinal with privacy screen provides enough privacy to the use, but is transparent enough to observe any loitering or other criminal activity.

7. Photo Source Bryan Park Corporation

8. Photo Source Big Belly

9. Photo Source AgainErick

WE ALL SCREAM FOR THREE STREAMS: (7) Custom designed trash receptacles located in Bryant Park in New York City for each waste stream: landfill, compost, and recycling. (8) Big Belly trash receptacles for landfill and recycling streams have been installed in some locations in San Francisco including the 16th Street Mission BART Plaza. (9) Another three stream receptacle system installed in Peru.

FINDINGS // 81

10. Photo Source Feldman Architecture

11. Photo Source StreetsBlog SF

12.

13. Photo Source inetours.com

14. Photo Source San Francisco Examiner

15.

16. Photo Source funcheap.com

17. Photo Source Off The Grid

18.

Photo Source San Francisco Planning Department

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

Photo Source Sunday Streets SF

ONCE YOU POP: (10) A parklet outside of Four Barrel Coffee in San Francisco’s Mission District replaced onstreet parking spaces with cafe seating and bicycle corrals. (11) The PARK(ing) day provides temporary open space by organizers who pay for an on-street parking space and construct a mini-park. (12) Jane Warner Plaza in San Francisco’s Castro District is a public space converted from underutilized public right-of-way through San Francisco’s Pavement to Parks Program.

STREETSCAPE, ACTIVATE!: (13) A cafe in San Francisco’s Cow Hollow neighborhood places benches outside of its store to provide seating areas for its customers. This activity further engages the public realm and provides natural surveillance. (14) A produce market in San Francisco’s Mission District displays its goods along its street frontage. (15) Continously occupied street frontages in San Francisco’s Castro District provide a continous stream of pedestrian activity. Display boards placed outside of stores can be interpreted as territorial enforcement.

TAKE BACK THE NIGHT (AND THE STREETS): (16) The Haight Street Art Walk in San Francisco draws a different night crowd to the neighborhood. Other than bars, retail stores and restaurants on Haight close around 8 PM. Art walks extend activity in a neighborhood later in to the evening. (17) San Francisco’s Off-TheGrid also draws activity and crowds to neighborhoods during otherwise slow evenings. (18) Sunday Streets SF in the Tenderloin occurs during the summer. Streets are temporarily shut down to auto access until mid-morning allowing pedestrians and bicyclists to utilize the space for uses other than driving.

82 // FINDINGS

disadvantaged neighborhoods, since these areas have the potential to benefit most from the improvements.

surveillance and potentially reduce the opportunity for public drug deals and use to occur.

• Improved Street Lighting (photos 1-3, page 81): Within the study area, street lighting primarily came in the form of car centric street lamps. Pedestrian scale street lamps were only found along Taylor Street between Ellis and Eddy Streets. Additional lighting was provided along building frontages, but their inconsistency created patches of darkness. The study area would benefit from improved street lighting to deter “offenders who benefit from the cover of darkness” and “offenders are more likely to be seen by someone who might intervene, call the police, or recognize the offender”.104 Improved or innovative solutions to street lighting implemented equitably can help reduce crime. Studies have indicated that the amount of lighting directly affect susceptibility to crime since lighting is directly related to visibility105.

• Open Window Policy: Discourage or penalize ground floor commercial businesses operating within the Tenderloin from obscuring or covering up their windows to prevent visibility out and in. Windows should be left reasonably unobscured to provide natural surveillance of the public realm.

• Public Restrooms (photos 4-6, page 81):The lack of public restrooms paired with the observation of high concentrations of homeless within the study area is a problem to both cleanliness and public health. The City and County of San Francisco should provide safe and sanitary public restrooms or apply other innovative approaches. For example, the City of London, England provides convenient outdoor, or “open air,” urinals for public use in an to reduce public urination. The urinals could be mobile and put into use during evenings and weekends.106 While the SFDPW has implemented the Tenderloin Pit Stop program which provides temporal services, a more permanent solution is needed. • Trash Receptacles (photos 7-9, page 81): Trash receptacles, preferably for all waste streams (landfill, recycling, and compost), should be installed throughout the study area. Additionally, more frequent pick ups are needed. • Parking Removal (photos 10-12, page 82): Remove or re-purpose on-street parking or implement more restrictive parking policies at night to make the public realm more visible through natural 104 US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, Improved Street Lighting to Reduce Crime in Residential Areas, Ronald V. Clarke (Washington DC: US Department of Justice, December 2008), http://cops.usdoj.gov/Publications/e1208-StreetLighting.pdf (accessed May 10, 2014). 105 Kirk, “Creating a Crime-Free Property,” 28-33. 106 “Public Toilets,” City of London (London: City of London), http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/transport-and-streets/ clean-streets/Pages/Public-Toilets.aspx (accessed May 10, 2014).

• Blurred Realms (photos 13-15, page 82): Authorize or create and provide incentives for ground floor commercial businesses operating within the Tenderloin to engage the public realm with active uses to achieve territorial enforcement. Examples include permitting, or streamlining the permitting process for businesses to implement cafe style seating or sidewalks sales. • Better Utilization of Parcels: Create and provide incentives for developers to redevelop the two surface parking lots along Taylor Street. Through the development, the developers would further be required to propose a community improvements package that would include implementing public realm improvements as prescribed in the General Plan and Better Streets Plan. • Tax Break for Businesses: Create and provide incentives for businesses (commercial and office) to relocate to vacant buildings within the study area. Additionally, create and provide incentives for existing businesses to adjust their hours of operation to encourage consistent use of the public realm throughout the day. • Conduct a longitudinal study to test the efficacy of CPTED principles in context of the Tenderloin (See Section 5.2 Study Constraints).

Short-term Land Use Programming: Municipalities should foster, encourage, or streamline temporary use (pop-ups) approval processes and evening events. To activate the public realm during off-peak hours, municipalities should establish policies that initiate, promote, or expand programs like San Francisco’s Sunday Streets, pavement-to-parks strategies like park lets or Park(ing) Day, and street fairs or art-walks like those hosted by the Oakland Art Murmur or The Lower Polk // Upper TL Art Walk. Another example would be Washington DC’s Office of Planning Temporary Urbanism Initiative FINDINGS // 83

which “seeks to transform vacant spaces into vibrant destinations and animated showcases through unique uses.”107 DC’s initiative includes temporary uses of vacant retail stores and empty lots for artists to exhibit and sell their work. Further, a study conducted in Perth, Australia determined the correlation between natural surveillance through higher pedestrian activity and fewer opportunities for crime to take place108. The activation of the public realm would provide for more “eyes on the street” and engagement. 5.2 STUDY CONSTRAINTS In order to test the efficacy of CPTED, a study must be conducted longitudinally over a significant period of time in order to yield significant data. However, due to time constraints, a longitudinal study was not feasible. An opportunity for future research would further investigate the efficacy of the observed CPTED techniques in the Tenderloin, rather than just a subjective evaluation of their presence. 5.3 THE BIG PICTURE These recommendations are by no means an exhaustive list of the potential manipulations to and programs to be implemented in our public realm and built environments to reduce the opportunity for crime. As with any urban neighborhood, the Tenderloin has its own unique demographics, problems, and political and physical characteristics that have been formed over time. Based on the evaluations in this report, these recommendations were found to be applicable to the Tenderloin. CPTED policies and programs should be implemented on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis after conducting similar research for that specific geography. There is no cure-all solution to crime and no guarantee these recommendations can be successfully implemented in all jurisdictions, particularly when considering demographics and urban versus nonurban settings. Within the planning profession, blanket application of planning policies with disregard for neighborhood context has the potential to be socially, politically, and financially harmful. This report should be used as a guide for other planners, design professionals, and municipalities to evaluate their own neighborhoods and jurisdictions and come to their own conclusions of what would be appropriate and potentially successful to implement. 107 “Temporary Urbanism Initiative,” The District of Columbia, Office of Planning (Washington DC: District of Columbia), http:// planning.dc.gov/DC/Planning/Across+the+City/Other+Citywide+Initiatives/Temporary+Urbanism+Initiative (accessed February 23, 2014). 108 Sarah Foster, et al, “Creating Safe, Walkable Streetscapes,” 79-88.

84 // FINDINGS

Photo Rogelio Foronda, Jr.

FINDINGS // 85

Page left intentionally blank.

86 // FINDINGS

lio

a, J

6.0 APPENDICES

APPENDICES // 87

APPENDIX A: BIBLIOGRAPHY Anderson, James M., John M. MacDonald, Ricky Bluthenthal, and J. Scott Ashwood. “Reducing Crime By Shaping the Built Environment with Zoning: An Empirical Study of Los Angeles.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 161, No.3 (2013): 698-755. Anselin, Luc, Elizabeth Griffiths, and George Tita. “Crime Mapping and Hot Spot Analysis.” Environmental Criminology and Crime Analysis, ed. Richard Wortley and Lorraine Mazorelle (2008): 98. Bomley, Nicholas. “Un-real Estate: Proprietary Space and Public Gardening.” Antipode 36, No.4 (September 2004): 614-641. Braga, Anthony A. Problem-Oriented Policing and Crime Prevention: Second Edition. New York: Criminal Justice Press, 2008. Braga, Anthony, Andrea Papachristos, and David Hureau. “Hot Spots Policing Effects on Crime.” Campbell Systematic Reviews 8 (2012). Brown, Edna and Yu Mansoo. “Exploring the Dynamics of Middle-Aged and Older Adult Residents’ Perceptions of Neighborhood Safety.” Journal of Gerontological Social Work 54, no. 5 (2011): 511-527. Brunson, Liesette, Frances E. Kuo and William C. Sullivan. “Resident Appropriation of Defensible Space in Public Housing: Implications for Safety and Community.” Environment and Behavior 33, no. 5 (2001): 626-636. Caldon, John. Interviewed by author. January 31, 2015. Chang, Dongkuk. “Social Crime or Spatial Crime? Exploring the Effects of Social, Economical, and Spatial Factors on Burglary Rates.” Environment and Behavior 43, no. 1, 2011: 26-43. City and County of San Francisco. “San Francisco Enterprise GIS Program.” San Francisco: City and County of San Francisco, 2014. Accessed May 10, 2014. http://sf-police.org/index.aspx?page=1618. City and County of San Francisco. San Francisco Better Streets Plan: Policies and Guidelines for the Pedestrian Realm. San Francisco Planning Department. San Francisco, 2011. City and County of San Francisco. San Francisco General Plan. San Francisco Planning Department. San Francisco, August 8, 1996. City and County of San Francisco. San Francisco General Plan: Recreation and Open Space Element. San Francisco Planning Department. San Francisco, 2013. City and County of San Francisco. San Francisco General Plan: Housing Element. San Francisco Planning Department. San Francisco, 2009. City and County of San Francisco. San Francisco General Plan: Urban Design Element. San Francisco Planning Department. San Francisco, 1972. Cozens, Paul Michael. “Urban Planning and Environmental Criminology: Towards a New Perspective for Safer Cities.” Planning Practice and 88 // APPENDICES

Research 26, No.4 (August 2011): 481-508. Crowe, Timothy. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design: Applications of Architectural Design and Space Management Concepts. Boston, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann, 2000. Ekblom, Paul. “Deconstructing CPTED… and Reconstructing it for Practice, Knowledge Management and Research.” Criminal Policy 17, Issue 1, 2011: 7-28. Ecker, Scott. Interviewed by author. March 8, 2015. Farrell, Graham and John Roman. “Crime as Pollution: Proposal for Market-Based Incentives to Reduce Crime Externalities.” Crime Reduction and the Law, edited by Kate Moss and Mike Stephens. London: Routledge, 2006. Foster, Sarah, Billie Giles-Corti, and Matthew Knuiman. “Creating Safe, Walkable Streetscapes: Does House Design and Upkeep Discourage Incivilties in Suburban Neighborhoods?” Journal of Environmental Psychology 31, no. 1, 2011: 79-88. Garvin, Eugenia, Charles Branas, Shimrit Keddem, Jeffrey Sellman, and Carolyn Cannuscio. “More Than Just an Eyesore: Local Insights and Solutions on Vacant Land and Urban Health.” Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine 90, No.3 (2012): 412-426. Goldstein, Herman. Problem-Oriented Policing. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1990. Grubesic, Tony H. and Elizabeth A. Mack. “Spatio-Temporal Interaction of urban Crime.” Journal of Quantitative Criminology No.24 (2008): 285306. Haydn, Florian and Robert Temel. “Temporary Urban Spaces: Concepts for the Use of City Spaces.” Canadian Journal of Urban Research 16, No.2 (Winter 2007): 191-272. Helms, Gesa, Rowland Atkinson, Gordon MacLeod. “Securing the City: Urban Renaissance, Policing, and Social Regulation.” European Urban and Regional Studies Volume 14, Issue 4, November 2007: 267-276. Hopkins, Daniel and Thad Williamson. “Inactive by Design? Neighborhood Design and Political Participation.” Political Behavior 34, Issue 1, 2012: 79-101. Hopkins, Brittany. “Your Tenderloin Residential Real Estate Update.” Hoodline, March 30, 2015. Accessed April 5, 2015. http://hoodline. com/2015/03/your- tenderloin-residential-real-estate-update. Jackson, Laura. “The Relationship of Urban Design to Human Health and Condition.” Landscape and Urban Planning 64, no. 4, 2003: 191-200. Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House, Inc., 1961. APPENDIX A // 89

Jeffrey, C. Ray. Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. California: Sage Publications, 1971. Katyal, Neal Kumar. “Architecture of Crime Control.” Yale Law Journal 111, No.5 (2012): 1039-1139. Kirk, Nancye. “Creating a Crime-Free Property.” Journal of Property Management 77, no.1 (2012): 28-33. Kitchen, Ted. “New Urbanism and CPTED in the British Planning System: Some Critical Reflections.” Journal of Architectural & Planning Research Volume 22, No. 4, Winter 2005: 342-357. Landman, Karina. “Boundaries, Bars, and Barricades: Reconsidering Two Approaches to Crime Prevention In the Built Environment.” Journal of Architectural & Planning Research Volume 26, No. 3, Fall 2009: 213-227. Lemann, Nicholas. “A Call For Help: What The Kitty Genovese Story Really Means.” The New Yorker. March 10, 2014. Accessed April 22, 2015. Minnery, John R. and Bill Lim. “Measuring Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 22, No. 4 (Winter 2005): 330-341. Newman, Oscar. Defensible Space; Crime Prevention Through Urban Design. New York: Macmillan, 1972. Newman, Oscar. Design Guidelines for Creating Defensible Space. Washington DC: National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, 1976. Reedy, Jac. Interviewed by author. February 12, 2015. Robinson, Tony. “Gentrification and Grassroots Resistance in San Francisco’s Tenderloin.” Urban Affairs Review Volume 30, Issue 4, 1995: 443513. Rondeau, Mary Beth, Patricia L Brantingham, and Paul J. Brantingham. “The Value of Environmental Criminology for the Design Professions of Architecture, Urban Design, Landscape Architecture, and Planning.” Journal of Architectural Planning and Research 22, No.4 (Winter 2005): 294-304. Sabatini, Joshua. “S.F. Aims to Educate Stores on Healthy Food Options.” San Francisco Chronicle. July 30, 2013. Samuels, Robert. “After-Dark Design, Nigh Animation, and Interpersonal Interaction: Toward a Community-Security Paradigm.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 22, No.4 (Winter 2005): 305-320. San Francisco Department of Public Works. “Tenderloin Pit Stop.” Department of Public Works. Last modified 2015. Accessed April 5, 2015. http://sfdpw.org/index.aspx?page=1805. San Francisco Planning Department. Better Streets Plan. San Francisco, December 2010. 90 // APPENDICES

San Francisco Police Department. “CrimeMAPS.” Last modified February 22, 2014. Schneider, Richard H. “Introduction: Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED): Themes, Theories, Practice, and Conflict.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 22, No.4 (Winter 2005): 271-283. Shah, Rajiv C. and Jay P. Kesan. “How Architecture Regulates.” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 24, No.4 (Winter 2007): 350-359. Storman, Gene. “Opportunity Mapping San Francisco’s Parklets and Plazas.” San Francisco Planning Department, Spring 2014. Taylor, Ralph B. and Stephen Gottfredson. “Environmental Design, Crime, and Prevention: An Examination of Community Dynamics.” Crime and Justice Volume 8, 1986: 387-416. The District of Columbia Office of Planning, Temporary Urbanism Initiative. United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. “Understanding SRO.” Washington, DC: US Department of Housing and Urban Development (2001). United States Department of the Interior, national Park Service, National Register of Historic Places Registration Form: Uptown Tenderloin Historic District, Approved 2/5/2009. United States Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Center for Problem-Oriented Policing. “Improved Street Lighting to Reduce Crime in Residential Areas.” Ronald V. Clarke. Washington DC: US Department of Justice (December 2008). United States Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice. “Physical Environment and Crime.” Ralph B. Taylor and Adele V. Harrell. Washington DC: United States Department of Justice (January 1996). Vilder, Anthony. “Troubles in Theory V The Brutalist Movement(s).” Architectural Review Vol. 235, Issue 1404, 2014: 96-102. World Health Organization. “Urban Population Growth.” Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization (2014). Wright, JL and RL Thomas. “Crime prevention through environmental design.” Aslet Journal Volume 7, Issue 3, July/August 1992: 14-17. Zarabadi, Sahra Sadat Saideh, Nora Haeri, and Timaz Iarimian. “Reduction of Urban Crimes through Secured by Design Scheme (Case Study: Navab Highway – Tehran).” International Journal of Academic Research 4, No.6 (November 2012): 57-63. Zham, Diane. “Learning, Translating, and Implementing CPTED.” Journal of Architectural & Planning Research 22, No. 4 (Winter 2005): 284-293. Ziegler, Edward H. “American Cities, Urban Planning, and Place Based Crime Prevention.” Urban Lawyer Volume 39, Issue 4, Fall 2007: 7-28.

APPENDIX A // 91

APPENDIX B: CPTED ASSESSMENT MATRIX

92 // APPENDIX B

APPENDIX C: CPTED EVALUATION RUBRIC

APPENDIX C // 93

APPENDIX D: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS The following questions were asked during semi-structured interviews: 1. How long have you worked in or been involved with the Tenderloin neighborhood? 2. Are you familiar with Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles and guidelines? If yes, in what capacity? 3. What is your perception of safety in the Tenderloin? What changes to the public realm in the tenderloin would improve your perception of safety? 4. What is your perception of street light conditions in the Tenderloin? 5. Do you attend events or any other functions in the Tenderloin outside of work? 6. What do you feel are some of the challenges the Tenderloin neighborhood and community faces? 7. If applicable: In your professional research, what have you found to be the most effective Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles and guidelines?

94 // APPENDIX D