Tracking
Crime
in
Raising the
Tide:
Strategies
for NewCity
York City
Beaches
New York
Parks
New Yorkers for Parks
The Arthur Ross Center for Parks and Open Spaces
355 Lexington Avenue, 14th Floor
New York, NY 10017
212-838-9410
www.ny4p.org
New Yorkers for Parks is the only independent watchdog for all the city’s parks, beaches and playgrounds.
New Yorkers for Parks Board
New Yorkers for Parks Staff
Chair
Lynden B. Miller
Executive Director
Christian DiPalermo
Vice-Chairs
Barbara S. Dixon
Catherine Morrison Golden
Peter Rothschild
Director of Planning
Micaéla Birmingham
Secretary
Mark Hoenig
Treasurer
Thomas Patrick Dore, Jr.
Luis Garden Acosta
Elaine Allen
Dana Beth Ardi
Martin S. Begun
Michael Bierut
Dr. Roscoe Brown, Jr.
Ann L. Buttenwieser
Harold Buttrick
Ellen Chesler
William D. Cohan
Margaret A. Doyle
Audrey Feuerstein
Carmen Walker-Gay
Richard Gilder
Michael Grobstein
George J. Grumbach, Jr.
Marian S. Heiskell
Evelyn H. Lauder
Karen J. Lauder
David J. Loo
Thomas L. McMahon
Danny Meyer
Ira M. Millstein
Jennifer M. Ortega
Cesar A. Perales
Philip R. Pitruzzello
A. J. C. Smith
Office Manager
Sharon Cole
Director of Government and Community Relations
Sheelah Feinberg
Development Associate
Ben Gwynne
Director of Research
Cheryl Huber
Government and Community Relations Manager
Okenfe Lebarty
Director of Finance
Sam Mei
Development and Marketing Director
Jennifer Merschdorf
This report was prepared by the Research Department of New Yorkers for Parks.
Lead Author: Cheryl Huber
Research Assistants: Alyson Evans, Kevin Leichner, Andrea Marpillero-Colomina
Statistical Consulting: Matt Glomski
Maps: Micaéla Birmingham
Graphic Design: Monkeys with Crayons
Source of mapping data: NYC Department of Parks & Recreation, 2004.
Source of crime data: NYPD Compstat Unit, 2007.
Maps made possible by the ESRI Conservation Program.
All photos copyright © 2004. Cover, Riverside Park, Laura Napier for New Yorkers
for Parks. Pages 2 & 4, Maria Schriber for New Yorkers for Parks. Page 12, Kim
Fagerstam for New Yorkers for Parks. All Rights Reserved.
Acknowledgements
New Yorkers for Parks would like to thank City Council Member Peter F. Vallone, Jr.’s
office and the NYPD Central Park Precinct for their assistance with this report.
Tracking Crime in New York City Parks
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Introduction and Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Compstat and Parks ................................................................................................................................................. 2
Advocating for Change ............................................................................................................................................ 2
Challenges and Solutions to Tracking Crime in Parks ........................................................................................ 3
The Results: 18 Months of Tracking Crime in Parks ........................................................................................... 4
Incidence of Crime Over 18 Months ........................................................................................................... 5
Incidence of Violent Crime Over 18 Months .............................................................................................. 8
Crimes per Park Acre ................................................................................................................................... 9
Seasonal Crime Trends ................................................................................................................................ 9
Park Crime by the Borough .......................................................................................................................... 13
Other Cities ............................................................................................................................................................. 13
Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................... 17
Appendix A: Definitions of Crimes ........................................................................................................................ 18
Appendix B: About the 20 Pilot Parks .................................................................................................................... 19
Executive Summary
By all accounts, crime in New York City has declined significantly in recent decades. Formerly seen as one of the most
dangerous cities in the country, New York’s reputation has done an about-face. The New York City Police Department’s
(NYPD) impressive Compstat (computerized statistics) program deserves much credit for providing near real-time
statistics to assist officers in efficiently addressing crime hot spots. However, prior to April 2006, there was a void of public
information regarding crime in parks because the NYPD did not specifically track crimes occurring on city parkland. The
exception is Central Park, which has been served by its own police precinct for decades.
Following several high profile crimes in parks and subsequent advocacy efforts, in December 2005 Mayor Bloomberg signed
Local Law 114 mandating the tracking of the seven Major Felony Crime Complaints in city parks. This marked significant
progress towards transparency, accountability, public awareness, and efficient resource deployment. Unfortunately, after
nearly two years, we have not progressed beyond the pilot phase of the program and are still tracking only the 20 largest
parks in the city.
Today’s relatively low level of crime in Central Park and throughout the city represents a notable achievement. If historical
data on crimes in the remaining parks in the system were available, similar declines might be apparent, particularly considering
the increases in funding and resources that the New York City Parks Department has seen in recent years. Since 2005, the
number of deployable Parks Enforcement Patrol officers has doubled to about 150 uniformed staff. This increased security
and the simultaneous expansion in maintenance staff in parks has surely served to deter crime.
Tracking crimes that occur in city parks is paramount to public safety. The initial data presented in this report provides
benchmarked conditions that will allow us in the future to better assess strategies to address crime. The data have guided
and will continue to guide the NYPD and Parks Department on how to best deploy resources to enhance safety. Finally,
published data on crime in parks helps to inform the public on how to safely use their parks. Compstat and reporting on
crime in parks helps citizens place sensational media headlines within a broader context of crime trends. It is essential that
the City continue and expand this essential program.
The first goal of this report is to provide the public with an assessment of the first 18 months of data on crime in parks
(April 2006 – September 2007). To assist in comparing data across sites, we have provided “crimes per park acre” as a
substitute for the commonly used rate of “crimes per person” because the Parks Department has not regularly collected
park usership data. The second goal of the report is to put forth recommendations to improve and expand this important
program.
Summary of Findings
• A total of 308 crimes were reported in the 20 pilot sites over 18 months.
• Flushing Meadows Corona Park (Queens) reported the highest total number of crimes (99), followed by Prospect Park,
Riverside Park, Bronx Park, and Pelham Bay Park.
• Half of the parks (ten parks) had five or fewer crimes in the 18 months.
• Two parks had no reported crimes over the 18 months: Fresh Kills Park and La Tourette Park, both in Staten Island.
• Seasonal differences in reported crime are vast, with the lowest number of crimes occurring in the winter and the
highest during spring and summer.
• Data from comparable quarters (Spring 2006 and 2007 and Summer 2006 and 2007) show that total crimes increased
due to an escalation of property crimes, rather than violent crimes.
Major Felony Crime Complaints include murder, rape, robbery, felony assault, burglary, grand larceny, grand larceny auto.
NYC Department of Parks & Recreation, Testimony, City Council Oversight hearing on “Crime Prevention and Safety Issues in City Parks,”
22 Jan. 2008.
1
2
Tracking Crime in New York City Parks
Introduction and Overview
By all accounts, crime in New York City has declined significantly in recent decades. Formerly seen as one of the most
dangerous cities in the country, New York’s reputation has turned around dramatically. In fact, according to preliminary
FBI data for 2006, New York has the lowest rate of crime among the 10 largest U.S. cities.1 The New York City Police
Department’s (NYPD) Compstat (“computerized statistics”) program, which integrates performance measurement and
accountability with near-instantaneous crime data to address safety issues, is largely credited with cleaning up New York
City’s streets.
At its inception, Compstat was lauded as an innovative crime-fighting strategy and it has continued to serve as a model
for police departments across the country. For years it was used to track, report on, and address crimes occurring on the
streets, on the subway, and in schools – but not in NYC’s parks. Central Park, the lone exception, is encompassed by its
own police precinct, which has tracked crimes in the park for many decades. But when a crime occurred in one of the
other 1,900 parks across the city, there was no mechanism for recording it as such. Rather than locating the crime to the
park itself, the NYPD located it to the nearest street intersection and reported it alongside data for the rest of the precinct.
This resulted in a void of public information regarding safety in NYC parks.
New York City’s Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) operates 29,000 acres of municipal parkland – the front and
backyards of New Yorkers. Our parks offer opportunities for solace, sports, performances, and spending time with friends
and family. They provide important environmental functions, such as filtering pollutants and offering habitat, and when
properly cared for, they increase property values. New Yorkers deserve parks that are clean, green, and safe.
Due to the efforts of advocates and the City Council, in December 2005 Mayor Michael Bloomberg signed Local Law 114,
which mandates the tracking and reporting of crime in parks. To allow the NYPD time to develop and adjust the program
as needed, only the 20 largest parks were slated for inclusion in the first year of the program. Unfortunately, after nearly
two years, we are still tracking only these 20 pilot parks.
As Compstat has proven throughout the city, data collection is a vital step toward crime prevention, helping to ensure the
efficient deployment of resources to improve safety. Without this crucial information, the public is uninformed and the
NYPD and the Parks Department are less able to efficiently and effectively address safety issues.
The goals of this report are to provide the public with an assessment of the first 18 months of data on crime in parks (April
2006 – September 2007); and to put forth recommendations to improve and expand this important program.
New Yorkers for Parks offers the following recommendations to expand the program and increase
public safety:
1. The NYPD should expand the program as outlined in the legislation, to formally track and report on crimes in
the 100 largest City parks now and all parks by 2010.
2. The City must ensure that funding is available for sufficient Parks Enforcement Patrol (PEP) officers to enforce
quality-of-life issues and deter serious crimes.
3. The Parks Department should publish on its website data on crime in parks. Safety tips should be posted online
and on signage in parks to ensure that visitors are well informed.
4. The Parks Department should continue to explore methods of measuring park use and eventually determine
the rate of crime in parks citywide. The agency should partner with an academic institution to conduct a
comprehensive study on crime, park use, and maintenance inspection data to determine how best to invest in
parks to deter crime.
1
The NYC Mayor’s Office of Operations, “FY 2007 Mayor’s Management Report.” http://home2.nyc.gov/html/ops/html/mmr/mmr.shtml
1
Compstat and Parks
In 1994, at the start of the Giuliani administration, newly appointed Police Commissioner William Bratton introduced
significant changes in the management of the NYPD. Central to the new strategy of fighting crime was the introduction of
Compstat. Compstat was based on the idea of performance measurement and managing for improvements. Components
of the program included reporting near-instantaneous crime data and conducting semi-weekly meetings to allow staff to
discuss tactics to address crime “hot spots.” Between 1994 and 1999, declines were seen in every crime category and in
each of the 76 precincts2, a significant credit to the program.
Despite Compstat’s success, crimes that occurred in City parks other than Central Park, which has its own precinct, were
not specifically recorded as such. Rather, they were simply located to the closest street intersection and reported as part
of precinct statistics, resulting in a void of information regarding safety in NYC parks. It is probable that the downward
trend in crime citywide was reflected in public parks; unfortunately, without historical data on crime in parks other than
Central Park, we are unable to fully validate that assumption.
Advocating for Change
Following the brutal attacks of four women on NYC parkland
in 2002, New Yorkers for Parks placed park safety at the top of
its advocacy agenda, with the goal of expanding Compstat to
specifically track and report on crimes that occur in parks. In
order to build support and convey the importance of the issue,
New Yorkers for Parks began tracking crime on its own via news
headlines. Over the next three years, New Yorkers for Parks
and Council Member Peter F. Vallone, Jr., the chair of the City
Council’s Public Safety Committee, worked to build a coalition
and gain support for the measure within the City Council.
During this time, several high-profile crimes occurred, including the
assault of a Catholic priest jogging in Tremont Park in the Bronx Brooklyn’s Prospect Park receives 8 million visitors a year,
according to the Prospect Park Alliance, the non-profit
and the murder of Sarah Fox in Inwood Hill Park in Manhattan. operator of the park.
These horrific incidents sparked several press conferences and
three City Council hearings, which in turn placed increased
pressure on the City to institute a tracking system. NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly and DPR began to work actively
with advocates and the City Council to determine the feasibility of tracking and reporting crimes in City parks.
The first step was to identify the existing barriers to tracking crime in parks. When filling out a crime report, there were
two ways that police officers could identify the crime as having occurred in a park: they could elect to check a box indicating
that the crime took place in a park, or they could include this information in the narrative section of the report. Because
both of these indicators were optional, there was no systematic, reliable method for capturing the data. In addition, many
of the larger parks in the city are served by multiple precincts, which presented another challenge to obtaining an accurate
count of reported crimes.
Because of these issues, the City and advocates agreed that tracking crime in parks should begin as a pilot program, in
order to give the NYPD time to adjust its methodology to ensure that crimes were being fully and accurately counted.
2
Smith, D., & Bratton, W. (2001). Performance Management in New York City: Compstat and the Revolution in Police Management. In D. W. Forsythe
(Ed.), Quicker, Better, Cheaper? Managing Performance in American Government (pp. 453-482). Albany, N.Y.: Rockefeller Institute Press.
2
Tracking Crime in New York City Parks
For the first year, crimes in the four largest parks in each borough
would be tracked and reported, resulting in a total of 20 pilot parks.
NYPD officials would be able to instruct and work with a few specific
precincts to institute the program. This relatively small universe of
sites also meant that the NYPD could feasibly discover, investigate, and
correct discrepancies in tracking and reporting crimes.
The leadership of Council Member Vallone was instrumental in pushing
this bill through City Hall. Council Member Joseph Addabbo must also
be credited for holding the initial hearings on crime in parks through
his position as former Chair of the Parks Committee. The two council
members sponsored the bill, which was supported by 47 out of 51
members.
On December 21, 2005, Mayor Bloomberg signed Local Law 114, which
required the NYPD to begin tracking the seven Major Felony Crime
Complaints (MFCCs) in the 20 largest City parks. The MFCCs include
murder, rape, felony assault, robbery, burglary, grand larceny, and grand
larceny auto.
According to the law, the NYPD was to begin tracking and reporting
on crimes in the 100 largest parks one year after the signing of the
bill, and two years after, the program was to be expanded to the 200
largest parks. After three years, every City park greater than one acre
would be tracked. Unfortunately, after nearly two years, we are still
tracking only the 20 pilot parks. It is time to expand this important
program.
Challenges and Solutions to Tracking Crime in Parks
One reported delay in expanding this program is that the NYPD has
historically referred to street intersections when locating and mapping
reported crimes across the city. Due to the limited number of sites,
the NYPD has been able to track the pilot parks; however, the absence
of city streets in parks poses a challenge to growing this program.
Officers with the Central Park Precinct have tracked crime in the park
for decades. The park is divided into sectors, which is the first geographic
descriptor that the officers note. In addition, each lamppost in Central
Park is marked with a number that corresponds to the street outside
the park, as well as an “E” or “W,” for “East” or “West.” Officers note
the lamppost number, any landmarks, and an approximate distance in
order to describe where a crime has occurred. The analyst reads each
crime complaint and manually marks the locations of reported crimes
on a map using GIS (Geographic Information Systems). The maps and
statistics are compiled for the NYPD’s weekly Compstat meetings.
3
Best Practice:
Using Crime Data
for Prevention
The Bryant Park Corporation is known
nationally as one of the innovators in park
management. Since 1985 the corporation
has operated the park, and today it
receives no public money, relying only on
revenues from events and concessions to
run the park. Bryant Park has regularly
been the highest scoring site on New
Yorkers for Park’s annual Report Card
on Parks, an award-winning independent
survey of the maintenance conditions of
more than 100 neighborhood parks.
Bryant Park has not always been a model
urban park, however. In the 1970s and
80s, the park had an extremely high
crime rate and was overrun with drug
dealers. Following a redesign of the
space and the dedicated attention of the
Bryant Park Corporation, the park today
is extremely safe.
The park managers work with the
NYPD annually to determine how many
and what types of crimes are occurring
in the park. In the early 2000s, the park
was down to about one reported crime
per year, an exceptional accomplishment.
However, analysis of crime data from the
NYPD in 2005 allowed park managers to
react to a sudden but moderate increase
of park crime linked to the installation of
a new amenity: The Pond, a popular ice
skating rink. The data revealed that theft
was occurring within the skating rink’s
changing facilities. Upon realizing this,
management installed a closed circuit
camera system, which immediately
decreased the number of incidents.
Without data on crime in the park, this
effective, targeted strategy would not
have been possible.
The strategy used in Central Park is fairly labor intensive and may not be replicable in other parts of the city. How can we
systematically track and report on crime in the parks that are just one component of a large precinct? Global Positioning
Systems (GPS) devices, which can pinpoint an exact location on a digital map, offer one simple way of locating crimes.
Another important tool is NYCMap, the standard GIS map used by all City agencies.
The Parks Department assigns each park a unique ID number, which corresponds to NYCMap. Small parks should be
identified in Compstat using their ID. DPR divides large parks into zones, which are also assigned a number. Paper or digital
maps of large parks could be given to the officers with a breakout of zones as well as major landmarks and other features.
When a crime occurs, part of the process of filling out the crime report should involve marking on the map the zone in
which the crime occurred. When the information is logged into Compstat, the individual recording the data would log the
park ID or zone as well as other standard information. This strategy would ensure that crimes in parks are appropriately
and accurately counted and would allow the crimes to be mapped.
The Results: 18 Months of Tracking Crime in Parks
This section of the report includes the results of 18 months of
data on crime in parks. Several factors must be considered when
examining the data presented in this report.
First, as written in the legislation, the 20 parks selected for
inclusion in the pilot program were chosen based on acreage
alone. Crime has been tracked in the four largest parks in each
borough, with the exception of Central Park. Although it is one
of the largest parks in the city, it was not included as a pilot site
since it is served by its own precinct that tracks crime. The data
collected on the 20 pilot parks provides a snapshot of conditions
and cannot be used to make generalizations regarding crime in
parks citywide. In addition, because the data is limited to only
six quarters, we do not have enough information to determine
the statistical significance of increases and decreases in crime
over time.
Marine Park hosts a kayak and canoe launch, allowing visitors
to explore the creeks that weave throughout Brooklyn’s
largest park.
Second, without information on park usership, which the Parks Department collects in only a very limited fashion, we
cannot determine the commonly used crime rate based on population. For example, although the number of crimes in
Central Park exceeded each of the 20 pilot sites included in the study, it is arguably the most visited park in the system.
The Central Park Conservancy, which does measure usage, estimates that the park receives 25 million visitors annually.
The number of crimes per 1,000 visitors, therefore, is likely lower than some of the other sites measured, particularly since
it is served by its own precinct whose primary responsibility is the safety of park users. The Prospect Park Alliance also
measures usage and estimates that 8 million visitors use the park annually. But without broad park usership numbers, it is
difficult to compare data across parks or over time.The U.S. Department of Justice and other agencies calculate crime rates
based on population to enable these sorts of comparisons. As a substitute standard measurement, this report includes the
number of crimes per acre in each park, to allow for comparison across sites.
Finally, it is important to recognize that crime depends on many factors. Crimes in parks are clearly affected by the presence
of uniformed staff. The Parks Department’s Park Enforcement Patrol (PEP) is responsible for enforcing “quality of life”
issues, but their presence also deters more serious offenses. In a notable incident in 2006, three PEP officers prevented a
rape from occurring in Forest Park. Since 2005, the number of deployable Parks Enforcement Patrol officers has doubled to
4
Tracking Crime in New York City Parks
Table 1: Central Park Crime Statistics
about 150 uniformed staff.3 This increased security and
a simultaneous expansion in maintenance staff in parks
have surely served to deter crime. However, with 29,000
acres of parkland, there are not enough PEP officers to
offer a constant presence in the vast majority of parks
– instead, they rove from site to site. Other significant
factors impacting crime include maintenance conditions,
design and location of the park, and programming. Parks
that are well maintained and programmed invite positive
uses.
Murder
Rape
Robbery
Felony Assault
Burglary
Grand Larceny
Grand Larceny Auto
TOTAL
1990
2006
Change
3
10
152
44
20
132
7
368
0
1
33
10
1
57
1
103
-100%
-90%
-78%
-77%
-95%
-57%
-86%
-72%
Although it was not one of the 20 pilot sites tracked
through Local Law 114, Central Park plays an important
Source: NYPD Compstat Unit, 2008
role in this report. Crime data from Central Park is
included for several reasons. First, most New Yorkers
have some level of familiarity with the park, making
it an interesting comparison for the pilot parks included in the study, which may be familiar only to their immediate
constituents.
Second, crime in the park has been tracked for decades and has decreased significantly in recent years – an important
success that the City should aspire to in all parks. Crime in Central Park decreased by 72% between 1990 and 2006 – from
368 to 103 reported crimes (see Table 1).4 These declines are a credit to the City as well as the Central Park Conservancy,
founded in 1980, which maintains and operates the park.
Third, unlike any other park in the city, Central Park is served by its own police precinct, whose job for many decades has
been to ensure the safety of park visitors. This level of security undoubtedly increases public safety and shows the effect
that a uniformed presence can have on crime.
The seven Major Felony Crime Complaints, as tracked by NYPD and defined in Appendix A, are considered in this report.
Full descriptions of each of the 20 parks are included in Appendix B. More detailed data is available by contacting New
Yorkers for Parks at [email protected].
Incidence of Crime Over 18 Months
Today’s relatively low levels of crime in Central Park and throughout the city represent a notable achievement. If historical
data on crimes in the remaining parks in the system were available, similar declines might be apparent, particularly considering
the increases in funding and resources that the New York City Parks Department has seen in recent years.
Users’ perceptions of park safety are represented in a 2006 online user survey conducted by New Yorkers for Parks and
eTownPanel, a project of Baruch College’s Survey Research Unit. When asked about park conditions, NYC respondents
were less concerned about safety in their local park than they were about maintenance, noise, and crowds.
The total number of reported crimes in the 20 parks over 18 months was 308. Of the 20 pilot parks included in the study,
Flushing Meadows Corona Park (Queens) had the highest incidence of crime during the 18 months (see Map 1 and Table
2.) This was followed by Prospect Park, Riverside Park, Bronx Park, and Pelham Bay Park. As a comparison, Central Park
NYC Department of Parks & Recreation, Testimony, City Council Oversight hearing on “Crime Prevention and Safety Issues in City Parks,”
22 Jan. 2008.
4
Police Department, City of New York, Compstat Unit. http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/crime_prevention/crime_statistics.shtml
3
5
Table 2:Total Major Felony Crime Complaints by Park, April 2006 – September 2007
Burglary
% Violent
Borough
Central Park
Manhattan
162
0
1
44
11
3
102
1
35%
Flushing Meadows Park
Queens
99
1
2
18
18
7
45
8
39%
Prospect Park
Brooklyn
57
1
1
29
9
1
16
0
70%
Riverside Park
Manhattan
31
0
0
17
5
0
9
0
71%
Bronx Park
Bronx
30
0
0
4
6
0
19
1
33%
Pelham Bay Park
Bronx
17
1
0
3
5
0
8
0
53%
Van Cortlandt Park
Bronx
16
2
0
0
6
1
7
0
50%
Forest Park
Queens
12
0
1
7
2
1
1
0
83%
Marine Park
Brooklyn
9
0
0
3
2
0
4
0
56%
Inwood Hill Park
Manhattan
8
0
0
5
2
1
0
0
88%
Cunningham Park
Queens
7
0
0
3
1
0
3
0
57%
Dyker Beach Park
Brooklyn
5
0
0
1
2
0
2
0
60%
Paerdegat Basin Park
Brooklyn
5
0
1
1
1
0
2
0
60%
Fort Washington Park
Manhattan
3
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
100%
Randall’s Island Park
Manhattan
3
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
67%
Alley Pond Park
Queens
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0%
Midland Beach & Boardwalk
Staten Island
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0%
Ferry Point Park
Bronx
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0%
Great Kills Park
Staten Island
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0%
Fresh Kills Park
Staten Island
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N/A
La Tourette Park
Staten Island
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
N/A
308
5
5
94
61
11
121
11
47%
Total, Pilot Parks Only
*”Violent” crimes include murder, rape, robbery, and felony assault
Rape
Robbery
Grand
Larceny
Auto
Park Name
Murder
Felony
Assault
Grand
Larceny
TOTAL
CRIMES
had a higher number of reported crimes during this period; however, it is also arguably the most heavily visited park in the
NYC park system.
Flushing Meadows contains two major sports venues: Shea Stadium and the USTA Billie Jean King National Tennis Center.
According to the NYPD, these two facilities account for a significant percentage of the crimes that are associated with the
park. In 2006, 30% of the crimes at the park occurred within these two facilities; in 2007, almost half. This information
highlights the need to publish data on the locations of crimes within large parks so that we may deploy officers and inform
the public accordingly.
Bronx Park also contains two unique and popular facilities: the Bronx Zoo and the New York Botanical Garden, both of
which attract large numbers of visitors. With more information on the locations of the crimes that have occurred in the
park, we might attribute a number to these destinations. The same logic could apply to Orchard Beach, which is part of
the vast Pelham Bay Park and attracted an estimated 1.6 million visitors during the summer of 2006, according to the Parks
Department.
Two parks had no reported crimes during the 18 months. These were Fresh Kills, which is in the development stage and
is slated to become a significant regional park, and La Tourette, largely made up of dense forest and a golf course. Both of
these parks are in Staten Island.
Of the 308 reported crimes in the 20 pilot parks, 121 (39%) were grand larcenies, or the theft of property valued at $1,000
or more. Another 94 (31%) were robberies – theft coupled with the threat or use of violence. Sixty-one felony assaults
were reported, making up 20% of the total crimes. These three categories together account for 90% of the total reported
crimes, and prevention efforts should be targeted accordingly. Park users should be aware that, although any occurrence
of murder or rape in a park is cause for deep concern, these crimes were rare in the pilot study.
Incidence of Violent Crime Over 18 Months
Crimes categorized as “violent” include murder, rape, robbery and felony assault. These crimes include the use or threat
of force or violence. Robberies and felony assaults accounted for a full 94% of violent crimes in the 20 parks. Murder and
rape, the other two “violent crime” categories were extremely rare. As shown in Map 2, 40 violent crimes were reported
in Prospect Park over the 18 months, closely followed by 39 in Flushing Meadows. However, the rate of violent crimes
relative to the total crimes in these parks shows an important difference in the two sites. While 39% of Flushing Meadows’
crimes were violent, 70% of the crimes reported in Prospect Park were violent (see Table 2.) More information is needed,
particularly whether or not there are “hot spots” of violent crime within the parks that could be targeted for prevention
efforts.
Other parks that had relatively large percentages of violent crimes include Fort Washington Park, Inwood Hill Park, Forest
Park, and Riverside Park. Violent crimes at all of these sites exceeded 70% of the total. As a contrast, 35% of the crimes
reported in Central Park were violent.
Although robberies and felony assaults were the most common violent crimes in the 20 parks, in six parks, neither was
reported over the 18 months.
Increased security resources should be provided to those parks that have relatively high incidences of violent crime. The
City Council and DPR have discussed installing security cameras in parks to address crime. Provided civil liberties are
protected, this may be an appropriate strategy. DPR should use violent crime data to pinpoint sites in need of added safety
measures.
8
Tracking Crime in New York City Parks
Crimes per Park Acre
As discussed previously, the Parks Department does not collect data on park usage. With this data, we could calculate a
crime rate for each park – for example, the number of crimes per 1,000 park users. As a substitute standard measurement,
Table 3 shows the number of reported crimes per acre for each park. This calculation allows for comparison despite the
vast range in acreage among the sites. Although the pilot includes the four largest parks in each borough, the acreage ranges
from 160 (Fort Washington) to 2,765 (Pelham Bay Park.)
The table shows that Riverside Park had a higher incidence of crime per acre (0.12) than any other park in the pilot study.
At 267 acres, the park is one of the smallest in the group of 20 parks. In total number of reported crimes, the park ranked
third highest over the 18 months; by the acre, it contained the greatest number of crimes. Prospect Park had both a
relatively high number of total crimes as well as a high number of crimes per acre.
Conversely, Pelham Bay Park, the largest City park, had the fifth highest number of reported crimes during the 18 month
study. However, by the acre, it performed fairly well on safety, with 0.01 crimes per acre. Similarly, Forest Park and Van
Cortlandt Park had relatively high incidences of crime, but they performed much better on the by-the-acre measure.
Seasonal Crime Trends
Crimes in the 20 pilot parks and Central Park rose slightly over the course of the study, as seen in Graph 1. In both Central
Park and the pilot sites, the number of crimes occurring in April – June 2007 and July – September 2007 is higher than the
same time periods in 2006. In the pilot parks the increase is due to a rise in non-violent crimes. The same is not true for
Central Park, which experienced an increase in violent crimes relative to non-violent crimes.
The colder months (January – March 2007) showed a significant drop in crime in Central Park and the 20 pilot parks,
with the reported incidents rising again as it became warmer. We know anecdotally that park usage is lower in the winter
months, which likely results in fewer reported crimes. In the pilot sites, the most crime complaints occurred during April –
June 2007, with 68 reported incidents; 30 of these (44%) were violent crimes.
The variation among the seasons appears to be greater in the pilot parks than in Central Park. Between January – March
2007 and April – June 2007, reported crimes in Central Park increased nearly three times, versus an increase of nearly five
times over the same period for the pilot parks. This difference may potentially reflect park usage as well. If winter usage
declines more in the 20 pilot parks tends to decline more than it does in Central Park, then a more dramatic seasonal shift
in crime may be logical. The DPR should study usage to determine how resources can be deployed to safeguard park users
throughout the year.
9
Tracking Crime in New York City Parks
Table 3: Crimes per Park Acre, April 2006 - September 2007
Park Name
Borough
TOTAL
CRIMES
Central Park
Manhattan
162
840
0.19
Riverside Park
Manhattan
31
267
0.12
Prospect Park
Brooklyn
57
526
0.11
Flushing Meadows Park
Queens
99
1255
0.08
Bronx Park
Bronx
30
718
0.04
Inwood Hill Park
Manhattan
8
196
0.04
Paerdegat Basin Park
Brooklyn
5
161
0.03
Dyker Beach Park
Brooklyn
5
217
0.02
Forest Park
Queens
12
538
0.02
Cunningham Park
Queens
7
358
0.02
Fort Washington Park
Manhattan
3
160
0.02
Van Cortlandt Park
Bronx
16
1146
0.01
Marine Park
Brooklyn
9
798
0.01
Randall’s Island Park
Manhattan
3
273
0.01
Pelham Bay Park
Bronx
17
2765
0.01
Great Kills Park
Staten Island
1
307
0.00
Midland Beach & Boardwalk
Staten Island
2
639
0.00
Alley Pond Park
Queens
2
655
0.00
Ferry Point Park
Bronx
1
414
0.00
Fresh Kills Park
Staten Island
0
814
0.00
La Tourette Park
Staten Island
0
511
0.00
15.4
635.9
0.03
Average, Pilot Parks only
11
PARK
ACREAGE
CRIMES PER
ACRE
Number of Total Crimes
Number of Total Crimes
Graph 1
12
Tracking Crime in New York City Parks
Park Crime By the Borough
As shown in Map 3, of all the pilot parks, Flushing Meadows
Corona Park (Queens) had the highest number of reported
crimes in every quarter except for January – March 2007. (Only
one crime occurred in the park that quarter, representing a
drastic decline.) During January – March 2007, Riverside Park
(Manhattan) had the highest number of reported crimes, with
five. Flushing Meadows reached a high of 21 crimes, and this
occurred during three separate quarters. Central Park had
the highest number of reported crimes during each of the six
quarters; however, this could reflect the high rate of usership in
this park, as noted previously. Non-violent incidents made up a
larger percentage of crimes in Central Park than in the 20 pilot
sites.
In the borough of Queens, Flushing Meadows had the highest
incidence of crime, as discussed above. Alley Pond Park had no
reported crimes during four of the six quarters.
Bronx Park includes the New York Botanical Garden, the
Bronx Zoo, and the Bronx River, the only freshwater river in
New York City.
Of the parks measured in the borough of Brooklyn, Prospect Park had the most reported crimes in every quarter, with a
high of 15 in April – June 2007. Paerdegat Basin Park had no reported crimes during two quarters, and Dyker Beach had
no reported crimes during three quarters.
Bronx Park had the highest number of reported crimes in that borough in every quarter except for July – September 2006,
when Van Cortlandt Park overtook it. Bronx Park reached a high of eight crimes during April – June 2007. Ferry Point Park
had only one reported crime during the 18 months. Pelham Bay Park had no reported crimes during two quarters.
In Manhattan, Riverside Park had the highest number of reported crimes in every quarter except for October – December
2006, when Inwood Hill surpassed it. Riverside Park reached a high of nine reported crimes between July – September
2007. Both Randall’s Island and Fort Washington Park had no reported crimes during four quarters.
In Staten Island, three of the six quarters had no reported crimes in any of the four parks. Over the 18 months, Great Kills
Park had one reported crime, and Midland Beach & Boardwalk had two – one each during two separate quarters.
Other Cities
Compstat has been a model for police departments across the country, and the NYPD has generally been considered the
forerunner in using crime data and mapping to quickly address safety issues. Through the agency’s website, citizens can
obtain near real-time numbers on crimes in their precinct. This data is provided alongside crime data for up to 15 years
prior, so that the public has a good sense of crime trends. This information is useful and important. However, other cities
have done an admirable job in expanding public access to crime data through GIS mapping tools. New York City residents
would benefit from a similar tool, which should be available through DPR’s website.
Cities such as Washington, D.C., Minneapolis, and San Diego allow users to search online for crimes by timeframe and
location, including address, school, place of worship, or park, and produce a custom-made map of the data. Although these
cities do not show if a crime happened inside the park or not, a user can search for crimes that have occurred near the
park. NYC should use online mapping technology to allow the public to create customized maps of park crimes.
13
Tracking Crime in New York City Parks
Recommendations
Along with “Getting guns off the streets” and “Breaking the cycle of domestic violence,” one of the 10 central police
strategies is, “Reclaiming public space.” Despite this admirable commitment, crimes in parks were not specifically tracked
and reported by the NYPD until two years ago. In the vast majority of parks in the city, crime is still not adequately tracked.
Local Law 114 is a great first step toward the ambitious but achievable goal of collecting and reporting crime data in every
park across the city, and most importantly, using this data to enhance public safety.
New Yorkers for Parks offers the following recommendations to improve this essential program and provide for the safety
of all park users:
1. The NYPD should expand the program as the legislation mandates, to track and report on
crimes in the 100 largest City parks now and all parks by 2010.
By following the model set by the Central Park Precinct as well as utilizing basic technology, an expansion in the program
should be achievable now. Once a process is put in place, there should be little delay in expanding the program to formally
track crime in all city parks. The NYPD should also begin tracking and reporting the locations of crimes within the large
parks to enhance efficient deployment of resources as well as educate the public.
2. The City must ensure that funding is available for sufficient Parks Enforcement Patrol (PEP)
officers to enforce quality-of-life issues and deter serious crimes.
PEP officers are the first enforcers in the park, responsible for ensuring that minor violations are addressed before they
lead to more serious incidents. We must sufficiently fund PEP to deter and address crime in city parks.
3. The Parks Department should publish on its website data on crime in parks. Safety tips
should be posted online and on signage in parks to ensure that visitors are well-informed.
One crucial objective of tracking crime in parks is that the data be made public, with the understanding that public
awareness leads to increased safety and greater accountability. The Parks Department should ensure that park users are
informed.
4. The Parks Department should continue to explore methods of measuring park use and
eventually determine the rate of crime in parks citywide. The agency should partner
with an academic institution to conduct a comprehensive analysis of crime, park use, and
maintenance inspection data to determine how best to invest in parks to deter crime.
Through a fuller understanding of the effects of park use and maintenance on crime rates, we will be able to better allocate
resources to keep our city parks green, clean, and safe.
17
Appendix A: Definitions of Crimes 5
• A person commits Murder when he or she causes the death of a person or an unborn child with which a female has
been pregnant for more than twenty-four weeks.
• A person commits Rape when he or she engages in sexual intercourse with a person who is of inappropriate age,
incapable of consent, or by means of forcible compulsion.
• A person commits Robbery when, in the course of stealing, he or she uses or threatens the use of physical force upon
another person.
• A person commits Felony Assault when he or she assaults and injures another person.
• A person commits Burglary when he or she unlawfully enters an edifice with intent to commit a crime.
• A person commits Grand Larceny when he or she steals property valued at greater than $1,000 or property of any
value that falls under specific categories such as credit cards, firearms, or objects of religious or scientific value.
• The penal code does not differentiate Grand Larceny Auto from Grand Larceny; however, this category is generally
used to describe vehicle theft.
5
As defined by New York Penal Law, http://law.onecle.com/new-york/penal/index.html
18
Appendix B: About the 20 Pilot ParksTracking Crime in New York City Parks
Park
Borough
Attractions
Acres Neighborhood
Alley Pond
Park
Queens
Composed primarily of natural area.
Some baseball fields, handball courts
and playgrounds.
655
Bayside, Little
Neck, Oakland
Gardens
Bronx Park
Bronx
Has a 40-acre virgin forest with
nature trails. Also offers bocce,
basketball, tennis, soccer, baseball,
football and playgrounds. Cultural
attractions include the Bronx Zoo
and NY Botanical Garden.
718
Cunningham Queens
Park
Three quarters of acreage is natural
area. Also provides baseball, tennis,
bocce, cricket, soccer and playgrounds.
Dyker
Beach Park
Brooklyn
Ferry
Point
Park
Police
Community
Precinct
Board
Council
District
111
411
23
Tremont, Crotona,
Belmont, Fordham
49, 52
106
15
358
Bayside, Fresh
Meadows, Holland
Hill, St. John
University
107
408
23
Offers baseball, bocce, football, golf, a
lagoon and natural areas.
217
Dyker Heights,
Fort Hamilton
68
210
50
Bronx
Situated on a peninsula, Ferry Point
Park is composed primarily of natural
areas. Some baseball, cricket and
football fields. The site is planned to
eventually host a golf course.
414
Throgs Neck
45
110
18
Flushing
Meadows
Park
Queens
A Flagship park. Active recreation
includes baseball, basketball, cricket,
football, soccer, tennis, boating, and
playground facilities. 124 acres of
natural area. Cultural attractions:
Shea Stadium, the USTA Tennis Center,
the Hall of Science, the Queens
Museum of Art, the Queens Botanical
Garden, a wildlife center, a children’s
farm and the preserved site of the
1939-40 and 1964-65 New York
World’s Fairs.
1255
Pomona, Flushing,
Rego Park,
Forest Hills,
Kew Gardens,
Queensboro Hill
110
403
21
Forest Park
Queens
A Flagship park. Includes a sizeable
oak forest. Offers golf, tennis,
basketball, playgrounds, a bandshell
and horseback riding.
538
Woodhaven,
Kew Gardens,
Richmond Hill,
Forest Hills,
Glendale
102
416
30
Fort
Washington
Park
Manhattan
This park offers natural areas, baseball,
basketball, tennis and playgrounds.
Cultural attractions include a
marina with a café and live musical
performances.
160
Inwood,
Washington
Heights
33
312
7
Fresh Kills
Park
Staten
Island
Natural area and wildlife refuge, with
plans for further development of
active recreation and other facilities.
814*
Travis, Arden,
Glenridge,
Heartland Village
122
502
50
Great Kills
Park
Staten
Island
Primarily natural area. Also has
baseball, football and unofficial
swimming beach.
307
Oakland, New
Dorp, Bay Terrace,
Great Kills
122
503
51
19
Park
Borough
Attractions
Acres Neighborhood
Inwood Hill
Park
Manhattan
Offers baseball, tennis, soccer, hockey,
football and playgrounds. Natural
areas. Cultural attractions include a
marina and an ecology center.
196
Inwood
34
312
7
La Tourette
Park
Staten
Island
Composed primarily of natural areas.
Offers a golf course, softball fields and
hiking trails.
511
Lighthouse Hill,
Heartland Village
122
502
50
Marine Park
Brooklyn
Located on the water and composed
primarily of natural areas. Also offers
baseball, cricket, football, golf, bocce,
tennis, basketball, nature trails, nature
center and playgrounds.
798
Marine Park, Mill
Island, Mill Basin,
Gerritsen Beach
63
218
46
Midland
Beach &
Boardwalk
Staten
Island
Main attraction is swimming beach
and boardwalk. Also boasts baseball,
basketball, handball, shuffleboard,
bocce, a roller hockey rink, a
skateboard park, a fishing pier and
playgrounds.
639
Arrochar, Dongan
Hill, Midland
Beach, South
Beach
122
502
50
Paerdegat
Basin Park
Brooklyn
Natural area, half the acreage is under
water.
161
Georgetown,
Canarsie, Bergen
Beach
63
218
46
Pelham Bay
Park
Bronx
A Flagship park and the largest City
park. Composed primarily of natural
areas. Offers baseball, basketball,
boating, bocce, football, golf, soccer,
tennis, horseback riding, concessions,
playgrounds and Orchard Beach.
2765
Eastchester,
Co-op City,
Pelham Bay,
Baychester,
Country Club
45
110
13
Prospect
Park
Brooklyn
A Flagship park. Offers kayaking,
canoeing, baseball, basketball, football,
ice and inline skating, soccer, tennis,
concessions, playgrounds and natural
areas. Cultural attractions include a
bandshell and zoo.
526
Park Slope,
Prospect Heights,
Windsor Terrace,
Prospect-Lefferts
Gardens
78
209
39
Randall’s
Island
Manhattan
Primarily used for active recreation,
this park offers baseball, track, a
driving range, golf, cricket, tennis,
football, soccer, a playground, a
stadium, concessions, bike paths and
natural areas.
273
Randall’s Island
25
311
22
Riverside
Park
Manhattan
A Flagship park. Offers baseball,
basketball, soccer, tennis, cycling, a
marina, concessions, and playgrounds.
267
Upper West Side,
Morningside
Heights, Harlem
26, 24, 20
307
6
Van
Cortlandt
Park
Bronx
A Flagship park. Composed primarily
of natural areas. Also offers baseball,
basketball, cricket, golf, bocce, football,
horseback riding, picnic areas, tennis,
soccer and playgrounds.
1146
Riverdale,
Kingsbridge,
Norwood,
Woodlawn
50, 47
108
11
Source: NYC Department of Parks and Recreation, 2007.
*Fresh Kills will expand to 2,200 acres following the development of the landfill area.
20
Police
Community
Precinct
Board
Council
District
355 Lexington Avenue, 14th Floor, New York, NY 10017 • www.ny4p.org • Phone: 212.838.9410 • Fax: 212.371.6048