Sarah KitnerShippensburg UniversityCapstone GIS ProjectFall 2016

Philadelphia Foreclosed PropertiesThe Relationship of Criminal Activity Within Proximity of Foreclosed Properties

Figure 1.Fore closure prope rtie s andrand om ad d r e s s e s w ith a 500-m e te rbuffe r d istance for crim e incid e nts inPhilad e lphia County.

Figure 2.Crim e Incid e nts w ithin a 200 footbuffe r d istance of a for e closure prope rty

Figure 3.Crim e Incid e nts w ithin a 500 footbuffe r d istance of a for e closure prope rty

Figure 4.Crim e Incid e nts w ithin a 1,000foot buffe r d istance of a for e closureprope rty

Figure 5.Crim e Incid e nts w ithin a 2,000foot buffe r d istance of a for e closureprope rty

One rand om for e clos e d prope rty w as s e le cte d toanalyze w hat crim e incid e nts occurr e d around thevacant hous e . Figure 2 s how s the s e le cte d for e clos e dhom e and the surround ing crim e incid e nts w ithin a200-foot rad ius. The crim e s that occur w ithin thisd istance are m or e conce ntrate d around the vacanthous e . In Table 2, the s pe cific crim e incid e nts thatoccurre d around this prope rty w e r e m ostly non-viole ntcrim e s. The s e crim e s are as s ociate d w ith the ft orburglary. Figure 3 s how s the sam e s e le cte d for e clos e dhom e and the surround ing crim e incid e nts w ithin a500-foot rad ius. The crim e s com m itte d w ithin this

d istance are in ad d ition to the 200-foot rad ius. Figure 4show s the sam e for e clos e d hom e and the surround ingcrim e incid e nts w ithin a 1,000-foot rad ius. Figure 5show s the sam e for e clos e d hom e as be for e and thesur round ing crim e incid e nts w ithin a 2,000-foot rad ius.The s e d istance s w e r e analyze d to s e e the rate ofincre as e in total crim e incid e nts from the s e le cte dfor e clos e d prope rty. The re sults s how the pe rce ntageof viole nt crim e s is highe st in the 200-foot buffe rd istance . Als o, as d istance incre as e s aw ay from theprope rty, the le ve l of viole nce als o d e cre as e s.

Philadelphia Foreclosed Properties and CrimeR and om Ad d r e s s e sFor e clos e d Ad d r e s s e sCrim e Incid e ntsPhilad e lphia Stre e tsR and om Ad d r e s s e s Buffe rFor e clos e d Ad d r e s s e s Buffe rPhilad e lphia

The purpos e of this re s e arch proje ct is to id e ntify for e closureprope rtie s and crim inal incid e nts re porte d w ithin the stud y are a.Analyzing crim e incid e nts in proxim ity to for e clos e d hom e s w illge ne rate a be tte r und e r stand ing of the ir re lations hip. Applyingrand om ad d r e s s e s to the stud y are a w ill d e te rm ine if the r e is acorr e lation be tw e e n for e closur e s and crim e . Spe cifically, thisproje ct focus e s on the s patial e xte nt of for e closure and crim e inPhilad e lphia County, Pe nns ylvania. The d ata w ill d e te rm ine howfor e closure s affe ct crim e and how crim e incre as e s w ith d istance .

R e fe r e nce m ap of the stud y are a

For e closure s have be e n incre as ing s ince the re ale state d e ficit in 2008. Fore clos e d hom e s d o not justaffe ct prope rty value s. The r e are othe r im portantas pe cts to cons id e r w he n analyzing for e clos e dhom e s. The proce s s of los ing one ’s hom e canbe com e ve ry e m otional for hom e ow ne r s. Hom e s arefor e clos e d w he n pe ople avoid or fall be hind payingthe ir bills or m ortgage s on tim e . Afte r a s pe cificam ount of tim e that the m ortgage is late onpaym e nts, a bank or age ncy w ill for e clos e the hom eforcing pe ople to vacate the pre m is e s. For e closure splay a m ajor role in ne ighborhood instability. The r e is

a pos itive re lations hip be tw e e n for e closure s andcrim e incid e nts. Crim e m ay be e nhance d d uring thefor e closure proce s s. The appe arance of vacanthom e s m ay incre as e opportunitie s for crim e . Crim ew as cate gorize d by viole nt or non-viole nt crim e s.Viole nt crim e s are cons id e r e d to be aggravate das sault w ith or w ithout a fir e arm , robbe ry w ith orw ithout a fir e arm and crim inal, gros s ne glige nce orjustifiable hom icid e . Non-viole nt crim e s arecons id e r e d to be re s id e ntial or non-re s id e ntialburglary, the ft, the ft from ve hicle , m otor ve hiclethe ft or re cove r e d stole n m otor ve hicle .

Introduction Purpose

What is the re lations hip of incre as e d crim e in proxim ity of for e clos e d prope rtie s in Philad e lphia County?Research Question

Pe nns ylvania countie s and Philad e lphia ce nte r stre e tsw e r e d ow nload e d from PASDA. Us ing a s e le ct bylocation, Philad e lphia County w as s e le cte d to cre ate astud y are a for the re s e arch que stion. Once the stud yare a w as d e te rm ine d , liste d for e clos e d prope rtie sw e r e obtaine d from Zillow w e bs ite . Since this d atahad no s patial coor d inate s, the ad d r e s s e s w e r e us e dto pe r form ge ocod ing te chnique s w ith QGIS. Policeincid e nts w e r e d ow nload e d from PASDA and ad d e dto the stud y are a. The d ata colle cte d w as proje cte dus ing the North Am e rica Equid istant Conic coor d inates yste m . This proje ction allow s for accuracy w hilepr e s e rving d istance . A buffe r d istance w as applie daround the for e clos e d prope rtie s to analyze howcrim inal activity incre as e d w ith proxim ity of

for e clos e d prope rtie s. To d e te rm ine a m inim al buffe rd istance , calculations w e r e m e asure d from afor e clos e d prope rty to the ne are st ce nte r stre e t. Abuffe r d istance of 200 ft., 500 ft., 1,000 ft. and 2,000ft. w e r e calculate d to analyze how the num be r ofcrim e incid e nts incre as e w ith the incre as ing d istancefrom the for e clos e d prope rty. The crim inal incid e ntsthat w e r e locate d w ithin the buffe r d istance s w e r ecate gorize d bas e d on viole nt and non-viole nt crim e s.A fixe d am ount of rand om points w e r e plotte d in thestud y are a to figure out how strong of a re lations hipcrim e had w ith for e closure s. The sam e buffe rd istance s w e r e us e d around the s e points w ith thesam e cate gorizations as state d above .

Methods and Data

PASDA. 2016. Philad e lphia Stre e ts – Stre e t Ce nte rline . City of Philad e lphia [cite d 2016 De ce m be r 8]PASDA. 2016. Philad e lphia Police – INCIDENTS 2014. City of Philad e lphia [cite d 2016 De ce m be r 8]PASDA. 2016. Pe nns ylvania County Bound arie s. Pe nns ylvania De partm e nt of Trans portation [cite d 2016 De ce m be r 8]Philad e lphia PA For e closur e s [Inte rne t]. c 2016. Zillow [2016; De ce m be r 8, 2016]Payton S, Stucke y T, Otte ns m ann J. 2015. The Spatial e xte nt of the e ff e cts of for e closure s on crim e . Social Scie nce R e s e arch [Inte rne t]. [cite dDe ce m be r 8, 2016]; 49: 288-298.

References

Table 3.Buffe r d istance from s e le cte d for e clos e d prope rty and the num be r of crim e s that occur w ithin thatd istance and the pe rce nt of viole nt and non-viole nt crim e s from total crim inal activity

Buffer Distance (Ft) Total Crime Incidents Violent Crimes Percent of VC (%) Non-Violent Crimes Percent of NVC (%)200 7 3 43 4 57500 19 6 32 13 681,000 81 18 22 63 882,000 353 77 22 276 88

1. Dow nload Pe nns ylvania countie s s hape file2. Dow nload Philad e lphia city ce nte r stre e ts s hape file3. Obtain for e clos e d prope rty d ata to ge ocod e the d ata in the stud y are a4. Find d ocum e nte d police incid e nts that are in the stud y are a5. Apply a d istance around for e clos e d prope rtie s to d e te rm ine incre as e d crim inal activity6. Cre ate rand om ad d r e s s e s to s e e the corr e lation of for e closure s and crim e

Objectives

The re sults of this proje ct conclud e d that the r e is apos itive re lations hip be tw e e n for e closure s and crim e .To s olve the re s e arch que stion, d ata w as obtaine dfrom various s ource s to cre ate a stud y are a. Crim eincid e nts w e r e analyze d w ith proxim ity to for e clos e dprope rtie s. Ne w applications le arne d from this proje ct

w as us ing QGIS to ge ocod e ad d r e s s e s and colle ctings ite s pe cific d ata for this proje ct. Future re s e arch thatcould follow this proje ct w ould be analyzing s ocial ande conom ic tre nd s that le ad to for e closure s andincre as e d crim e .

Conclusion

Table 1.Buffe r d istance from for e clos e d prope rtie s and the num be r of crim e s that occur w ithin thatd istance and the pe rce nt of viole nt and non-viole nt crim e s from total crim inal activity.

Buffer Distance (ft) Total Crime Incidents Violent Crimes Percent of VC (%) Non-Violent Crimes Percent of NVC (%)200 2178 591 27 1587 73500 11474 3115 27 8357 731000 32145 7974 25 24171 752000 56245 12806 23 43439 77

Table 1. Buffe r d istance from rand om ad d r e s s e s and the num be r of crim e s that occur w ithin thatd istance and the pe rce nt of viole nt and non-viole nt crim e s from total crim inal activity.

Buffer Distance (ft) Total Crime Incidents Violent Crimes Percent of VC (%) Non-Violent Crimes Percent of NVC (%)200 1,089 222 20 867 80500 6,542 1,185 18 5,357 821000 22,744 4,332 19 18,412 812000 55,876 10,956 20 44,920 80

The re sults of this proje ct conclud e that the r e is apos itive re lations hip be tw e e n for e clos e d prope rtie sand crim e incid e nts. Figure 1 s how s for e closur eprope rtie s and rand om ad d r e s s e s w ith a 500-m e te rbuffe r d istance for crim e incid e nts in Philad e lphiaCounty. The r e is a highe r conce ntration of crim eincid e nts locate d around for e clos e d prope rtie scom pare d to furthe r aw ay. The r e w e r e 489for e clos e d hom e s in the stud y are a. In the buffe rd istance , 49,499 crim e incid e nts occurr e d . The r e w e r e489 rand om ad d r e s s e s ad d e d to the stud y are a. In thebuffe r d istance , 45,523 crim e incid e nts occurre d .Com paring for e clos e d prope rtie s w ith rand omad d r e s s e s s how s the re lations hip be tw e e n

for e closure s and crim e . Crim e incid e nts w e r ecate gorize d bas e d on viole nt or non-viole nt crim e s.Table 1 w as cre ate d to show how crim e incid e ntsincre as e w ith buffe r d istance from the for e clos e dprope rtie s. De s pite the incre as ing am ount of crim eincid e nts, this ind icate s that the r e is a highe rconce ntration of crim e locate d clos e to the for e clos e dprope rty. Table 2 w as cre ate d to s how how crim eincid e nts incre as e w ith buffe r d istance from a rand omad d r e s s. The pe rce nt change of the total crim eincid e nts fluctuate s w ith d istance . Com paring Table s 1and 2, the r e are m or e viole nt crim e s around for e clos e dprope rtie s. This supports the pos itive re lations hipbe tw e e n for e clos e d prope rtie s and crim e .

Results and Discussion