Atlas Week 2018

Transcript

1. COFFEE & CONVERSATION CHRIS PRENER, PH.D. SAM AND MARILYN FOX ATLAS WEEK 2018
2. A SEGMENTED STREET GRID
3. A SEGMENTED STREET GRID
6. PUBLIC SAFETY & BARRIERS
7. SIMPLE CLOSURES
8. VANDEVENTER Enright Ave Delmar Blvd W Bell Pl N Newstead Ave
9. CUL-DE-SACS
10. Botanical Ave Shenandoah Ave Tower Grove Ave SHAW
11. POCKET PARKS
12. Laclede Ave N Boyle Ave Forest Park Ave CENTRAL WEST END
13. MULTIPLE CLOSURES
14. Gibson Ave S Newstead Ave Chouteau Ave Arco Ave FOREST PARK SOUTHEAST
15. Gibson Ave S Newstead Ave Chouteau Ave Arco Ave FOREST PARK SOUTHEAST
16. BARRIER LOCATIONS Current Barrier Density City of 
 St. Louis Projection:
 NAD 1983 Missouri State Plane East greater density n of barriers = 270 Data:
 Equal interval classes; k-density raster output of barrier point locations
17. rho = 0.441 (p < 0.001)
18. QUESTION If barrier density is 
 positively related to crime
 at the neighborhood level,
 are blocks that are closed safer than the surrounding neighborhood? ?
19. “ISLANDS IN A STORM”
20. RESULTS: BLOCK LEVEL EFFECTS ON CRIME CITY-WIDE RESULTS This analysis focuses on violent crime counts because of the high number of blocks with a “0” population. Closed blocks have, on average, higher violent crime rates. Category n mean Not Blocked 15037 0.365 Blocked 959 0.556 W = 6397000, p < .001, d = .143
21. RESULTS: BLOCK LEVEL EFFECTS ON CRIME CITY-WIDE RESULTS This analysis focuses on part 1 crime counts because of the high number of blocks with a “0” population. Closed blocks have, on average, higher part 1 crime rates. Category n mean Not Blocked 15037 1.509 Blocked 959 2.578 W = 5401200, p < .001, d = .262
22. QUESTION Do barriers operate with
 different consequences in
 different parts of the city? ?
23. LOCAL EFFECTS? Current Barrier Density greater density n of barriers = 270 Data:
 Equal interval classes; k-density raster output of barrier point locations
24. LOCAL EFFECTS? n of barriers = 270 Segregation Current Barrier Density greater density Data:
 Equal interval classes; k-density raster output of barrier point locations
25. LOCAL EFFECTS? n of barriers = 270 Current Barrier Density greater density Data:
 Equal interval classes; k-density raster output of barrier point locations 1 - 6 Barriers per
 Neighborhood 7 - 12 13 - 17 18 - 23 24 - 29 Data:
 Equal interval classes n of valid neighborhoods = 49
26. NEIGHBORHOOD RESULTS This analysis focuses on violent crime counts because of the high number of blocks with a “0” population. 6 of the 49 neighborhoods had a statistically significant mean difference between open and closed blocks. Neighborhood % closed mean, open mean, closed p d Downtown West 1.6% 0.434 0 p < .001 0.402 Covenant Blu / Grand Center 9.7% 0.554 0.077 p < .001 0.278 The Ville 10.9% 0.575 0.077 p < .001 0.431 Kingsway East 19.2% 1.086 2.158 p < .001 -0.616 Penrose 4.5% 0.627 0.182 p < .001 0.322 Skinker DaBaliviere 36.4% 0.147 0.535 p < .001 -0.579
27. NEIGHBORHOOD RESULTS This analysis focuses on part 1 crime counts because of the high number of blocks with a “0” population. 9 of the 49 neighborhoods had a statistically significant mean difference between open and closed blocks. Neighborhood % closed mean, open mean, closed p d Tiffany 16.4% 1.125 2.909 p < .05 -0.832 Downtown West 1.6% 2.244 14.833 p < .05 -2.505 Central West End 32.9% 2.946 4.591 p < .05 -0.220 Vandeventer 3.7% 1.924 0.333 p < .05 0.607 Visitation Park 38.9% 1.909 5.571 p < .05 -1.190 Jeff Vanderlou 6.2% 1.292 2.346 p < .05 -0.429 West End 25.3% 2.043 3.915 p < .05 -0.474 Penrose 4.5% 1.897 1.000 p < .05 0.258 Skinker DaBaliviere 36.4% 1.773 3.070 p < .05 -0.456
28. Slides will be available via SpeakerDeck:
 https://speakerdeck.com/chrisprener/atlas2018 LEARN MORE THANKS FOR COMING! Caution Text You can find out more about our project and 
 download our initial release of data at:
 https://chris-prener.github.io/barriers/ chris.prener@slu.edu
 https://chris-prener.github.io
 , :