Dangerous/Good parts of Minneapolis/ St. Paul (Brooklyn Park, Nicollet: crime rate, credit)

[Cruz Azul Guy]

My quick 2 cents. When looking at how dangerous a neighborhood is, it doesn't make sense to include non-violent crimes like larceny and auto theft, just look at the crimes violent in nature: murder, rape, robbery and agg assault. So then compile the Jan/Feb 2010 totals for a few neighborhoods and you have these results:
Neighborhood - M,RP,RB,AGAS-total
Marcy Holmes - 1, 3, 1, 5, = 10
Cedar Rvrsde - 0, 1, 2, 9, = 12

compared to a few of what would normally be considered to be rougher neighborhoods:
Neighborhood - M,RP,RB,AGAS-total
Central - 1, 2, 6, 10 = 19
Hawthorne-0, 1, 11, 10 = 22
Jordan - 1, 1, 16, 8 = 26
E. Phillips - 0, 0, 3, 12 = 15
Mdtwn Phillips-0, 1, 13, 5 = 19
Near-North- 1, 3, 3, 15 = 22
Phillips W - 0, 0, 2, 4 = 6
Ventura Village-0, 2, 8, 7 = 17
Whittier - 0, 0, 13, 9 = 22
Willard Hay - 0, 1, 12, 15 = 28

Look at this, the only neighborhood that has lower violent crime numbers than Cedar Riverside and Marcy Holmes is Phillips West (shockingly low crime there by the way). But yeah, overall the two University neighborhoods seem much safer from a violent crime standpoint thus far in 2010 and have had less than half the reported violent crime as north Minneapolis neighborhoods Willard Hay and Jordan.

[eastside38]

Slig --

I still maintain that Marcy-Holmes is one of the more dangerous parts of the city. I consider burglary, while not violent in a person-to-person context, to be an incredibly high risk situation for the occupants of the dwelling/business being burglarized. To me, auto theft is also a crime that reflects very poorly on a neighborhood, and Marcy-Holmes is tied at 3rd with Jordan in that category.

I see what your saying with the types of crime in Cedar-Riverside. I might write more about this soon, but I have a bus to catch.

However, would you agree that even a high rate of larceny would deter you from living in a certain neighborhood? I certainly don't want to live in a neighborhood where I have to worry about the safety of my personal items.

[uptown_urbanist]

I lived for two years in Marcy-Holmes (the non-Dinkytown portion) and never once had anything stolen. My roommate had a car and never had it stolen, my then-boyfriend visited frequently, parked his car on the street, and never had any problems. I agree that it has more crime than some parts of the city, but "dangerous" is, in my opinion, a pretty big exaggeration.

[Cruz Azul Guy]

I also see it as a probability issue. Those UMN East Bank neighborhoods are amongst the most dense and highest traffic areas in the city along with the downtown and uptown areas, Whittier, etc. This causes overall crime numbers to inflate compared to areas with less people traffic and density. If you do a comparison of crimes per neighborhood population those numbers will go way down. Although I've never lived in Marcy-Holmes I do spend alot of time there and honestly I don't really see why there should be any safety concerns with the area. The West bank, although still pretty safe, is more iffy in my book than the East Bank neighborhoods.

[uptown_urbanist]

Good point, Slig. Looking at numbers of crimes in the neighborhoods surrounding the University and comparing it to number of residents doesn't factor in the thousands and thousands of non-residents spending time there each day. I would assume that in most of the neighborhoods the actual resident count is also underreported. So once you look at the crime rates with that perspective they really don't look that bad.

I can understand why people might choose not to live in a neighborhood near the U -- they are dense, urban, busy, sometimes loud, etc., and the Dinkytown part of Marcy-Holmes in particular has its share of notorious slumlords -- but putting them in a "most dangerous" category doesn't make much sense.

More "dangerous" than many of the Twin Cities' many heavily residential and much quieter neighborhoods, sure, but in the grand scheme of things not bad. I know personal experience doesn't really count for much, but again, during my two years in Stadium Village and two years in Marcy-Holmes I never once ran into problems, and I was out walking around on the street at at all hours of the day.

[west336]

Density and crime do not necessarily go hand-in-hand. Cities in the South for instance have high crime rates and much lower densities. Even rural areas have high crime rates in some parts of the country. You could attribute that to Jane Jacobs' "eyes on the street" theory, or something else, but there is not a crime:density correlation that I know of.

As far as larceny not being considered a deterrant like violent crime, I completely disagree. People living in an area where break-ins were more common may be more apt to own a gun for instance, which in turn could be used to defend their home or accidentally against someone they know. People would be more on edge and confrontations with burglars could lead to more violent crimes, such as assault or murder. Personal quality of life would be reduced in the form of higher cost of security or loss of possessions, not to mention anxiety and or confrontations.

[uptown_urbanist]

I wasn't trying to imply that density and crime go together (I tend to be pretty strong on the "the more density the better" camp, myself), and don't think Slig was, either, but rather that high density means higher population, which in turn means that looking at overall crime numbers without looking at the per capita rate doesn't mean much. And in the case of the University neighborhoods, even just looking at population alone doesn't tell you much given the huge numbers of people in the neighborhood each day that don't live there. Ten muggings in a neighborhood with low density and therefore low population (and presumably also fewer people in general coming through, as there would probably be less reason to do so) could represent much more of a crime wave -- and the chances that someone walking around on the street would have of being mugged -- than ten muggings in a neighborhood packed with more people. That's one of the reasons I liked living in M-H; there were always people out walking, even late at night, and I always feel safer when there are other people out on the streets, too.

As far as being on edge, I really don't think most residents of neighborhoods like Marcy-Holmes ARE on edge about potential break-ins. I know I certainly never thought of it as a bad neighborhood when I lived there. I think most people, or at least most of my friends who lived/live in the area, thought of it as a pretty regular student neighborhood. Certainly none were out there with guns. Half the time my roommate would forget to lock the door (which drove me crazy, but I'd lock it anywhere, even the safest of neighborhoods).

I would say that people who live in neighborhoods where they perceive themselves to be at higher risk may be more paranoid and would be on edge, but while I can't speak for the West Bank neighborhoods or everyone in Marcy-Holmes, I still don't think most Marcy-Holmes residents perceive themselves as living in a dangerous neighborhood. And as far as quality-of-life goes, my quality of life was certainly enhanced by being able to walk to school, walk to the store, walk to work, walk or take the bus to friends' homes, walk to the Stone Arch Bridge, etc. I had low transportation costs, no security costs, no stolen property, and no particular anxiety about being mugged or robbed. Now maybe if I had been the nervous type who was afraid of my own shadow I would have hated Marcy-Holmes, but in the grand scheme of Minneapolis neighborhoods it's really pretty tame.

[west336]

Can't say I know enough about Marcy-Holmes to say who is right and who is wrong -- I was just speaking in generalities. I'd suggest, however, to try not to use personal experience to generalize an entire neighborhood. What works for one person doesn't necessarily work for the next person. RELATIVELY speaking, if one area is more apt to crime than another then certain considerations should be taken before blindly deciding to locate there. Of course, Minneapolis relative to Detroit is probably a joke, but Marcy-Holmes relative to Fulton may be more meaningful.

[uptown_urbanist]

I agree that one should be careful with personal experience (although I was throwing it out there because I think that, based on the sheer number of people I knew in in Marcy-Holmes who also never thought of it as a bad neighborhood), but don't think that comparing Marcy-Holmes to Fulton is particularly helpful. I certainly haven't on this thread tried to say that M-H is one of the safest neighborhoods in the city, but I think it's really misleading for some to suggest that it's one of the most dangerous. Fulton is a quiet heavily residential neighborhood with some commerce along the edges; M-H is a densely populated neighborhood between downtown and the U's Minneapolis campus. It has a lot more commercial areas, a lot more bars and restaurants, a lot more people coming through on a daily basis (to work, go to school, visit friends, etc.), a much more diverse mix of people, etc. It is undoubtedly going to have more crime than a quiet and unquestionably safe neighborhood like Fulton, but when you put it up against the more commonly recognized "bad" neighborhoods of Minneapolis (which is what an earlier poster was doing) then I think it should become absolutely clear that Marcy-Holmes in no way deserves a spot on the most dangerous neighborhoods of Minneapolis list. To suggest that it does is to twist around statistics and to not look at the unique position of the neighborhood and the many factors at play that don't necessarily show up when just looking at number of crimes committed.

[mmm45]

i will be traveling to north M/SP...If i am going for training in Brooklyn Park, as a single white woman,
will i be in danger going to and from my hotel/restaurants?

thanks
mm