---
title: "Falcon Pointe Apartment Complex Project"
type: "pdf"
year: "1998"
canonical: "/projects/1314"
---

# 1998 HERMAN GOLDSTEIN NOMINA11U17 FALCON POINTE PROJECT 

In 1970, an apartment complex was constructed at 4244 S. Hydraulic which was called Royal Regency. The complex sat on 27 acres and consisted of nine buildings with a total of 216 units. The complex struggled for the years to come, constantly changing owners and managers. By the early 80's the complex had gained a reputation of bringing in only low income and criminally oriented people. The owners and managers took little interest in the complex and basically were concerned only about when they would receive their monthly rent checks.

In the 80's, the complex kept the Wichita Police Department very busy with call after call of disturbances and drug violations. Owners looked to change their image so the complex changed it's name to Braden Square. With no luck, the complex continued to lose money and it was very evident the "Broken Window" theory applied here. In 1987, Branden Square changed it's name again to MacArthur Park Apartments and began working with HUD to boost occupancy rates. The reputation continued to worsen. In the early 90 's, it was viewed as one of the worst places to live in the City of Wichita. It created a very high call load for the Police Department and tied up a lot of police officers valuable time.

At the beginning of 1996, the Wichita Police Department went city-wide with Community Policing. MacArthur Park Apartments was one of the first Community Policing projects. Once again owners changed, new management was brought in, but this time Community Policing was there to help. The first step was to improve the reputation of the complex. The name was changed again, this time to Falcon Points Apartments. Police worked closely with management and learned about the problem areas in the complex. Officers visited every resident in the complex and learned their concerns and what they thought needed to be done to improve their attitudes and living conditions. Surveys were completed by residents and owners, while Midland Property Management Inc., became more involved in the complex. They invested 1.5 million dollars to remodel the whole complex. Monthly meetings were started where police, Apartment Management, and residents would get together and talk. For the next year there were many improvements on the exterior and interior of the complex. Screens were placed in front of all the windows, the buildings were repainted, new roofs were put on all the buildings. The appearance improved dramatically. The

parking lots were cleaned and parking stalls were painted. Inoperable and abandoned cars were towed away. The trash dumpsters which were located in the parking lots were enclosed in wooden sheds so all the trash would be hidden. Improved screening was done on potential residents. The apartment complex hired a background screening agency to screen all the potential residents and to check their past credit record. The management became more strict on lease agreements and many evictions were processed. Communication with the Police and residents improved dramatically. The residents felt comfortable calling their local Police Officer and giving information on drug dealers, gang members, and other problems. Other agencies became involved such as the Wichita Childrens Home. Community Policing helped the Wichita Childrens Home apply and receive a grant from the Attorney General's office. The grant targeted activities for the nearly 100 kids who live at Falcon Pointe Apartments. Community Policing and the Wichita Childrens Home put together educational packets on Gangs, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, and Domestic Violence and handed them out to all the residents at Falcon Pointe. All of the educational packets were paid for by the grant.

In past years, the complex occupancy rate was between $55 \%$ and $75 \%$ full. Currently, the occupancy rate is 99 percent with a waiting list in the making. With over a 100 additional families living at the complex the Police call load, which averages 28 calls per month in a year, is staying about the same and not going up. All of this progress was made due to the Wichita Police Department, Falcon Pointe staff, and residents all working together.

A survey was administered on two occasions, the first in September 1996, and the second in April 1998. On the first survey, officers received 50 surveys from residents after making personal contact with every occupied apartment. During the second survey, 66 surveys were filled out. The 1996 survey indicated that 19 out of 50 people, or 38 percent of the people, did not feel safe at their apartment. In April 1998, the same survey showed 19 percent of the occupants did not feel safe at their apartment. That is a 19 percent reduction since 1996. In 1996, over 58 percent of residents who lived at the complex, suspected criminal activity at Falcon Pointe Apartments. In 1998, only 21 percent of the people suspected criminal activity within the complex. Both surveys show that the average length of occupancy was about 6 months.

One example of residents, management, and police all working together was a search warrant that was served on an apartment involved in dealing drugs. Drag use and drug dealing has been a long time problem at Falcon Pointe Apartments. Many problems in an apartment complex stemmed

from one apartment. When police made the extra effort to establish relationships with residents by stopping to visit, or to say hello to people walking out to their cars, they received information about illegal activity. One such case was about an apartment dealing drugs to just about anyone that would knock on the door. Traffic from outside the complex would come in to buy drugs and so would certain residents that lived within the complex. Management and residents provided many names of suspects involved and eventually the police, residents and management all worked together to make a controlled buy from an apartment. The information and drug buy led to a search warrant being executed. The occupants of the apartment were subsequently arrested and evicted. Several other residents that lived in the complex that were involved were also evicted. This one search warrant led to a substantial reduction in the call load in the months to come at Falcon Pointe Apartments.

Currently, Falcon Pointe management regularly communicates with residents and the Police Department. All Ieam from one another on how to make Falcon Pointe Apartments a safe and comfortable place to live. Managment has learned about CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Envirnmental Design). They have added lighting, enclosed trash dumpsters, and keep parking lots clear of abandoned cars. Screens are now on all the windows and all the windows are now visible as the bushes are kept trimmed. Unlike before, much attention is being given to the appearance of the complex.

# Table of Contents

- [1998 HERMAN GOLDSTEIN NOMINA11U17 FALCON POINTE PROJECT](#1998-herman-goldstein-nomina11u17-falcon-pointe-project)
- [1998 HERMAN GOLDSTEIN NOMINATION FALCON POINTE PROJECT](#1998-herman-goldstein-nomination-falcon-pointe-project)
  - [A. SCANNING](#a-scanning)
  - [B. ANALYSIS](#b-analysis)
- [C. RESPONSE](#c-response)
- [D. ASSESSMENT](#d-assessment)
- [AGENCY AND OFFICER INFORMATION](#agency-and-officer-information)
- [WICHITA POLICE DEPARTMENT CALL TYPES](#wichita-police-department-call-types)
- [WICHITA POLICE DEPARTMENT COUNT OF CALLS FOR 4244 S HYDRAULIC](#wichita-police-department-count-of-calls-for-4244-s-hydraulic)

# 1998 HERMAN GOLDSTEIN NOMINATION FALCON POINTE PROJECT 

## A. SCANNING

1. What was the nature of the problem?

Repeat police calls and a high amount of criminal activity, especially gang and drug related. Domestic Violence has also been high. Residents of the complex had very little or no respect for the complex.
2. How was the problem identified?

The problem was identified through police officers personal experience of making 911 calls at the complex and the reputation the calls created. Door to door surveys of all the residents at the complex helped identify the problem.
3. Who identified the problem?

Community Policing Officers, apartment management, and the residents of the complex.
4. Far more problems are identified than can be explored adequately. How and why was this problem selected from among problems?
This problem was selected because it was most severe based on statistical analysis.
Also the problem was selected so it could be handled as a learning tool for other apartment complexes that are experiencing the same sort of problems.
5. What was the initial level of diagnosis/unit of analysis?

The problem exists at an apartment complex, 4244 S Hydraulic, Falcon Pointe Apartments. It lies on 27 acres, contains 9 buildings with 216 units total. The complex brings in mostly low income people and many of those are assisted with HUD.

## B. ANALYSIS

1. What methods, data and information sources were used to analyze the problem?

It began with an analysis of crime data dating back to the beginning of 1994. Next, Officers surveyed residents door to door, having residents fill out a survey on the spot. Officers also visited with residents as they filled out the survey to get their views on the complex. Officers worked closely with the management learning about the clientele, and performed hours and hours of surveillance.
2. History: How often and for how long was it a problem?

The problem has been ongoing for over a decade and has created a bad reputation for the complex which has an impact on the type of people that will live there.

3. Who was involved in the problem and what were their respective motivations, gains and losses?
The problem involved some residents who sold drugs. In the past, management also played a small role in the problem as they neglected to enforce many of the rules and policies.
4. What harms resulted from the problem?

The harms are having a higher than average risk of being a victim of crime. Other harms are the lack of respect some residents had for the complex and the reputation that was created.
5. How was the problem being addressed before the problem solving project? What were the results of the responses?
By police making 911 calls and making case after case, very little follow up was ever done, and the root of the problem was never addressed.
6. What did the analysis reveal about the causes and underlying conditions that precipitated the problems? The poor condition of the exterior, and the past reputation for this complex made it to where a lot of good people would refuse to live there. The complex lured in drug users, dealers, gang members, and the type of people that regularly break the law.
7. What did the analysis reveal about the nature and extent of the problem? The problem involved juveniles, gangs, drugs, and low income families.
8. What situational information was needed to better understand the problem? The environment along with time of occurrence, location, and apartment number.
9. Was there an open discussion with the community about the problem? Yes. During Neighborhood Watch Meetings in nearby neighborhoods and also at a Neighborhood Watch meeting held at the complex.

# C. RESPONSE 

1. What range of possible response alternatives were considered to deal with the problem? Added enforcement, more visibility, better relations with landlord along with cooperation from the landlord, which included eviction. Monthly meeting in the club house for residents to attend and express their concerns or pass any information they wanted.
2. What responses did you use to address the problem?

Zero tolerance enforcement, undercover work, more police presence, and for management to enforce the rules written out in the lease.

3. How did you develop a response as a result of your analysis?

By doing research to determine the root of the problem.
4. What evaluation criteria were most important to the department before implementation of the response alternatives?
Statistics gathered through the Crime Analysis Unit, personal contact with citizens who live in the community, and through surveys of residents who live at the Apartment Complex.
5. What did you intend to accomplish with your response plan?

The project goals were to improve the appearance, fill vacant apartments, improve the reputation of the complex, and establish a relationship with residents and the management. We also intended to reduce the call load in the complexs. Lastly, to make the drug dealers and gang members uncomfortable in hopes their activity will cease.
6. What resources were available to help solve the problem?

Neighborhood associations, the Health Department and Central Inspections Offices were involved. Other units in the Wichita Police Department such as Crime Analysis, SCAT (Special Community Action Team), and Narcotics Officers also assisted. The media was also a positive resource.
7. What was done before you implemented your response plan?

Research, surveys, and many meetings with owners, managers, and residents.
8. What difficulties were encountered during response implementation?

Getting residents involved and racial tension.
9. Who was involved in the response to your problem?

Law enforcement, residents of the apartment complex, the surrounding community, and the staff of the apartment complex.

# D. ASSESSMENT 

1. What were the results? What degree of impact did the response plan have on this problem?
Apartment employees became more involved, appearance improved, and the occupancy rate went from $56 \%$ a year ago to around $99 \%$ currently. Furthermore, the call load has stayed about the same which is acceptable due to $32 \%$ increase in the occupancy.
2. What were your methods of evaluation and for how long was the effectiveness of the problem-solving effort evaluated?
Methods of evaluation were through crime analysis, and surveys which were handed out to all residents of the complex. The problem solving effort is being monitored and evaluated continuously.

3. Who was involved in the evaluation?

The Police Department and the community.
4. Were there problems in implementing the response plan?

To get the apartment residents to cooperate at first.
5. If there was no improvement in the problem, were other systemic efforts considered to handle the problem?
Only to put more emphasis on enforcement although the original plan was a success.
6. What response goals were accomplished?

Most of the goals set were met. The apartment complex improved its appearance dramatically and the occupancy rate has increased $32 \%$ in the last year without calls for service increasing. The reputation is also improving from the word on the streets.
7. How did you measure your results?

Through crime analysis and feedback from residents and management. Also, through regular meetings held in the club house and through all the positive contacts with kids of the area and adults.
8. How could you have made the response more effective?

Even though there were many activities for the kids, provided by the Street Outreach, an after school day care could have made the response more effective.
9. Was there a concern about displacement?

No, other apartments and landlords should take note of all the success at Falcon Pointe, all the positive improvements, and use it as a learning tool for themselves.
10. Will your response require continued monitoring or a continuing effort to maintain your results?
Somewhat! Management has learned how to control their residents by screening potential applicants better, and enforcing the rules in the lease agreement more consistently with very little or no tolerance for misconduct. Management has also learned more about Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). Police still need to keep their presence high and keep their contacts.

# AGENCY AND OFFICER INFORMATION 

1. At what level of the police organization was this problem solving initiative adopted? The patrol level!
2. Did officers or management receive any training in problem-oriented policing and /or problem solving before this project began or during its execution?
Yes, a two week training program on how to utilize different resources and on the philosophy of community policing. Also, continuous information comes in on community policing activities across the country,
3. Were additional incentives given to police officers who engaged in problem solving? Yes, a flexible shift allowing them to work the hours they are needed in order to attend meetings. Also Officers can get their own pager to answer calls 24 hrs a day. Take home Radios and cars are also available.
4. What resources and guidelines were used, if any, by police officers to help them manage this problem-solving initiative?
There were no guide lines, manuals or policies to follow. Just the Wichita Police policy and and procedure manual, along with all the available resources.
5. What issues/problems were identified with the problem- oriented policing model or the problem-solving model?
That it would take many people from many different agencies to participate for this project to be a success.
6. What general resource commitments were made to this project, and of those resources, what went beyond the existing department budget?
Falcon Pointe spent 1.5 million dollars in rejuvenating the complex. The complex also qualified for a grant that also assisted on activities and improvements.

Project Contact Person

| Name: | Scott A Marshall \#1500 |
| :-- | :-- |
| Position: | Community Police Officer |
| Address: | 455 N Main |
| City/State: | Wichita, Kansas |
| Phone: | $\underline{316} \underline{337-9200}$ |
| Fax: | $\underline{316} \underline{337-9029}$ |

# WICHITA POLICE DEPARTMENT CALL TYPES

![img-0.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/98-85/img-0.jpeg)

# WICHITA POLICE DEPARTMENT COUNT OF CALLS FOR 4244 S HYDRAULIC

|  **TOTAL CALLS** | **1995** | **1996** | **1997** | **1998** | **1999** | **2000** | **2001** | **2002** | **2003** | **2004** | **2005** | **2006** | **2007** | **2008** | **2009** | **2010** | **2011** | **2012**  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  **TOTAL CALLS** | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011  |
|  **OCCUPANCY RATE** | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10% | 10%  |

**TOTAL CALLS** → **OCCUPANCY RATE**

![img-1.jpeg](https://popdatasets.blob.core.windows.net/popdatasetmdimgs/98-85/img-1.jpeg)