The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCSD-07-066 - Report on Graffiti in the City of Kitchener ) R Community Services Report To: Date of Meeting: Submitted By: Community Services Committee June 18, 2007 Prepared By: Mark Hildebrand, Interim Director, Community Programs and Services ext. 2687 Mark Hildebrand, Interim Director of Community Programs and Services, ext. 2687 Ken Currier, Director of Operations, ext. 2657 Shayne Turner, Director of Enforcement, ext. 2753 All Ward(s) Involved: Date of Report: Report No.: Subject: June 4, 2007 CSD-07-066 REPORT ON GRAFFITI IN THE CITY OF KITCHENER RECOMMENDATION: For Information. BACKGROUND: The presence of graffiti on private and public property in an issue in many communities across Canada and has a number of negative impacts. The term "graffiti" is generally used as an all- encompassing label for any illegal writing or drawing on buildings, overpasses, fences, cable boxes etc. There are different forms of graffiti, the most prevalent being the practice of 'tagging' an identifying word with spray paint or wide felt tip pen in a publicly visible place. Graffiti has been termed a quality of life crime, and the harm caused to the community is seen generally in terms of property damage and fear of crime. Specifically, the reported impacts reach far into communities, affecting: 1. Property values - neighbourhoods containing graffiti are less appealing to people looking to buy or rent property, reducing property values; 2. Retail and other businesses - people tend to feel less safe in areas where there is significant graffiti, and are therefore less likely to shop and do business in these areas. Also, business owners feel victimized when their facilities have been tagged; and 3. Enjoyment of public spaces - graffiti causes public areas (e.g. parks, pools, community centres etc.) to look and feel unsafe. It is well known that if graffiti is not removed quickly, the space invites more graffiti as 'taggers' become to realize that their 'tag' will be displayed for some time. It also can quickly become a space where loitering and littering increases. Report No. CSD-07-066 Page 2 Types of Graffiti It is helpful to understand the different forms of graffiti and the motivations of graffiti offenders when developing strategies to address this. Most graffiti is the work of individuals labelled as 'taggers' or 'writers'. Taggers engage in very basic 'tags' which are short stylised signatures comprised of letters and/or numbers. It is widely held that the motivation of taggers is public recognition. By writing their tags in as many places as possible they seek such things as fame, self-expression or power. On the other hand, writers are responsible for the more artistic forms of graffiti which involves larger 'bubble' styled outlines called 'throw-ups' and more artistic and complex pieces. In these instances graffiti writers can work alone or in small groups called crews. Crews have been known to take significant risks for the purpose of displaying their 'art' in highly visible spots. Graffiti crews can often be confused in the press with gangs, however the sole purpose of a graffiti crew is to write graffiti and they rarely engage in other criminal activity. Besides individual tagging and writing, there are other forms of graffiti that have varying motivations of those who engage in the activity. These forms of graffiti can be opportunistic and engaged in when the occasion presents itself, or can be deliberate in nature and intended to convey a specific message. They include: · Political/Social graffiti - this involves words expressing a political or social viewpoint displayed in a prominent public place; · Humorous graffiti - this is largely opportunistic writing of a humorous nature on billboards, bathroom doors or walls; · Malicious graffiti - this is pointless, malicious graffiti including scratches, names, obscenities and other words written or marked into a variety of surfaces (e.g. seats on public transport, school yards, public toilets); · Gang Graffiti - this is used by some gangs as a method of marking out territory and intimidating rival gang members; and · Graffiti Advertising - the influence of graffiti has also been seen lately in advertising. Most forms of graffiti mentioned above have been observed in the City of Kitchener. REPORT: At their meeting on March 6, 2007 the Safe and Healthy Community Advisory Committee asked City of Kitchener staff to investigate the option of creating a long-term program, including funding, for the removal of graffiti for 2007 and beyond. This decision came forward as a result of a request, from the Kitchener Downtown Business Association (KDBA), who is responsible for removing graffiti from private businesses in the downtown core, to the Safe and Healthy Community Advisory Committee for additional funding to offset an over-expenditure in their 2006 graffiti removal budget. The substantial increase in costs for the KDBA was a result of the volume of requests received in 2006, due to an expansion of the boundaries that the KDBA Graffiti Busters program was responding to. Addressing Graffiti in the City of Kitchener Currently, graffiti is addressed three ways in the City of Kitchener. First, the Operations division of Community Services has a budget dedicated to addressing vandalism, which includes the removal of graffiti on publicly owned land. The total dedicated annual budget is approximately Report No. CSD-07-066 Page 3 $145,000. In this instance staff investigates and process graffiti complaints received through our graffiti hotline or from other calls into city administration. City of Kitchener deals with graffiti removal on publicly owned land (e.g community centers, pools, park benches, park equipment, pumping stations, etc). However, if the graffiti reported is on privately owned buildings, it is either referred to the KDBA, if it falls within the boundaries of the KDBA Graffiti Busters program, or a letter is written to private building owners if outside the Graffiti Busters program boundaries. Once a complaint is received on public land, staff investigates the complaint, take a picture to share with the police, and remove the graffiti. In 2006, 600 investigations were completed by City of Kitchener staff. Out of this, 155 investigations required further work on city owned buildings and infrastructure and the remainder was given to property owners for their removal (e.g. Canada Post, Rogers, Regional Traffic). Second, the KDBA currently operates the Graffiti Busters program, which is funded jointly by the KDBA ($1 0,000) and through a grant from the Safe and Healthy Community Advisory Committee ($10,000). The Graffiti Busters program covers private businesses within the Downtown boundaries of Francis to Cedar street and Charles to Duke street. In 2006, unbeknownst to staff, the KDBA extended these boundaries and took responsibility for graffiti removal from Union Street and Westmount Road to Ottawa Street and Lancaster Street. This contributed to a significant over-expenditure in 2006. Finally, the City's Property Standards By-law also addresses graffiti and directs private owners on the appropriate measures to be taken to remove graffiti and other forms of defacement occurring on exterior surfaces of buildings. It should be noted that the property standards enforcement process, as dictated by the Building Code Act can be lengthy if an Order is appealed. As such, it may not facilitate quick removal of the graffiti. It should also be noted that the provisions in the by-law apply to the owner of the property upon which the graffiti exists. For this reason, many people view the issuance of a cleanup order to the owner as further victimizing someone who is already seen as a victim. Similar to many cities, currently City of Kitchener has implemented strategies which focus mainly on dealing with the proliferation of graffiti, centred on removal and deterrence through criminal offences and law enforcement. However, because graffiti shows few signs of abating, despite these efforts, many cities are now looking to a more holistic approach which not only looks at expanding methods of eradication and enforcement, but also looks at means of prevention. In various areas of the United States and Canada we see the development of many new initiatives which can be separated into three distinct categories including: · Prevention - which includes methods implemented to prevent graffiti writers from being able to write graffiti, reduce the number of opportunities to write graffiti and/or harnesses the creative aspects of graffiti. Prevention can include such things as implementing urban design techniques that limit opportunity, plantings, video surveillance, restricting the sale of spray paint, focusing on youth education and creative art programs, and/or facilitating and encouraging legal graffiti activities. · Eradication - which focuses on programs dedicated to the immediate removal of graffiti as soon as it appears and to keep removing it when it reappears, referred to as "rapid removal". Eradication includes focus on harm minimisation through the use of protective coatings on surfaces. It can include providing members of the public and those who own their own businesses with incentives, removal equipment and advice free of charge. Report No. CSD-07-066 Page 4 · Enforcement - although it is generally recognized that reduction in graffiti needs strategies with a broader focus than policing and punishment, more sophisticated law enforcement techniques and harsher punishments have also been developed and implemented in some cities to reflect the increasing seriousness of graffiti as a crime, and to force offenders to make retribution to the community. For example, as part of a graffiti removal program, in some instances offenders have been required to participate in the removal of graffiti via community service orders or other agreements. It is a growing belief that any graffiti strategy, if it is to succeed, has to be multifaceted and well coordinated with other partners within the community. Partners include but are not limited to community advisory councils and associations, local businesses, industry, other local government bodies, the police and organizations such as the Community Safety and Crime Prevention Council. Currently, City of Kitchener staff is investigating a multifaceted approach to dealing with graffiti in the community and are beginning to search out partners with common interests, and who can assist in the development of a strategy. Specifically, staff is investigating the following options: · The development of a communication and education strategy for the prevention of graffiti in the city. Possible partners include the Safe and Healthy Community Advisory Committee; · The costs and implications associated with various forms of "rapid removal" programs including but not limited to removal incentive programs for businesses throughout the City and/or the City becoming responsible for all graffiti removal in the city; · The possibility of cost sharing removal of graffiti with other corporations including CN, MTO, Region of Waterloo, Hydro, Rogers and Bell; and · Creating a by-law that will assist with the City's enforcement of having graffiti removed in a timely manner. This type of by-law could be outside of the property standards framework, thus facilitating quicker cleanup. However, it makes sense to look at this issue in conjunction with potential incentives that could entice owner's to voluntarily comply with the by-law, as opposed to strict enforcement. It is expected that staff will come back with recommendations for Council's consideration winter 2007. Staff will continue to gather statistics as to the costs associated with the removal of graffiti from public property. Also during this time period, staff has requested that the Graffiti Busters program start gathering the same statistics in order to get a more accurate reflection of the total costs associated with the removal of Graffiti in the City. For the remainder of 2007 staff are suggesting that graffiti program, functioning out of the City of Kitchener's Operations Division continues in the current form, and the Graffiti Busters program, operated by the KDBA, continues to operate within the boundaries outlined prior to 2006. This is until such time that recommendations can come forward to Community Services Committee for consideration and discussion. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: NA Mark Hildebrand Interim Director, Community Programs and Services AP