lenaitch
Senior Member
Sad, but I don't think anyone can honestly say it wasn't inevitable.
- Thread starter vic
- Start date
crs1026
Superstar
^ It’s regrettable, but the more I look at the huge expanses of nice flat concrete….the thought that hits me is, why didn’t anybody see this coming?
It’s only just beginning. Maybe some serious street art would reduce the temptation.
- Paul
It’s only just beginning. Maybe some serious street art would reduce the temptation.
- Paul
rdaner
Senior Member
There is a great plan to turn this area into a linear park. Colour and landscaping. I’m sure it has been posted.
EnviroTO
Senior Member
Maybe some people being caught and handed a significant punishment hitting the news would be a deterrent. I feel like nobody gets caught for anything anymore. Anyone worry about turning where there is a sign that says not to do it? Anyone really think there is a high chance of getting caught speeding? Anyone think going on a streetcar and not tapping will lead to a fine? When I was younger they actually caught people. If you didn't pay for the GO there was a reasonable chance of being caught and humiliated in front of the people around you. If you put graffiti on a building there was a good chance it would get reported. People wouldn't think of going 130km/h down the highway. Not catching people or reporting people means society no longer cares. The government and public are giving up.
This area has so much tagging so fast it probably happens 7 days a week. Not catching people means there is no effort to try to catch people. A police officer could probably close their eyes and walk with their arms grabbing the air in front of them and catch a tagger here.
This area has so much tagging so fast it probably happens 7 days a week. Not catching people means there is no effort to try to catch people. A police officer could probably close their eyes and walk with their arms grabbing the air in front of them and catch a tagger here.
Mrgeosim
New Member
You can make the punishment as hefty as you want, it isn't going to change behavior if there isn't a way of justly identifying the perpetrator. The police don't have the resources to patrol every wall in the city, nor would people want that level of police presence. Further, high tech cameras with facial recognition technology isn't something we'd want or want to pay for either. I live in this area and have thought of ways to deter graffiti, but there really isn't a way besides designing the structure with an anti-grafitti mindset, like surrounding columns with greenery and cladding concrete with easily cleaned material.
rdaner
Senior Member
Don’t know if this belongs here. Drilling and steel thingys going in where Barrie line crosses Bloor.
Photos taken 28 April.
Photos taken 28 April.
crs1026
Superstar
^Presumably work in preparation for adding the second-track to the flyover (ie a second bridge over Bloor) so certainly relevant - and good to see this getting done.
- Paul
- Paul
EnviroTO
Senior Member
I don't disagree with the goal of designing with an anti graffiti mindset however there are limits to what can be done. Metrolinx put up a huge number of transparent sound walls to appease residents that didn't want their sightlines impacted by the noise mitigations. Those costly installations are now completely wrecked and either they stay wrecked or we replace them. The cost of replacing all those walls probably easily pays for a few officers to be covertly staking out perpetrators.
You don't need to patrol every wall, you just need to catch one or two people per month, make the punishment significant, and make sure the media is aware of who it was and what the punishment is. Alternatively or additionally you could have a monthly clean up tax to finance clean up of property wrecked by graffiti. The constant removal and cleanup combined with a price tag everyone must pay would dissuade the taggers (lack of permanence of their mark), motivate the public to catch people on cameras or to report events because people would be sick of the tax, and would fractionally hit the pockets of the taggers.
There is a big cost to dealing with crimes against the environment, private property, or public property. The options are (a) accept it and do nothing about it (accept vandalism, accept dumping, accept littering), or (b) catch people who are doing it and clean up.
lenaitch
Senior Member
So a property owner, perhaps one not directly victimized by graffiti, gets to pay for both the presence and absence of law enforcement.
Mrgeosim
New Member
I'm sorry but the idea of plain clothes officers sitting and waiting for taggers at 2am along the linear park is just hilarious. I can imagine the conversations they'd have as they waited. "Its a sick world out there, man. Last week on my rounds, I nabbed a tagger drawing a penis on one of these column... Yeah, that's right, a giant pee pee! Back in my day, these criminals just stuck to bubble letters. But this new breed of taggers is ruthless!"
Yeah, that tax would go in place and never disappear. Law abiding citizens shouldn't have to pay a special tax on behalf of taggers. That's unethical and no one would go for it.
milkycontent
Active Member
Maybe if they painted the bridge a nice colour instead of leaving it as a drab depressing grey, people would feel less inclined to tag it.
CapitalSeven
Senior Member
Attractive infrastructure? In Ontario?
Metroscapes
Active Member
Surface textures on the concrete could help as well, instead of providing a smooth canvass. But that sounds like a frill.
Allandale25
Senior Member
Toolio555
New Member
Nice, hopefully sooner than later. I can confirm that metrolinx has already removed as as much of the diversion track as possible. What’s left is only a short span of track (few metres) each way i.e. east/west from the diamond intersection. And I anticipate this final portion will be left for CP to remove along with the intersecting portion.
.