RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A STRATEGY TO ADDRESS VANDALISM AND ROWDINESS ISSUES AT MUNICIPAL WALKWAYS, PARKS AND OTHER PUBLIC LOCATIONS. D. Cozzi C.

Transcription

1 Appendix Appendix B A RECOMMENDATIONS FOR A STRATEGY TO ADDRESS VANDALISM AND ROWDINESS ISSUES AT MUNICIPAL WALKWAYS, PARKS AND OTHER PUBLIC LOCATIONS D. Cozzi C. Mark September 2009

2 2 Executive Summary Acts of vandalism (including graffiti) are costing the Town well over a quarter of a million dollars per year in repair and maintenance. Isolated incidents of rowdy behaviour are discouraging for adjacent and nearby residents and impact their quality of life. Town Council has directed Town staff to report back on issues of vandalism and violence. Currently, affected Town departments are dealing with incidents of vandalism and rowdiness in a reactive manner. Although corporately there are other operations dealing with vandalism problems (e.g. Transit Services, Recreation and Culture), this strategy primarily addressed the departments of Roads and Works and Parks and Open Space. As operating departments, they are not staffed to proactively plan measures to reduce these types of incidents; as they are most suitably resourced to deal with and focus on maintenance and repair only. This document details a strategy moving forward for Council s consideration to additionally deal with the issues in proactive manner. D.M. (Dan) Cozzi, P.Eng., Director, Department of Roads & Works Operations C. Mark Director, Department of Parks & Open Space

3 3 Table of Contents 1.0 Background Challenges and Issues Stakeholders Options Option Details & Costs Staffing Issues Strategy Recommendations.. 21

4 4 1.0 BACKGROUND Oakville Town Council has requested staff to report back on the following: Vandalism & Rowdiness (Council Meeting of September 18, 2006): 1. That Town Staff with the assistance of Halton Regional Police be requested to conduct a study of the public walkways in the Town which have been subject to public concerns relating to vandalism and rowdiness, starting with those that connect to a mall, plaza or school and report back as to the use and functionality of such walkways; 2. That Staff report back to Council with proposed options which may assist residents living adjacent to walkways as well as residents who utilize walkways, with the intent of creating a more secure and safer environment for the community at large; 3. That as a second phase to the study, Staff also consider options for better security with respect to trails and school yards based upon a review of Halton Regional Police Services statistics in conjunction with the School Boards; and 4. That the second phase of this review also include a review of vandalism occurring to rear yard private fences on rear facing lots, recognizing that private owners are incurring the costs to repair any damages. Closure of Public Walkway from Galena Crescent to Grosvenor Street (CSC Meeting of May 8, 2007): 1. That staff be requested to research and report back to identify other walkways and trail entrances that exhibit similar or worse problems such as those discussed at the Community Services Committee meeting on May 8, 2007; and

5 5 2. That lighting and video surveillance measures be evaluated, together with signage describing monitoring programs for use at walkways, and that staff be requested to report further on these options. Town staff formed a working group and has met with Halton Regional Police Services as well as both School Boards to discuss the overall issue of vandalism and rowdiness. The purpose of this document is to detail a potential strategy that may address or mitigate this issue. 2.0 CHALLENGES AND ISSUES Broken Window Theory If someone breaks a window in a building and it is not quickly repaired, others will be emboldened to break more windows. Eventually, the broken windows create a sense of disorder that attracts criminals, who thrive in the conditions of public apathy and neglect - Political Scientist James Q. Wilson and Criminologist George Kelling Where is Vandalism/Rowdiness Occurring? The Town of Oakville is experiencing instances of vandalism and/or rowdiness, generally by youth: 1. Within public walkways and along trail systems 2. Along privacy line fences adjacent to municipal road corridors and parks 3. Within / around public buildings, parks and playgrounds 4. On transit vehicles and at bus stops

6 6 Examples of vandalism include graffiti, willful damage to municipal and or private property. Examples of rowdiness, inappropriate or criminal behaviour, include loitering, littering, drinking, drug use as well as aggressive behaviour towards adjacent residents. The Town of Oakville has a network of 64 public walkways that are situated between private properties and connect two (2) or more roadways. The Town also has an additional network of 118 public walkways that connect roads to schools, parks and commercial plazas. Walkways continue to be constructed in new subdivision developments that the Town has yet to assume. The Town also has a network of over 150 km of municipal trails. There are also several locations throughout Town where privacy line fences abut (flank, back-on) municipal road corridors. Incidents of vandalism (graffiti, damage) are occurring along these fence lines. Apart from the security issues and repair costs experienced by property owners, the overall neighourhood aesthetics can be negatively affected, especially where properties back on to a municipal corridor (e.g. long sections of roads that have no municipal frontage). Examples of this include (but not limited to) the rear yard privacy line fences at: 1. Nottinghill Gate north of the North Service Road 2. Eighth Line north of Falgarwood Drive

7 7 Pedestrian Mobility: Public walkways are intended for the use of pedestrians throughout the local neighbourhood as well as the greater community. They create linkages to the Town s sidewalk, park and trail systems as well as to schools and commercial areas. The Town s Transportation Master Plan final report has acknowledged the Town s vision of: Developing a transportation system that meets the needs a variety of stakeholders, and, provides a variety of modes including walking, cycling, high occupancy vehicles, and community, local and interregional transit to collectively provide convenient and attractive travel alternatives to single-occupant vehicle use. Public Walkways form an integral part of this vision, and is further emphasized with the recent adoption of Oakville s Active Transportation Master Plan. Maintenance: The Town of Oakville maintains the public walkway system. Walkways connecting two (2) or more roads are maintained by the Roads & Works Operations Department; walkways connecting schools and parks along with municipal trails are maintained by the Parks & Open Space Department. Maintenance generally includes: Litter debris clean-up Repair of damaged Town owned chain link fences as well as other appurtenances (pavement, bollards, signs)

8 8 Graffiti removal Pruning of encroaching vegetation where required Snow removal along walkways that serve as school routes Most of the above is pro-actively maintained and is scheduled twice a year. However, some maintenance is reactionary (e.g. snow removal, reports of broken bottles and graffiti, high incidents of litter) The Town of Oakville does not maintain privacy fences; property owners are expected to maintain private property, including fence damages and graffiti removal. This may be enforced under the present Property Standards Bylaw. Graffiti Abatement Program: The Town implemented a Graffiti Abatement Strategy in August of The present target is to remove all known and/or reported incidents of graffiti, on Town owned assets, within 3 business days. The annual budget for graffiti abatement is approximately $156,000. Graffiti reported within public walkways (i.e. on Town owned items such as signs, pavement, chainlink fences, bollards, posts, etc,) area currently addressed through the Graffiti Abatement Program. Graffiti on utilities (Hydro, Bell, Cable, etc.) are referred to the respective utility company. Staff is working on a proposal to clean graffiti on Oakville Hydro plant on their behalf on a charge back basis. In 2008, the Town attended to over 3,000 separate reports of graffiti throughout Town.

9 9 How Much is Vandalism Costing the Town? Starting in 2008, Town departments were asked to specifically track costs associated with vandalism. Those costs which were tracked to vandalism (excluding graffiti abatement) within Roads and Works and Parks & Open Space are as follows: o 2008: $100,000 o 2009 (as of June 30): $ 55,000 The annual budget for graffiti abatement = $ 156,000. In addition to the above costs are those encountered by other Town Departments such as Recreation and Culture and Transit Services which have not been included within this assessment. 3.0 STAKEHOLDERS Halton Regional Police Services (HRPS) and Halton School Boards: The working group held meetings with HRPS and both Halton School Boards to discuss the overall issue of vandalism and rowdiness. The following comments are relevant: HRPS does not have specific statistics to determine which public walkways are experiencing the highest rate of criminal activity or are receiving the highest rate of citizen complaints. In 2008, HRPS initiated an annual program called Project Walkway where plain clothes police officers will focus on area high schools and surrounding areas (parks, plazas and walkways).

10 10 The respective school boards are interested in helping to mitigate the problem, especially at walkways that connect a road to a school Town programs like Adopt-a-Road, Adopt-a-Trail, Pick-a-Parcel can be further promoted/enhanced to include school adoptions of adjacent walkways - this can be a good use of student volunteer hours as they require this for graduation. Affected Residents: Meetings were not held with adjacent residents; however, staff is quite familiar with the issues of adjacent residents from previous reports to Council concerning public walkways. The following comments are relevant: Council has authorized the closure of two public walkways (sold to abutting property owners) since This involved the walkway connecting Glenbrook Avenue to the Upper Oakville Shopping Centre (2002) and the walkway connecting Galena Crescent to Grosvenor Street (2008). Staff has consistently not recommended closing public walkways. A pilot project is currently ongoing at the walkway connecting Glanada Crescent to the Upper Oakville Shopping Centre; illumination is being used as a means to detract undesirable behaviour within the walkway. Some existing walkways are angled and prevent a clear and unobstructed view from one end of the walkway to the other. This may promote a feeling of invisibility to those who choose to act irresponsibly. Staff has investigated the use of video surveillance cameras for problem walkways for potential future consideration.

11 11 The Town s public walkway standard includes a four (4) foot high black vinyl chain link fence on either side. Typically, abutting residents choose to install a privacy fence adjacent to the Town s fence creating further invisibility to those acting irresponsibly within the walkway. Litter tends to collect in between the fences, and vandals may use the Town s fence as a means to step up (or sit against) the privacy fence. Repair of damaged privacy fences is the responsibility of the property owner. Several examples are known where vandals within the walkway have thrown objects (stones, etc.) toward adjacent houses, or into swimming pools. Youth Advisory Committees and Social Services Agencies Much of the vandalism, whether it be municipal or private property damage, is committed by youth. In order to effect some behavioural change, we must explore engaging youth at various levels through one form or another. For example, o Engaging a youth worker to network with schools, youth clubs (churches) to send a message regarding vandalism and the impact on the community and associated costs. o Bring forward the youth vandalism issue to the Youth Steering Committee assisting with the development of the Youth Strategy by the Recreation and Culture Department as well as to the Youth Advisory Committee for comment o Requirement to develop a base line of data regarding vandalism and rowdiness and from this data develop a Community Mobilization strategy to include residents, Recreation and Culture, Roads and Works, Parks and Open Space, Schools, Youth Steering Committee and Youth Advisory Committee

12 OPTIONS The staff working group has considered the following options that can be considered to help mitigate the problem of vandalism and rowdiness: A. Partnership with School Boards to promote adoption of walkways connecting roads to schools. Schools to advocate a no loitering policy within walkways; take initiatives to clean litter, etc. B. Similar Partnership with Plazas to promote adoption of walkways connecting walkways to plazas C. Increased security measures at problem walkways, parks and other hot-spots D. Urban Design Guidelines: Moving forward for North Oakville, develop a more friendly walkway standard (e.g. walkway widths, fencing types, lighting, geometry) E. Walkway closures where required F. Community Development Program G. Include graffiti removal on privacy line fences facing on to public property, i.e. on rear facing or flankage lots, as part of the &Town s Graffiti Abatement Program

13 OPTION DETAILS AND COSTS Option A: Partnership with School Boards to promote adoptions of walkways The respective school boards have expressed a willingness to participate in a pilot project, in time for the next school year, to further assess this option. The Town promotes the adoption of roads, trails, parks by corporations, community groups and schools. Adopters are acknowledged in the form of a sign. A summary of expectations for walkway adoptions would need to be developed (how often should it be cleaned for litter, etc.) This would generally apply to walkways that connect a road to a school; however, consideration for the adoption of a nearby walkway connecting street to street is also possible. Costs associated with the creation of an Adopt-a-Walkway Program would be minimal. Staffing is discussed under 6.0: Staffing Issues. Option B: Partnership with Plazas to promote adoption of walkways Similar to Option A, only this would involve aggressively pursuing the adoption by plaza owners of walkways that connect a street to a plaza. Costs associated with the creation of an Adopt-a-Walkway Program would be minimal. Staffing Is discussed under 6.0 : Staffing Issues.

14 14 Option C: Increased Security Measures at problem walkways, parks and other hot spots o Illumination: The Town has conducted a pilot project involving the illumination of a public walkway connecting Glanada Crescent to the Upper Oakville Shopping Plaza. This walkway was illuminated in October Though we can not explicitly state it has resolved the problem of vandalism and rowdiness occurring in this walkway, staff have received a favourable comment from one of the adjacent property owners who indicated that it appears to have reduced undesirable activities in the walkway. The issues pertaining to retrofitting walkways, parks and other locations with lights: 1) Are the adjacent property owners (residents) receptive to having lights installed in the walkway? Though steps can be taken to direct the lighting primarily to the walkway, it is impossible to contain all the light and there will be spillover to the adjacent properties. Many residents see this as an intrusion and are not agreeable to this. However, where adjacent property owners/residents are agreeable, consideration of lighting options can be advanced. 2) The difficulty in retrofitting a power supply point to the walkways. Excavating to access a power source and supplying underground conduit to the luminaire within the walkway is time consuming, disruptive and costly. In lieu of carrying out these significant efforts, solar powered LED lights can be installed in the walkway much more conveniently this was the case for the pilot project at Glanada. However, at present, solar powered LED light fixture hardware is quite costly to purchase and to maintain.

15 15 The typical capital cost of installing a streetlight pole, luminaire and electrical supply within a public walkway is in the order of $21,500; within a park this cost is approximately $10,000. The capital cost of installing a streetlight pole and solar powered luminaire is approximately $14,500. There are additional annual operating costs to maintain these items. For the purposes of assessing the full cost of this strategy, we will assume up to 2 locations per year for a total cost of $35,000. o Surveillance: Surveillance cameras can be installed within public walkways, in parks or other areas that are regularly problematic. The camera can record to a hard drive and video files can be forwarded to the police as potential evidence in the event of criminal activity. The Town s corporate policy on video surveillance requires that a sign be installed advising the public of the camera operation. The issues pertaining to the installation of surveillance cameras are similar as described under illumination: a) Community and/or adjacent property owner/resident s acceptance. Adjacent residents may be opposed as this may be perceived as an infringement on their privacy (How wide of an angle will the camera record? Will it record partial sections of adjacent private property?). b) Concurrence from HRPS

16 16 c) Power supply points and installation issues. Staff estimates the capital cost to install a surveillance camera system per location would be in the order of $18,500. The annual operating costs associated with maintaining such a system would be in the order of $2,500. For the purposes of assessing the full cost of this strategy, we will assume up to 1 location per year for a total cost of $21,000. o Security Patrols As mentioned earlier in this document, a Project Walkway initiative by HRPS in 2008 involved increased police monitoring (plains clothes officers) at selected high schools and vicinity (e.g. criminal activity within nearby walkways). This initiative should continue to support areas that are most affected. Further, a joint staff/hrps task force could meet regularly to identify/highlight areas of concern. In addition, the Town could consider retaining a security firm to patrol specific hotspots during evening and at night. This would cost in the range of $ per evening/night. For example, if this was done 3 nights per week commencing after Victoria Day and ending around Thanksgiving, the total cost of such an initiative would be in the range of $25,000 annually.

17 17 Option D: Urban Design Guidelines Moving forward, the Town can establish new design standards for North Oakville as it relates to walkway design pertaining to: 1) Width 2) Alignment 3) Fencing standards 4) Illumination 5) CPTED: Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design. As new walkways in developments are built by developers, there would be no cost associated with any change to the standard walkway design, however, additional or enhanced features added to the standard design will need to be maintained, and annual operating expenses may be affected. Option E: Walkway closures Though staff has consistently not recommended the closing of public walkways, Council does have the authority to close walkways in exceptional circumstances. Each case can be considered on its own merits. Closing of a public walkway involves selling the land, at fair market value and typically to an adjacent landowner(s). The community at large may be opposed to any plans to close a walkway as it often provides a community linkage, and its closure would remove this linkage. Also, this option would be contrary to the

18 18 Town s strategic goals to provide accessible, environmentally sustainable programs and services, and represents a step backward in enhancing pedestrian and cycling mobility options as espoused in our master plans for transportation and for recreation. Option F: Community Development Program The Community Services Commission (Recreation and Culture, Parks and Open Space with assistance from the Youth Advisory Committee) are providing opportunities for youth to be positively engaged. This includes the recent opening of a new youth centre in Bronte, the completion of 2 skate parks in 2009, and plans for two additional youth centres in the coming years. A program entitled Urban Art has been very successful as means for youth to express themselves artistically in an appropriate manner, rather than on private or municipal property. However, to effect any behavioural change requires dedicated staff resources in the form of a Community Development Coordinator, working with stakeholders to promote the issue and make an impact. It requires the combined resources of all concerned to introduce a social marketing campaign to effect a reduction in vandalism and rowdiness. This would include proactive youth outreach initiatives relating to the abatement of graffiti. A Community Development Coordinator could also take a lead role in actively and aggressively marketing/administrating the various Adopt-a programs (road, trail, pick-a-parcel) and the Median Planting Sponsorship Program; these programs are currently not well resourced. The cost of this strategy is discussed under 6.0 Staffing Issues.

19 19 Option G: Graffiti removal on rear lot facing privacy fences Currently, graffiti removal along all privacy fences in Oakville is the responsibility of property owners and this can be enforced under the Property Standards Bylaw. Apart from the security issues and repair costs experienced by property owners, the overall neighourhood aesthetics can be negatively affected, especially where properties back on to a municipal corridor (e.g. long sections of roads that have no municipal frontage). The Town s Graffiti Abatement Program can be enhanced to include the removal of such instances. The present workload would require the Town to retain a contractor to deal specifically with this issue. The estimated additional annual cost associated with providing this service would be $25,000, although it introduces a significant precedent in using municipal (tax supported) funds to maintain property that is deemed to be under private ownership.

20 STAFFING ISSUES In order to develop and implement a proactive program that will assist in reducing vandalism on public walkways, it is staff s opinion that it requires dedicated resources. To coordinate the program, liaise with the various stakeholders and provide prompt support to the community, the Town could consider hiring (minimum seasonal or contract position, preferred full-time) a Community Development Coordinator to lead the various initiatives discussed under 5.0. The portfolio for this position, would include: o Coordinating pilot programs with school boards and local plazas o Liaise with residents concerning issues of vandalism and rowdiness o Participation in a joint task force with HRPS to identify problem walkways and parks that require increased security measures, including coordinating any warranted increased security measures (illumination, surveillance and patrols) o Recommend which walkways/parks are candidates for both lighting or surveillance cameras o Market and manage the various Adopt-a programs and Median Planting Sponsorship Program o Coordinate other initiatives such as various litter awareness events o Implement youth outreach initiatives to address graffiti abatement The above responsibilities require staff resources that are presently not available and a dedicated staff person could bring the issue of vandalism to the forefront. The annual cost to retain a Community Development Coordinator: o Seasonal/Contract: $35,000 o Full-time $77,000

21 STRATEGY RECOMMENDATIONS The Working Group recommends the following options be considered moving forward: Option: Cost: o A: Partnership with School Boards to promote adoptions of walkways $ 0 o B: Partnership with Plaza s to promote adoption of walkways $ 0 o C: Increased Security Measures at problem walkways, parks and other hot spots $ 81,000 o D: Urban Design Guidelines $ 0 o F: Community Development Program (full-time staffing) $ 77,000 TOTAL $158,000 The Working Group does not recommend Options E and G. The cost of the strategy recommendations would be subject to budget approval.