Carl Zehr Square renovations

[ijmorlan]

The implied notion of renaming it to just “Zehr Square” reminds me of the pizza place on King at the Waterloo Spur in Uptown. It had a sign saying “PIZZERIA” vertically down the building. The bottom 2 letters disappeared. Eventually, the store removed 2 more letters and replaced them with just an “A”.

[Rainrider22]

Lol I agree, that's has a better ring

[Rainrider22]

I think updates for this project ended up posted in the General thread... but might as well use this one since it exists.

For the last week the signage lighting for the square has been flickering - seemingly an electrical fault. Annoying for something recently built. However that doesn't seem to matter, as now someone has decided to go ahead and destroy part of the signage.

That is actually quite possible...

[ac3r]

I wonder what fine citizen(s) did the damage, eh?

[jeffster]

Yes I noticed the flickering as well,  likely a bad transformer that needed replacing.  But this, really.  We jist can't have anything nice anymore

We haven't been able to have nice things for a long time. Nice things get destroyed be the idiots roaming the city. That said: I have never loved naming anything after anyone. I have always thought of it was wrong. Perhaps I am not the only one -- but my guess this was done so we can't have nice things, and not as a message of any sort.

[Acitta]

Yes I noticed the flickering as well,  likely a bad transformer that needed replacing.  But this, really.  We jist can't have anything nice anymore

We haven't been able to have nice things for a long time. Nice things get destroyed be the idiots roaming the city. That said: I have never loved naming anything after anyone. I have always thought of it was wrong. Perhaps I am not the only one -- but my guess this was done so we can't have nice things, and not as a message of any sort.

When they rebuilt the IHT, they put in attractive wooden benches. It wasn't long before they were vandalized by spray painters. Removing the paint also removed the finish, ruining the look of the benches. They had to replace them with easier to repaint black metal ones.

[dtkvictim]

We haven't been able to have nice things for a long time. Nice things get destroyed be the idiots roaming the city. That said: I have never loved naming anything after anyone. I have always thought of it was wrong. Perhaps I am not the only one -- but my guess this was done so we can't have nice things, and not as a message of any sort.

When they rebuilt the IHT, they put in attractive wooden benches. It wasn't long before they were vandalized by spray painters. Removing the paint also removed the finish, ruining the look of the benches. They had to replace them with easier to repaint black metal ones.

I think most of the benches are still wooden ones, no? The ones that sometimes have "bike holders".

I once saw a near-naked man sanding all of the paint off of the bridge at IHT/Henry Sturm Greenway, which I assume is there to help prevent corrosion.

And just north of there by the train tracks, I'm pretty sure someone cut down one of the light posts on the trail. I heard sawing noises, and a woman leaving from there was on the phone (presumably with the police) asking to have someone sent out. I decided to walk a different direction, but the light post was knocked over and cleanly cut next time I went through.

[danbrotherston]

When they rebuilt the IHT, they put in attractive wooden benches. It wasn't long before they were vandalized by spray painters. Removing the paint also removed the finish, ruining the look of the benches. They had to replace them with easier to repaint black metal ones.

I think most of the benches are still wooden ones, no? The ones that sometimes have "bike holders".

I once saw a near-naked man sanding all of the paint off of the bridge at IHT/Henry Sturm Greenway, which I assume is there to help prevent corrosion.

And just north of there by the train tracks, I'm pretty sure someone cut down one of the light posts on the trail. I heard sawing noises, and a woman leaving from there was on the phone (presumably with the police) asking to have someone sent out. I decided to walk a different direction, but the light post was knocked over and cleanly cut next time I went through.

This is a weird thing to do, and frankly, I wonder if it wasn't one of the property owners. They opposed the lighting pretty strongly, claiming that a light 50 meters behind their home would "ruin their lives". I wouldn't be surprised if one of them chose to take some direct action.

And...lemme say, absolutely we can't have nice things anymore. But it isn't just tweakers and taggers who ruin things for us. NIMBYs and drivers too are killing our city and making it impossible for us to have nice things. But as respectable members of society, nobody is really willing to say that out loud.

[ac3r]

We haven't been able to have nice things for a long time. Nice things get destroyed be the idiots roaming the city. That said: I have never loved naming anything after anyone. I have always thought of it was wrong. Perhaps I am not the only one -- but my guess this was done so we can't have nice things, and not as a message of any sort.

When they rebuilt the IHT, they put in attractive wooden benches. It wasn't long before they were vandalized by spray painters. Removing the paint also removed the finish, ruining the look of the benches. They had to replace them with easier to repaint black metal ones.

Spray paint at least isn't a big deal. They should have just left it instead of wasting the money replacing entire benches. Spray paint on stuff is part of living in a city.

Vandaizing a sign like in the picture is scummy though.

[Acitta]

When they rebuilt the IHT, they put in attractive wooden benches. It wasn't long before they were vandalized by spray painters. Removing the paint also removed the finish, ruining the look of the benches. They had to replace them with easier to repaint black metal ones.

Spray paint at least isn't a big deal. They should have just left it instead of wasting the money replacing entire benches. Spray paint on stuff is part of living in a city.

Vandaizing a sign like in the picture is scummy though.

They were fucking brand new! Would you tolerate it if it was something on your property that you spent a lot of money on? We spend municipal tax money to install beautiful infrastructure only to have it ruined by ignorant assholes. Why should we tolerate that? These people should be locked in stocks in a public square!

[ac3r]

Spray paint at least isn't a big deal. They should have just left it instead of wasting the money replacing entire benches. Spray paint on stuff is part of living in a city.

Vandaizing a sign like in the picture is scummy though.

They were fucking brand new! Would you tolerate it if it was something on your property that you spent a lot of money on? We spend municipal tax money to install beautiful infrastructure only to have it ruined by ignorant assholes. Why should we tolerate that? These people should be locked in stocks in a public square!

Quite an extreme desire of public violence you wish to see but okay.

It's simply a colossal waste of money. Why spend thousands - likely well over $10'000 in new benches and labour - replacing something you know is going to get tagged once again? It's like how we waste thousands of dollars a year on grey paint and labour costs to buff city/regional walls only for them to get tagged within a week, just to crack open a new can of grey paint and send a crew out so soon. Half the time that stuff doesn't match and the walls end up looking like some shitty Rothko painting although, at the same time, buffing of graffiti becomes a subconscious form of abstract art in and of itself). Just gives the artists free canvas as well.

A lot of graffiti sucks, sure, but it's a futile battle. And I think it gives cities charm. Set foot in any European city or town and it's everywhere. World class cities like London, Berlin, Paris, Budapest, Milan and so on are covered in the stuff, both good and bad. Every single surface gets hit with it and unless it's something important (a subway car, the front of some government building, public art) it's left alone. They don't try to fight it most of the time because they have better, more important things to spend tax dollars on. It's like trying to stop a bleeding artery with a bandage from a dollar store.

If you hate it and want to see it gone that's fine, but I don't think it's worth a single cent to fight unless it's in a place (or has offensive content) where it warrants removal. A bench still works whether there is paint on it or not.

[SF22]

They were fucking brand new! Would you tolerate it if it was something on your property that you spent a lot of money on? We spend municipal tax money to install beautiful infrastructure only to have it ruined by ignorant assholes. Why should we tolerate that? These people should be locked in stocks in a public square!

Quite an extreme desire of public violence you wish to see but okay.

It's simply a colossal waste of money. Why spend thousands - likely well over $10'000 in new benches and labour - replacing something you know is going to get tagged once again? It's like how we waste thousands of dollars a year on grey paint and labour costs to buff city/regional walls only for them to get tagged within a week, just to crack open a new can of grey paint and send a crew out so soon. Half the time that stuff doesn't match and the walls end up looking like some shitty Rothko painting although, at the same time, buffing of graffiti becomes a subconscious form of abstract art in and of itself). Just gives the artists free canvas as well.

A lot of graffiti sucks, sure, but it's a futile battle. And I think it gives cities charm. Set foot in any European city or town and it's everywhere. World class cities like London, Berlin, Paris, Budapest, Milan and so on are covered in the stuff, both good and bad. Every single surface gets hit with it and unless it's something important (a subway car, the front of some government building, public art) it's left alone. They don't try to fight it most of the time because they have better, more important things to spend tax dollars on. It's like trying to stop a bleeding artery with a bandage from a dollar store.

If you hate it and want to see it gone that's fine, but I don't think it's worth a single cent to fight unless it's in a place (or has offensive content) where it warrants removal. A bench still works whether there is paint on it or not.

There is a tagger that hits the Lexington bridge over the highway about once a month, and then someone comes in and paints over it, and three days later the same tag is back again. If you look at the bridge, there are tons of grey rectangles in different shades where it's been painted again and again. I know we don't want graffiti everywhere, but how much have we paid to have one stupid word covered up again and again for 2 years straight? They could've left it, and I bet the person never would have tagged it again. Instead, it's now an ongoing battle that costs us money.

(That said, I appreciate if the taggers have at least an ounce of artistic ability with a spray can).

[danbrotherston]

Quite an extreme desire of public violence you wish to see but okay.

It's simply a colossal waste of money. Why spend thousands - likely well over $10'000 in new benches and labour - replacing something you know is going to get tagged once again? It's like how we waste thousands of dollars a year on grey paint and labour costs to buff city/regional walls only for them to get tagged within a week, just to crack open a new can of grey paint and send a crew out so soon. Half the time that stuff doesn't match and the walls end up looking like some shitty Rothko painting although, at the same time, buffing of graffiti becomes a subconscious form of abstract art in and of itself). Just gives the artists free canvas as well.

A lot of graffiti sucks, sure, but it's a futile battle. And I think it gives cities charm. Set foot in any European city or town and it's everywhere. World class cities like London, Berlin, Paris, Budapest, Milan and so on are covered in the stuff, both good and bad. Every single surface gets hit with it and unless it's something important (a subway car, the front of some government building, public art) it's left alone. They don't try to fight it most of the time because they have better, more important things to spend tax dollars on. It's like trying to stop a bleeding artery with a bandage from a dollar store.

If you hate it and want to see it gone that's fine, but I don't think it's worth a single cent to fight unless it's in a place (or has offensive content) where it warrants removal. A bench still works whether there is paint on it or not.

There is a tagger that hits the Lexington bridge over the highway about once a month, and then someone comes in and paints over it, and three days later the same tag is back again. If you look at the bridge, there are tons of grey rectangles in different shades where it's been painted again and again. I know we don't want graffiti everywhere, but how much have we paid to have one stupid word covered up again and again for 2 years straight? They could've left it, and I bet the person never would have tagged it again. Instead, it's now an ongoing battle that costs us money.

(That said, I appreciate if the taggers have at least an ounce of artistic ability with a spray can).

Graffiti is much more complicated issue than I ever knew.

But, FWIW....tagging is nothing more complex than when a dog pees on everything...that shit should be covered up and stopped. It is worth spending money to keep the city looking non-shitty. That being said it's also the case that there are certainly smarter policies we can use to solve these problems. I'd even go so far as to say that we should encourage actual graffiti (i.e., not lazy tagging) in places like this because unlike tagging, it would actually enliven the city.

My favourite graffiti moment was actually some graffiti that some UrbEx folks found in the abandoned Cincinnati subway tunnel where graffiti had been painted on the walls, but the artists avoided covering up the signage in the tunnel because they knew that had historic value.

[ijmorlan]

There is a tagger that hits the Lexington bridge over the highway about once a month, and then someone comes in and paints over it, and three days later the same tag is back again. If you look at the bridge, there are tons of grey rectangles in different shades where it's been painted again and again. I know we don't want graffiti everywhere, but how much have we paid to have one stupid word covered up again and again for 2 years straight? They could've left it, and I bet the person never would have tagged it again. Instead, it's now an ongoing battle that costs us money.

(That said, I appreciate if the taggers have at least an ounce of artistic ability with a spray can).

My preferred approach to a situation like this would be to monitor problem locations rigorously and clean them up promptly. So in the situation you mention, after a couple of instances, I would have somebody drive by daily and paint it over right away if they saw it tagged. Of course a lot of up-front investment might be needed to make this happen.

I understand this is how they fixed the problem in the New York subway: they started cleaning all the cars often (I thought I read at the end of the line, but I don’t see how that’s possible; maybe it was at the end of every day) so that tags disappeared. Once the thrill of seeing ones tag out on the system goes away, so does some of the incentive to deface it in the first place. So at first they had to do a lot of cleaning but after a while it was much more manageable.

[danbrotherston]

There is a tagger that hits the Lexington bridge over the highway about once a month, and then someone comes in and paints over it, and three days later the same tag is back again. If you look at the bridge, there are tons of grey rectangles in different shades where it's been painted again and again. I know we don't want graffiti everywhere, but how much have we paid to have one stupid word covered up again and again for 2 years straight? They could've left it, and I bet the person never would have tagged it again. Instead, it's now an ongoing battle that costs us money.

(That said, I appreciate if the taggers have at least an ounce of artistic ability with a spray can).

My preferred approach to a situation like this would be to monitor problem locations rigorously and clean them up promptly. So in the situation you mention, after a couple of instances, I would have somebody drive by daily and paint it over right away if they saw it tagged. Of course a lot of up-front investment might be needed to make this happen.

I understand this is how they fixed the problem in the New York subway: they started cleaning all the cars often (I thought I read at the end of the line, but I don’t see how that’s possible; maybe it was at the end of every day) so that tags disappeared. Once the thrill of seeing ones tag out on the system goes away, so does some of the incentive to deface it in the first place. So at first they had to do a lot of cleaning but after a while it was much more manageable.

It takes considerably more effort to tag an NYC subway car than a bridge in public. It sounds like we're already cleaning it pretty frequently...and it isn't solving the problem. And for that matter, the "remediation" done isn't particularly attractive.

I think there are other better solutions to this kind of issue. For example, inviting artists to actually create artwork on the bridge.