Community-based Planning Graffiti in Community District Two, Queens, New York: Private expression in...
If you can't read please download the document
Community-based Planning Graffiti in Community District Two, Queens, New York: Private expression in the public realm by Thomas Paino Presentation by Emily
Community-based Planning Graffiti in Community District Two,
Queens, New York: Private expression in the public realm by Thomas
Paino Presentation by Emily Leavitt
Slide 2
Background information on graffiti in NYC Graffiti is a
widespread daily phenomenon in New York City, especially in the
boroughs outside Manhattan. It has been estimated that $750 million
is spent annually to get rid of graffiti. Because some people
create graffiti and others try to get rid of it, there is a wide
range of opinion about the purposes and appropriateness of
graffiti. Graffiti occurs both legally and illegally. Sometimes
property- owners invite well-known local graffiti artists and
artists from abroad to express themselves on the walls of their
buildings (Maantay 415), but when graffiti is done illegally, it
can be an eyesore and there are many groups advocating against
it.
Slide 3
The area chosen to analyze incidents of graffiti Community
Board 2, a five square mile district in Queens, was chosen because
it includes a wide range of land uses, from heavy industrial to
high-rise commercial to low-density housing which allowed for a
broad range of possibilities for linking land use to the presence
of graffiti (Maantay 416).
Slide 4
Further details on Community Board 2 & ways that police
combat graffiti The 108th Police Precinct patrols Community Board
2, which has the second highest arrest rate for graffiti
infractions in Queens (Maantay 417). To combat graffiti, police use
different techniques like mounting specialized patrols, cooperating
with community groupsand providing anti-graffiti technical
assistance to property ownerssuch as razor-ribbon fencing and paint
applications which make graffiti removal easier. But the district
is also home to at least four property owners who encourage
graffiti (Maantay 417).
Slide 5
Types of graffiti in Community Board 2 The styles to the right
are the most prevalent types of graffiti in Community Board 2. The
mural type is usually colorful and meaningful to the immediate
community and accomplished through cooperation with a building
owner (Maantay 418) but the other types are usually done by
taggers.
Slide 6
Potential factors and software used for determining patterns of
graffiti Potential factors included: location; land use; building
type, age, and surface; and public exposure. Since potential
factors were numerous and detailed, the software LotInfo was used
because its smallest denominator is the individual property lot
keyed into the database by a unique identifier derived from the New
York City tax lot and block number (Maantay 417). In regular
non-computer English, this basically means that LotInfo took
information that already existed about the properties in Community
Board 2 (like land use and building type, for example) and linked
it to surveyed incidents of graffiti, in order to see to what what
extent different factors about a property might lead to an
occurrence of graffiti.
Slide 7
Pilot Study Area Since Community Board 2 consists of five
neighborhoods and 3 main land-use types, in order to determine the
extent to which types of neighborhood and land use affect the
occurrence of graffiti, 4 potential survey areas were developed:
Residential/Commercial, Residential/Industrial, Large-Scale
Industrial, and Mid- Size Industrial.
Slide 8
Interesting Results A total of 494 street-facing properties
were surveyed on 65 blocks, which is about 7% of the total area of
Community Board 2. Factors like zoning, land use, building type,
and building owner all appeared to be related to the incidence of
graffiti. Lots facing railroad properties seemed especially
vulnerable to graffiti. Industrial buildings appear more likely to
have graffiti than other building types. One of the most important
factors seemed to be public exposure, meaning that buildings with
an object such as a fence, plant, or ornaments placed between the
building faade and the sidewalk were hit less frequently (Maantay
419).