Item B: Neighborhood Livability Working Group Report

Home Browse Search

Neighborhood Livability Working Group Countermeasures for Traffic Sign Vandalism Problem Description Traffic sign vandalism has become a problem across the country and poses significant costs to local governments responsible for maintaining them. The problem is typically more acute in neighborhoods adjacent to colleges or universities as signs are seen as an attractive part of young adult décor. Costs are not limited to those associated with maintenance and replacement of signs, posts and hardware. While none have been documented in Eugene, accidents caused by traffic sign vandalism have occurred in other communities. Once local entities determine the need for a traffic sign, they have a duty to install and maintain it in a reasonably safe condition. Strategy Description the following countermeasures be evaluated for their potential to have a positive impact on the problem in the campus area neighborhoods and that those cost-effective elements deemed appropriate to our local context be implemented as resources allow: Consider expanding the use of products and installation techniques that minimize opportunity or make it more difficult to vandalize a sign. Measures may include increasing sign heights and use of double signs, battens, double supports, theft resistant hardware and anti-twist devices. [The City switched to a more vandal-resistant cantilever bracket for street signs about five years ago and staff is evaluating the use of metal versus wood posts.] Consider changes to local laws to enhance enforcement and prosecution efforts (i.e., increasing penalties and fines for sign vandalism.) Change public perception about the costs and potential dangers of sign vandalism through aggressive media campaigns. Consider the use of community volunteers to provide supplemental street name stenciling on sign posts or curbs. Costs and Potential Resources Additional funding would be needed to shift to more vandal-resistant materials and installation methods. Additional staffing would be needed if the objective was to address the backlog of missing street signs. There is likely to be resistance to providing additional resources towards enforcement and prosecution given competing priorities and the cost-effectiveness of sign replacement. Costs for a media campaign or recruitment and use of volunteers are considered low. There may be an opportunity to expand the concept of neighborhood graffiti and litter patrols to include street name stenciling on posts and curbs. Issues to Consider The city maintains an inventory of all signs (+ 30,000, including 9,810 street name signs). An annual night time inspection is done to verify existing non-street name signs are in good repair. Any sign not in good condition is replaced. Signs that are dirty or tagged may be cleaned rather than replaced. Currently 2.5 FTE are budgeted for sign maintenance. The annual program cost is $341,268. In addition to the annual inspection, the City keeps records of all reports of missing, damaged or worn out signs and the actions taken. Existing practice is to replace those signs which most directly impact public safety, like stop or yield signs, as soon as reports they are missing are made. Staff is available or on call for those most critical signs 24/7. Other signs are prioritized and replaced or repaired as staff and resources allow with required regulatory signs taking precedence over directional, advisory and street name signs. Sign replacement work is somewhat seasonal. In the summer, the sign crew focuses on striping and pavement markings. In March of 2010, 801 signs were cleaned, repaired or replaced. In August of 2010, only 128 were done. 29 Page