Identification of Influencing Factors of Graffiti Occurrence at Nevada State Highway Bridges and Soundwalls
Publication: Journal of Infrastructure Systems
Volume 23, Issue 4
Abstract
This study identifies the factors influencing the occurrence of graffiti on highway infrastructure, specifically bridges and soundwalls in Nevada. Using data from the Las Vegas area, linear regression models were developed to link the occurrence of graffiti (in terms of graffiti size) to highway infrastructure locations and the presence of graffiti countermeasures. Bridges at high-profile freeways are found to experience more graffiti compared with bridges at low-profile freeways. Infrastructure located in commercial areas or low income residential communities is not found to influence the intensity of graffiti occurrence at bridges. Fencing is found to be an effective measure to prevent graffiti occurrence. Soundwalls next to high profile freeways are found to have more graffiti compared with those at low-profile freeways. Graffiti appears in clusters; graffiti locations at soundwalls may not be proportional to the length of the soundwalls. Soundwalls in residential areas tend to have more graffiti than those in commercial areas. The developed models can be used to predict the locations that are more likely to suffer from graffiti problems and the amount of graffiti to occur. Agencies can use the results of this study to develop appropriate countermeasures to combat graffiti problems.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Nevada Department of Transportation for providing the funds to conduct this study.
References
Eck, R. W., and Martinelli, D. R. (1998). “Assessment and mitigation measures for graffiti on highway structures.” Transp. Res. Rec., 1642, 35–42.
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). (2014). “Context sensitive solutions primer.” ⟨http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/csstp/css_primer/⟩ (Nov. 15, 2016).
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). (2015). “Guidelines for the visual impact assessment of highway projects.” FHWA-HEP-15-029, U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Washington, DC.
Halsey, M. J., and Young, A. (2002). “The meanings of graffiti and municipal administration.” Australian and New Zealand J. Criminology, 35(2), 165–186.
Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department. (2016). “Graffiti.” ⟨http://www.lvmpd.com/Sections/Graffiti/tabid/421/Default.aspx⟩ (Nov. 11, 2016).
Sinha, K. C., and Labi, S. (2007). Transportation decision making: Principles of project evaluation and programming, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
Teng, H. (2009). “Evaluation of graffiti countermeasures on highways.”, Nevada Dept. of Transportation, Carson City, NV.
Teng, H., Puli, A., Karakouzian, M., and Xu, X. (2012). “Identification of graffiti countermeasures for highway facilities.” Proc., 8th Int. Conf. on Traffic and Transportation Studies, Changsha, China, 43, 681–691.
Teng, H., Puli, A., Kutela, B., Ni, Y., and Hu, B. (2016). “Cost and benefit evaluation of graffiti counter measures on the Nevada highways.” J. Transp. Technol., 6(5), 360–377.
Weisel, D. L. (2009). “Problem-oriented guides for police series. No. 9: Graffiti.” U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Infrastructure Systems
Volume 23 • Issue 4 • December 2017
Copyright
©2017 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Feb 9, 2014
Accepted: Jan 6, 2017
Published online: Apr 11, 2017
Discussion open until: Sep 11, 2017
Published in print: Dec 1, 2017
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.