The Observation Deck

Graffitti from troublemaking kids seems to often get attention. In our walks around town though the thing that makes Lakewood look like crap though is all of the spray paint on the streets and sidewalks for utility work. Now, maybe I'm off base and this is really the work of law breaking gangsters who are in the I T I. But it certainly looks like directions for a utility job. In several instances the spray paint was on fresh cement. I have to wonder if this sort of thing is permitted in other communities. Why can't the utilitity companies use chalk that will wash away? I can't imagine that they 1st surveyor who marks the site is there 4 months before the digging begins.

I know that it's bad form to respond to your own post but now I'm curious. Is this something that is just no big deal to anyone else or is it just so indefensible that there is no need to respond?

I did read your first post and meant to respond but I forgot. Anyhow I find this type of graffiti very ugly and it does bug me when it occurs on brand new streets and sidewalks. I do know that in California they use chalk, well at least where I lived. I think that chalk would be a better idea than spray paint especially since it leaves the streets and sidewalks looking very unattractive.

Before any digging a contractor is required to call the utility location service which marks any underground utilities that may be damaged while digging. Paint is used because the job may not occur immediately and chalk would wash away. A little paint is better than a ruptured gas line.

Steve,
You make a great point. Relative to a gas rupture, I'll take paint. But is this really the case on Detroit for instance? There is spray paint all over the place. Some fresh but much of it seems old. If it is marking a future dig then shouldn't the block be dug up and replaced in a reasonable time period? Unless the utility company has marked their lines for proposed digs that were never performed, I don't see the reason for the amount of paint on our sidewalks. If the proposed work wasn't done then who's responsible for cleanup? Hopefully someone can enlighten me on this. I'm willing to accept that there is a potential time lapse between marking and digging but if it's marked then shouldn't it be resolved by digging then replacing the marked block?
Maybe the real difference that I've experienced is that other cities sidewalks are actually owned by people like Bob Stark and Scott Wolstein that would not allow the utility companies to mess up their sidewalks in such a roughshod way. The question I suppose is where the accountability lies, is it with the individual property owners or the city?