Draft Minutes – April 10th 2018

London Road LAT minutes 10th April 2018

  1. Welcome and introductions


Andy Winter, Andy Keeffe, Sandy Crowhurst, Emma Daniel, Tim Read, Tony Firmin, Mike Hedgethorne, Tom Walby (ESFRS)

Tony: Re; graffiti.  It’s not done just late at night.  A couple of weeks ago 2 yobs were spraying the student accommodation in Baker Street.  They were sanding on the communal bin at about 6.30pm.  We shouted at them and one fell off!  May have hurt himself (shame).  They were both high as kites.

Present: Cath Prenton, Martin Curtis (Equinox), Alan Brigginshaw, Penny Morley, Richard Barraball, Janice Beckett (ESFRS), Mark and Daphne de Boissere, Anne Scott (resident), Martin and Lucy Dunleavy, Diane Chandler, Ray Cunningham with Cllr Louisa Greenbaum, Philip Wells, Corinne Lamb (note-taker), late arrival Dave (ESFRS)

(17 present)

  1. Minutes and date of next meeting

  • Minutes were agreed

  • May 8th set as date of next meeting.

  1. Graffiti

    1. Restorative justice – with Council Officer Tim Read

  • Apologies from Tim Read were read out.

  • If a person is caught they are cautioned. They need to be caught to caution them this is what has happened in Hanover. Interested if this is happening in our area.

  • We need to ask Tim to tell for definite.

  • Cllr Emma Daniel also knows some details regarding this.

  • Louisa- good idea but how many people have got caught?

  • Conditional cautioning exists to help the victim not sure this is happening in our but will ask Tim to clarify.

  • Action: Philip to try to talk to Tim before if he can and try and book him for next the meeting.

    1. Reply from Inspector McCarthy

Philip wrote to Inspector McCarthy regarding the issue of graffiti, and inspector wrote back a reply as follows:

Hi Brian,

Long time no see, I hope you are well.

At the last LAT meeting (March 2018) I was asked to ask you about Graffiti and tagging.

If there is graffiti/tagging on private property -

a. would this be considered "criminal damage"?

b. what is the local policing policy and priority on this?

best wishes,


London Road LAT
Hello Philip,

To answer your questions yes it is an offence of Criminal damage and if it is reported it will be dealt with using the THRIVE model to decide what action is taken. I will check to see if we have had an increase in Graffiti in the area and get back to you.

Regards Brian
  • THRIVE is a local policing way of dealing with the tagging and graffiti, which stands for: Threat, Harm, Risk, Investigative, Victim etc.

  • If there is no risk to a persons live then the case goes to the bottom of the pile. Exact opposite to Broken Window theory.

  • The Alms houses have graffiti on, they had a letter to put the onus on them to get the graffiti removed- this was (raised as a point of information).

  • It is the owner’s responsibility if it’s not a hate crime then the council will take on this issue.

  • Could we go into the shops to remind them of the issue, Louisa has been in touch with a local graffiti solution remover, who offered a box of 12 bottle of this if we wanted to do a local LAT graffiti removal day, maybe if the council can not do this yet, maybe as a option we could do it.

  • Mark de Boissiere has been a great star in making the London Road station clean. It has been remarkable effort of success.

  • Tracy Phipps (council) there could be some money in the council budget but needs looking into, it is possible that the fact there has been no response to these issues is due to the workload.

    1. Cross-city initiative

Maureen Winder, Anne McKay and Philip wrote a letter to Emma Daniel, below is what was sent:

Major concern regarding exponential growth of graffiti across our City

Chairpersons representing a wide variety of community groups across the city wish to voice their concern regarding the massive increase in graffiti and tagging across the city, particularly over the last twelve months. We are requesting leadership and urgent action from our elected leaders to address this issue.

The increase in ‘tagging’, alongside unwelcome ‘commissioned’ graffiti on public, private and even architecturally significant properties, has reached alarming levels. It is rarely painted over by council or by property owners and, based on feedback from residents, our police service appears no longer able to respond to reports of tagging. It seems clear to us that if there is an existing BHCC strategy regarding reducing and removing graffiti, it is failing. The result is that our historic and attractive city is becoming an eyesore and more and more areas feel ugly, unwelcoming and even threatening.

It is unclear from the council’s constitution and committee structure where the responsibility for this area sits and what role the police play. We therefore request that the Chairs of the three committees where leadership on this issue would possibly best reside, meet to agree who will take the initial lead. Namely;

Cllr Gill Mitchell: Environment

Cllr Emma Daniel: Neighbourhoods

Cllr Alan Robins: Tourism

We do recognise the severe financial constraints that the council is working within, however this cannot release the council from its leadership role in coordinating action and finding a resolution to this ever growing problem which is spoiling our city. Graffiti deters visitors, upsets residents and creates unsettling, ‘no go’ areas where antisocial behaviour grows. It costs local businesses income and reduces the quality of life of residents.

We feel sure that if a creative strategy can be developed and implemented.

This ought to be

  • via leadership from the Council

  • developed with communities

  • on a city-wide basis

  • enlisting cross-party support

  • encouraging local people to play an active part

  • setting out clearly the boundaries of what is acceptable for our city

  • persuading property owners of their responsibility

  • with strong city-wide publicity

  • and a clear line on enforcement

We believe that such strategic action can halt the graffiti scourge.

We look forward to hearing your response

Signed: Community group:

  • The content of the letter was discussed at the last meeting, and if reflected in the letter.

  • The definition between tagging and graffiti was raised and would was explained.

  • All street art or any commissions carried out on any premises need planning permission and a process, as this area is a conservation area.

  • If there is not permission the council would tell the owners to take it off. Outside the conservation area there is flexibility.

    1. The LAT asked Cllr Emma Daniel was invited to attend [this meeting in April], but is unable to do so and sends apologies as shown below:

  • Action: To ask Emma to come to next meeting.

Community infrastructure Levy, CIL

  • From last time- Cath Prenton looked into this for the LAT.

  • It is where developers have to make a contribution to planning permission.

  • Came from the issue with the bollards around Preston Circus, used by the fire engines, this is being treated as access an access route.

  • There is a Parish and Neighbourhood fund, supplied by a fund of the planning committee. Philip knows who we need to be in touch with.

  • There is currently a “section 106” scheme in this area.

  • But this would be replaced by CIL

  • We don’t have a neighbourhood fund for this area.

  • We still need to find out if this is the same for our area. In other councils there is an application.

  • This will give us access to a fund- we would be able to make a application if there is a need, which the bollards could fall into, this shouldn’t come through CIL, find out more about process. There are grants available to make a plan for the area moving forward, using others in the community.

  • LAT Chairs meeting there was a presentation on CIL but was rather technical.

  • There are places that have neighbourhood plans; the ones that were mentioned were the Marina and Rottingdean.

Action: to see if there is a Parish and Neighborhood fund.

  1. Policing and Licensing

    1. Reply on Police attendance

  • Chris Veil has read the reply but have not heard anything more from him on this.

Action: Philip did ask Chris V about attendance to LAT and will follow this up. Also draw this to the attention of Caroline Lucas our MP, who has expressed an interest.

    1. The application for alcohol licence by International Food and Wines was refused

  • Joanna player; (Head of Safer Communities). Local democracy working.

  • Action: Philip to thank her for following this up.

  • They have had a 28 day appeal period and restricted hours have happened, the shop is still open but less than usual.

    1. Planning application – (a) Kodak shop/Hughies (b) former Leyland/Tiles

Did anyone go along??

(a) Kodak shop/Hughies

      • The plans are available to have a look at on the council-planning portal, of the council website.

      • If it does obtain the planning permission, and then we presumably we would not have a issue with it.

      • Hughies and the “Smoking shop” are looking to rent more space in the London Road area

(b) Former Leyland/Tiles

      • Leyland tiles had presentation in the Jury’s Inn 22nd March and the 24th March.

      • They have not given a lot of notice for this.

      • Richard B. attended.

      • Action: Philip to write a reply to say the LAT didn’t attend but would like some more information about it.

      • The letter from Legal and General was read out some of the details as follows:

      • It is going to be a new mixed-use scheme, including rooms for rent. 200 homes for rent, Legal and General will manage and retain these.

      • 3000 square metres of office space. 1000 square metres of residential facilities and retail space.

      • There will be engagement with the community and 2 displays.

      • Community consultation as it stands.

      • Action: Philip to ask Gabrielle Kyriakou who is in charge to come to meeting or ask if they could do a presentation outside of the meeting that would be open to all the LAT, or provide us with a link to the presentation, so we could get some background.

  1. Parking in zone J – a petition was suggested

  • Philip wrote to Charles Field and asked for some information. The correspondence is detailed below:

HI All, (14/3/18)


We would only have figures of the whole of Area J rather than sections but I have copied in the parking infrastructure team in case they have any previous information on bays in certain extensions to the scheme. 

We do not issue resident permits to any car free developments (apart from blue badge holders) as this is an audit requirement which we must adhere to.

We only issue resident permits to those who state they own a garage / off street parking for a second vehicle assigned to their address which can’t fit off street. I’ve copied in colleagues in the customer service team in case you wish to discuss this further.






Hi All, (9/3/18)

The recent figures for February 2018 indicate that 4077 resident permits have been issued in Area J and the capacity is 4529 (amount of parking spaces across the zone).

There also needs to be consideration that the parking scheme only runs until 8pm so limiting permits for residents and splitting the zone may not actually solve the issue as it is likely non permit holders are also using the spaces at these times. 

It may be worth residents putting together a petition which will allow the Council to gauge the strength of opinion for a change from local residents in a certain area, however, a significant change such as increasing the hours of operation would need to be considered carefully in terms of staff resource to review this and additional enforcement outside of core hours.

I hope this helps, 



  • This came up a year ago and it is possible to split zone J and it could happen we would need a petition to do so, but it didn’t go forward.

  • Charles also said that we should take on board was that the residents in the north, who voted yes on the understanding that they would be in the same zone as us. There is potential to split the zones, but it wouldn’t be quick as there are a lot of similar petitions in the pipeline. E.g. Round hill is doing a similar scheme, something to look out for. This is also Zone J.

  • The logical spilt could be the railway line. The people in the north could park north of the railway line and the people in the south could still park south of the railway.

Louisa spoke about the council petitions and how we could go forward:

  • Online council petitions and written and match them up. 4 days, it would go to the environment, transport and sustainability committee, the next one is the 26th June.

  • The petition would need to be in 4 working days before.

  • There is no limit on the amount of signatures.

  • We would need at least 200 people to sign. It is very achievable!

  • It was agreed at the meeting that there is appetite for a petition.

  • The wording is important. It was suggested, could we include in the wording of the petition to extend the time the restrictions goes up to in the evening.

  • Louisa suggested we could word it that we want a report to be brought from parking officers to the environment committee and leave it up to them for a solution.

  • By the next LAT we can see how far we have got with it.

  • Electronic petitions:

  • Go to the Council website and search petitions, and follow the instructions to set one up.

  • Send it out by social media, email etc.

  • The Ditching rise community group would be interested in this.

  • The electronic deadline is 12 noon on the 19th June.

Action: Philip and Lucy to discuss the wording further. Follow up at the next LAT meeting. Put this idea in the next mail out, or on the notice board.

  1. Updates (if any)

    1. Fire service bollards


  • They will be repaired and they will match fund it with the council, put out to tender and waiting for a response for a date.

  • It’s the electronics that is the issue but it will get done!!!

  • There will be a warrantee on the works that go ahead.

  • This is in hand and waiting for a response from the council will take time but is processing, the time line will not be short.

    1. Oxford Street Alley – funding

  • Louisa noted that some of Pete West’s ward money would go into this.

  • Philip has no update from Simon B on this.

  • There is some police funding, and it this ought to go ahead.

    1. Viaduct Road/ Beaconsfield Road communal bins

  • Philip contacted Adrian Ash interim manager but has had no reply from his colleague Lynsay Cook.

[Post meeting update: following reply was received:

Dear Mr Wells

The current timescales for rollout are:

· w/c 7 May: mail out to residents with details of the implementation of communal bins; this will explain where the bins will go, what can go in them, collection arrangements etc.

· w/c 21 May: bin infrastructure to be delivered and installed

· w/c 21 May: dual collections

· From 28 May only communal bins will be emptied.

Please do get in touch if you have any further questions.

Kind regards, Lynsay ]

  • There is a date for the bins, 28th May the infrastructure with go in and the 4th June the bins go in.

  • Viaduct road, Westbourne Street and Beaconsfield road, but Beaconsfield is only getting both types of bins and Viaduct road is only getting communal bins, which is different from the original plan.

Action: Louisa is going to check what the situation is and get back to the LAT.

    1. Loss of bins near London Road station

  • Philip sent email and reminder but no reply.

    1. Pavement parking on Baker Street

  • The correspondence between Philip and council parking team was read and is detailed below, but have had no reply back from Layla:

Dear Mr Wells,

Thank you for your email.

This has been passed onto the Freedom of Information team to answer your queries.

Kind regards,


Dear Parking,

I have been asked by the London Road LAT meeting to enquire about this.

Please could you tell me about cars half-parked on the pavement in Baker Street (off London Road) on the street running next to the Abacus student accommodation.

a. What is the enforcement policy?

b. What is the track record of enforcement i.e. have you issued many fines to culprits?


Philip Wells

Chair – London Road Area Local Action Team (LAT)

  • Louisa to follow up with Layla regarding what enforcement is happening with the obstructive parking on Baker Street.

  • This is to do with the council but might escalate to police if enforcement does not work but start with enforcement.

  • There is a link to the section on the council website, just search obstructive parking.

    1. Francis Street (if any)

  • There has been nothing more in terms, of road safety on this issue, but there has been a safety audit.

  • It is now moving forward, as it is going to become access only and have double yellow lines, and bollards.

  • In the last week they will put in a traffic safety order.

Meeting closed around 19:45

Date of Next meeting: 8th May