Notes/ Minutes London Road LAT 2/2/2016

London Road LAT – February 2 2016

Draft notes – N.B. no official minute-taker was present – these are presented as an outline report of what was said, and does not imply that the remarks are endorsed by the LAT – nor yet confirmed as a fair record (1/2/16)

1. Welcome, apologies and introductions

  • a number of apologies have been received : Chris Tucker (UOS accommodation), Amanda Healey (St Bartholomew’s School), Andy Winter, Lindsay Debach (usual note taker!), Mike Hedgethorne, Tony Firmin, Cllrs Greenbaum and Deane (via Pete West), Angie Bonnel (verbally)
  • present: P.Wells (Chair), Lucy Dunleavy (V.C.) Damien Murmara (City Clean), Cllr Pete West, Sandy Crowhurst (North Laine Community Association), Ann Townsend (Town Team and London Road Business Association), Marie-Louise Maeder, PCSOs Nic Harrison and Sharon Birt, Bob Chilton, Daphne and Mark de Boissiere, Harriet Lyden-Milwain (Sussex University Accommodation), Penny Morley, Garry Collins (Safe in the City), Eric (resident), Andy Keeffe (Brighton University Accommodation)
  • 17 present

3. The agenda item on Viaduct Road dealt with earlier in order to release Damien who had not yet been home from work.

From Cllr Gill Mitchell:

  • email from Cllr Gill Mitchell following up earlier correspondence:

Dear Philip,

We seem to be going round in circles.  I’ve dug this email out from last July.  I’ve met with Mark and said that we need to find out if the further traffic survey work has been undertaken or will take place and then meet with the LAT to propose a way forward.

Best wishes,

Gill 

a. Written info from Planning Officer for enforcement:

Planning Officer for  enforcement Mat Gest – has sent apologies in Feb:

I’m very sorry but I’m afraid I’m not going to be able to attend the meeting tomorrow. I am genuinely very sorry but something has come up for me privately which means I won’t be available that evening.

I would be willing to re-schedule and attend the next meeting if convenient.

In short as an update, we have undertaken a survey of the street and written to the most concerning properties, as you are aware, however formal action/s have not yet been pursued. This remains a “pro-active” piece of work which will be followed through as soon as resources allow.

I would be grateful for views (from all sides) in regards to the “painted houses”. Clearly these have been in place for a while but I would just say that I have not received many representations in regards to their effect on the area. I would only say, at this time, if anyone has any representations in these regards, to please let me know.

I am so sorry again that I am unable to attend, I have attempted to seek a replacement to attend on my behalf but unfortunately no-one is available tomorrow evening.

b. Damien Murmara – City Clean

– the achievements of previous months appear to have gone backwards

– we need to knock on doors, but do it at the weekend when people are at home. This is planned for the coming weekend 5/2/16

– the plan to change to communal bins will be put to the Environment, Transport and sustainability committee on 15th March. (There are 10 members of the committee. The LAT could lobby them)

– elderly people can ask for special help in moving rubbish to bins

– rubbish in front gardens: City clean can request cleanup, Environmental Health can request cleanup.

– when the lorry comes to empty the bins it can only work on the left hand side of the road. This will produce difficulties for people on the other side.

– recycling bins will be included in the plan above. (Q: what about glass? A: this won’t include recycling for glass, because of the noise caused to nearby residents. There are glass recycling facilities nearby [? New England House area?]

– national legislation has removed the ability to issue penalty notices about bins

– Andy Keeffe: if there is a problem identified with a particular house let him know, and he will chase it up

HMO planning permission

– Pete West: “there are standards for safety which HMO licensing is aiming to address”

2. Police and Licensing

a. Discussion of general situation

– Child Sexual Exploitation.

It is suspected that this occurs on the Level. One can imagine the scenario of someone getting into debt [for substances?] and repaying with services of a sexual nature. Vulnerable people are being befriended with alcohol/drugs/ etc. which leads to their exploitation.

– London Road – youth problem, anti-social behaviour

Teenagers are causing a problem e.g. at MacDonald. This alternates with Western Road. Especially after school, e.g. at bus stop – sexist and abusive comments made to members of the public (who are offended, but don’t necessarily ring it in or report it). There can be 15-20 kids involved. They show no respect. This ought to be nipped in the bud.

“Section 35” by which people can be dismissed from an area for 24 hours – it is an offence to return. This can be invoked for disorder or Anti Social Behaviour

There are kids who go out very late and come home drunk.

Please call in such problems: 101 if suspicious, 999 if verbal abuse is happenning.

Q: Section 35, is it difficult to get?

A: it is a good tool, but needs evidence of ASB to make a strong case for getting it.

Pete West: what about Public Space Protection Order – can this help? Where is envisaged to operate? Is the Level or Greenway included?

A: (subsequently) “there is not enough current evidence for these locations” – Peter Castleton

A: there is a consultation taking place.

b. Pavement Cycling – follow up in response to Mark de Boissiere

Written reply to question asked about cyclists, and pavement cycling:

“Cycling on the pavement is an offence but the government aren't keen to hand out fines for this, unless people are cycling in a dangerous manner. Most people appreciate how dangerous the roads can be for cyclists and most  are careful on the pavement. I generally find that people pushing wheelchairs and prams more often run into people than cyclists, albeit at a slower speed. The pavement is a shared space for all sorts of moving people/obstacles and we need to be mindful of each other. They are pushing councils to provide more cycle lanes which is a long and expensive process. The facility to hand out a fine was removed a while back, and so now a form is filled in and sent off to the ticketing office. They then make the decision if the cyclist should get a fine or a warning, so it's not a guaranteed fine anymore. We only set days of action for areas that have a high number of accidents and calls. There are currently no areas that reach this. Generally there are rarely calls of cyclists coming into contact with pedestrians, so the need to spend time and resources on it isn't there. This could be that people just aren't reporting it, but as is always the case, if the calls aren't coming in then it's deemed there isn't a problem.

Cyclists going through red lights is nearly impossible to Police. When we see them out and about we generally tell them but they are usually cycling away and don't stop. We can't chase after them … and calling up a Police response unit to get them stopped would not be a productive use of resources. Again if a specific area was creating volume calls into the Police, then it may be deemed suitable for an operation to look at the problem. 

Look forward to seeing you later. 

Sharon

Sharon Birt 
Police Community Support Officer 
Neighbourhood Policing Team - London Road, York Place and New England Quarter
Police Station, John Street, Brighton, BN2 0LA 
Mobile 07912 893448
To contact Police call 101 for non-emergency calls or 999 for emergencies

Pavement Cycling Discussion:

Q: what about enforcing?

A: government guidance has reduced incentive to tackle pavement cycling

– there are very few reports called in. There was a day of action on Viaduct Road last year. If it is a specific pattern in a specific place then more could be done. One might ask, is it actually endangering pedestrians?

Marie-Louise: the most dangerous are the “deliveroo” people

Penny: there can be tensions against wheel chair users (Q: is this persistent? If so please ring it in)

Pete West: there is an issue of resources. There used to be a council strategy for education, this is being cut back. It used to target e.g. delivery drivers and risks to motorcyclists.
4. Updates

  • Business Improvement District

– Ann Townsend: a consultation is about to take place. The big issues are security and marketing. It would be really an advantage to London Road if the traders voted to have a Business Improvement District (BID)

  • Planning Applications

ST. PETER’S & NORTH LAINE

BH2015/04474 Units 1-6 Longley Industrial Estate New England Street, Brighton

Change of use of all units from light industrial (B1c) and warehousing (B8) to offices (B1a) together with external alterations and refurbishment including increase in height of

building, installation of curtain walling system, metal faced cladding and glazed panelling, revised vehicular and pedestrian access, new cycle and motor cycle storage and disabled parking bays.

Some plans were shown on the TV screen. This looks like a big development. Possibly big enough to trigger the release of funds such that London Road could be considered in terms of traffic improvements. The Business Association would very much like to see London Road car park being made much more well-known, and well signposted.

Sandy – there is Council website page which refers to this: something like “Greater Brighton Economic Board → pipelines → bidding process”

[ see Greater Brighton Economic Board document on LAT website]

5. Any other business items

  • HMO issues meeting – Wed 3rd Feb – we will be represented by Mike Hedgethorne and Tony Firmin (note: only 2 reps are invited per organisation)

  • Fish shop – Richard had brought up this topic – but was not present to speak to it

6. Next meeting 8th March – venue possibly to be Barclays Bank – t.b.c.

The meeting closed at around 20.00 hours