Agenda item

The Director of Neighbourhood & Environmental Services and the Head of Safer Communities will give a presentation providing an update on the development of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) for the outer city areas.

The Director of Neighbourhood & Environmental Services and the Head of  Safer Communities gave a presentation providing an update on the development of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) for the outer city

areas.

The Deputy City Mayor for Housing, Economy and Neighbourhoods introduced the report and noted that it needed to be a data-driven exercise and that expectations would need to be managed.

Slides were presented as attached to the agenda pack.  Additional key points to note were as follows:

• This was a work in progress, but the presentation gave an early insight into the formation of the proposed second PSPO (PSPO2).
• There had been a limited amount of responses from Ward Councillors, and there was a need to encourage the public to take part of the consultation process.
• Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) had been recorded in different locations by different teams, so a variety of data had been collected.
• Types of ASB were sometimes interconnected.
• E-bikes had been an issue with regard to vehicle-based ASB.
• The timeline had changed since the slides had been published and it was currently aimed to push back the timeline to give a realistic timeframe, the timeline was now running 2-4 weeks behind.  It was important to ensure that this was done correctly and not rushed through.

In response to member discussion, the following was noted:

• In response to a query on the clarity of boundaries, it was noted that geolocations were mapped by postcode and the boundaries were exact.  It was further noted that it was useful for ward residents to encourage them to take part in the consultation.
• It was also important for residents to report ASB.  The Love Clean Streets app could be used for this, there were also QR codes that could be scanned.  Additionally, a new tool and web portal was being launched.  People could also report via computers in libraries, where staff could help.  If people did not report, data was not available.
• With regard to fly-tipping this was dealt with by City Wardens.  This used a similar data set and dashboards.  This work could increase as more data was received.
• This work would have a team of 11 officers to look after PSPO1 and to do targeted work in PSPO2.
• Data could be analysed to see where problems were likely to occur and when.  Some issues, such as fireworks, were seasonal.
• This scheme was about project-based intervention work.  The team could support and intervene where necessary and work could be done and measured to see if had a positive impact.
• As the project was data-led, if there was a specific issue then hotspots and trends could be identified, and the team could look to be deployed, highlighting the importance of reports.
• The scheme would go live in the Autumn, and staff would be appointed from April.  These staff could be deployed in Wards for targeted intervention work.
• Councillors were encouraged to bear in mind the key facts (as set out on the slide) when talking to constituents.
• It was noted that in some areas, people could drink in public if they weren’t doing to in an anti-social way.
• As the approach needed to be evidence-based, spitting was hard to catch, however, signage could be installed to discourage it.  Work would be undertaken on engagement and education where there were groups of problematic behaviour.
• Members were reminded that PSPOs were not implemented to generate fines but to encourage behaviour change.
• It was necessary to educate ourselves and the public on that PSPOs could achieve, and manage expectations.  If a PSPO were introduced in certain area, it would be necessary to think about the priorities of that area.  It was necessary to think about what was aimed to be achieved with Ward Councillors and residents.
• Bikes were an issue, but not enough to build into PSPO2.  This was different to PSPO1.  PSPO2 would not adopt whole Wards, but would look at hotspots where there was evidence.  Illegal E-bikes would be looked at ant the Police would be worked with on Operation Pedalfast.  The PSPO team did not have the power to stop moving vehicles, whereas the Police did.
• PSPO2 was very different to PSPO1 as it was more project-based intervention.  Therefore, it was necessary to show when time and effort had been put in and positive impacts on the community.  Outcomes could be shared with the Commission in the new municipal year.
• If certain behaviours arose in other pockets, another PSPO would be written.  If Councillors felt an area needed a PSPO, they needed to encourage people to report behaviours as PSPOs needed to be data-driven.  Ways to report could be discussed at Ward Meetings.
• It was noted that this was a citywide initiative.

AGREED

1)    That the reports be noted.

2)    That comments made by members of this commission to be taken into account by the lead officers.