Appendix 2
Public Space Protection Orders (related to antisocial behaviour) – West Dorset
Consultation Response Report
What was the Under the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing consultation about? Act 2014, West Dorset District Council can put in place Public Space Protection Orders(PSPOs).West Dorset District Council are considering a PSPO in relation to antisocial behaviour, and are proposing this cover alcohol related antisocial behaviour, begging related antisocial behaviour and the feeding of herring gulls in specific areas in West Dorset.
Over what period did the The consultation ran for 12 weeks finishing at 5pm on consultation run? 15 March 2017 How many responses 579 overall responses were received, with 8 of those were received overall? from organisations. Virtually 90% of the respondents currently live in West Dorset. How many organisations Three organisations gave an official response through gave a official response? the online survey: Broadmayne Parish Council, Lyme Regis Town Council and Owermoigne Parish Council Where will the results be Results will be published on the council's website published? www.dorsetforyou.com How will the results be The results will be used to guide councillors’ decision used? making for PSPOs relating to Antisocial Behaviour across the district. Who has produced this Mark Simons, Consultation Officer DCP April 2017 report?
Analysis Method: The main method of analysis is looking at the percentage of respondents who expressed a view on each question. For the majority of questions the percentage strongly supporting and supporting are calculated. Those opposing and strongly opposing are also recoded. One is taken from the other giving a net agreement figure. This could be positive or negative. A figure of zero would be when equal percentages support and also oppose a proposal. In some questions a high number of people said they didn’t know/ not applicable/no opinion. In these cases the figures are excluded from the results but this is explained in each case. For each open question the text comments have been studied and coded depending on what issues were raised. The coded comments are then reported on based on the amount of times those individual issues have been raised. Total redacted comments are provided in an appendix. Note: some figures may not sum due to rounding.
1 Appendix 2
Alcohol-related anti-social behaviour
Q1 How much of a problem, if any, is alcohol-related anti-social behaviour to people living in, working in or visiting Dorchester town centre and/or Bridport town centre?
Q1 Very big Fairly big Not a big Not a problem problem problem problem at all
Dorchester 4% 26% 60% 10% Town Centre
Bridport 5% 25% 57% 13% Town Centre
Of the total respondents quite a few understandably only had a view on one town or the other rather than both. 351 responded on Dorchester and 256 on Bridport. Of those who responded 30% felt there was a very big or fairly big problem in Dorchester and similarly in Bridport. Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal diverge from the results as a whole.
Bridport Town Centre 30.0 70.1
Very/Fairly big problem Not big/Not a problem
Dorchester Town Centre 29.9 70.1
2 Appendix 2
Q2 Over the last 12 months, how would you describe the affect of alcohol-related anti-social behaviour has had on you when you have been in Dorchester town centre and/or Bridport town centre?
Q2 Seriously Fairly affected Not affected affected
Dorchester 3% 18% 79% Town Centre
Bridport 2% 16% 82% Town Centre
This question asked about the affect of alcohol related anti-social behaviour (ASB) on people personally. Of the total respondents quite a few understandably only had a view on one town or the other rather than both. 425 responded with a view on Dorchester and 309 on Bridport. Of those who responded 21% felt they were seriously or fairly affected by alcohol related ASB in Dorchester and similarly in Bridport with 18%.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal diverge from the results as a whole.
Bridport Town Centre 17.8 82.2
Seriously affected/Fairly affected Not affected
Dorchester Town Centre 21.2 78.8
3 Appendix 2
Q3 If you have been affected, please tell us how you've been affected
There were in total 98 responses to this question. The table below quantifies the percentage of total comments by issue for people who felt they had been affected in Dorchester
Issue % Fearful in street/avoid some areas 31 Aggressive and intimidating youths 15 Noise and disturbance 14 Abusive and foul language 13 Urinating and vomiting in street 6 Begging and drinking 6 Approached for money 4 Damaging items 4 Night time issue 4 Litter 2 No police 1
The table below quantifies the percentage of total comments by issue for people who felt they had been affected in Bridport
Issue % Fearful in street/avoid some areas 37 Abusive and foul language 20 Noise and disturbance 12 Begging and drinking 8 Approached for money 8 Urinating and vomiting in street 6 Aggressive and intimidating youths 4 Damaging items 2 Boy racers 2
Comparison between the two areas show many similarities but the issue of “aggressive and intimidating youths” appears to feature more often in Dorchester than Bridport.
4 Appendix 2
Dorchester The Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 allowed councils to designate an area where it was satisfied that a nuisance, associated with drinking alcohol, was being caused to the public in that area. These are called Designated Public Place Orders (DPPOs). The effect of a DPPO is that it is an offence if a person fails to comply with a request from a police officer to stop drinking any intoxicating liquor and/or fails to hand over to that officer any containers of such liquor in the designated area. There is a current DPPO for Dorchester town centre.
It is proposed to continue this measure for Dorchester town centre by including it in the new PSPO, but to expand the area covered to include Brewery Square and Dorchester South train station.
Q4 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the proposal to include a controlled alcohol zone in the PSPO, as outlined above, in public spaces in designated areas of Dorchester town centre? (This would include parks, streets and other public places but not public houses or licensed beer gardens or pavement cafes).
Q4 Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Don’t agree agree or disagree know/no disagree opinion
To what extent do you agree 45% 31% 5% 6% 3% 10% or disagree with the proposal to include a controlled alcohol zone in the PSPO, as outlined above, in public spaces in designated areas of Dorchester town centre
555 people responded to this question. Of them 422 (76%) Strongly agree/Agree with the proposal and 52 (9%) Disagree/Strongly disagree with the proposal. This gives a strong net agreement figure of +65. Both Owermoigne and Broadmayne Parish Council strongly agreed with this proposal.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal diverge from the results as a whole.
5 Appendix 2
9% Disagree/Strongly disagree Strongly agree/ 76% Agree
Q5 Do you have any additional comments in relation to this proposal?
Comments from those disagreeing with the proposal Issue % Overkill 29 Police have sufficient powers 24 Will spoil everyday activities 24 No evidence of the problem 18 Not a deterrent 6
There were 77 people who commented on the proposals. 20 people who disagreed with the proposal commented. The table above shows most of the comments related to the fact they saw the PSPO as overkill, particularly when they felt the police already had sufficient powers. There were also some concerns that the PSPO would spoil normal everyday activities such as having a picnic in the Borough Gardens. There were 38 comments from those supporting the proposal. These covered a wide range of issues but the biggest single item was the need for the police to enforce the restrictions. Several people also suggested other areas that could be included.
6 Appendix 2
Bridport There is a current DPPO for Bridport town centre and West Bay, making it an offence to fail to comply with a request by an authorised officer (for example a police officer) to cease drinking or surrender alcohol in the designated area. It is proposed to continue this measure for Bridport town centre only (not West Bay) by including it in the PSPO . Q6 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the proposal to include a controlled alcoholzone in the PSPO, as outlined above, in public spaces in Bridport town centre? (This would include parks, streets and other public places but not public houses or licensed beer gardens or pavement cafes). Q6 Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Don’t agree agree or disagree know/no disagree opinion
To what extent do you agree 38% 26% 5% 5% 4% 22% or disagree with the proposal to include a controlled alcoholzone in the PSPO, as outlined above, in public spaces in Bridport town centre? (This would include parks, streets and other public places but not public houses or licensed beer gardens or pavement cafes).
519 people responded to this question.115 of them didn’t know or had no opinion. However of those with an opinion 334(64%) Strongly agree/Agree with the proposal and 42 (8%) Disagree/Strongly disagree with the proposal. This gives a strong net agreement figure of +56. Both Owermoigne and Broadmayne Parish Council strongly agreed with this proposal.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal diverge from the results as a whole.
7 Appendix 2
8% Disagree/Strongly disagree Strongly agree/ 64% Agree
8 Appendix 2
Q7 To what extent do you agree or disagree with the proposal not to include a controlled alcohol zone in the PSPO, in public spaces in West Bay?
Q7 Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Don’t agree agree or disagree know/no disagree opinion
To what extent do you 10% 10% 12% 23% 22% 23% agree or disagree with the proposal not to include a controlled alcohol zone in the PSPO, in public spaces in West Bay?
517 people responded to this question.120 of them didn’t know or had no opinion. However of the total respondents 104 (20%) Strongly agree/Agree with the proposal and 233 (45%) Disagree/Strongly disagree with the proposal. This give a strong net agreement figure of - 25. This demonstrates a significant proportion did not agree with the proposal to exclude West Bay. Broadmayne Parish Council strongly agreed with this proposal.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal divergence from the results as a whole.
45% Disagree/Strongly disagree Strongly agree/ 20% Agree
Q8 Do you have any additional comments in relation to this proposal?
There were just over 60 comments on these proposals. The comments covered a wide range of issues without a particular focus but the biggest single item was the desire to include West Bay in the PSPO with 12 specific mentions.. The second most prominent comment was about the importance of the police enforcing the restrictions.
9 Appendix 2
Begging
Q9 How much of a problem, if any, is begging to people living in, working in or visiting Dorchester and/or Bridport town centres?
Q9 Very big Fairly big Not a big Not a problem problem problem problem at all
Dorchester 11% 32% 47% 10% Town Centre
Bridport 5% 16% 59% 20% Town Centre
In this case the analysis of the responses was done after excluding those who responded “don’t’ know”. In Dorchester 122(22%) responded “don’t know” and in Bridport 232 (45%). These have been excluded in the table above. Of those who had a view on the scale of the problem there were 427people with a view about Dorchester and 286 with a view about Bridport. The percentages above show 43% felt begging in Dorchester to be a very big or fairly big problem whilst 57% felt it was not a big problem or not a problem at all. However, those responding about Bridport felt the issue to be less of a problem with only 21% thinking begging in Bridport to be a very big or fairly big problem whilst 79% felt it was not a big problem or not a problem at all. Owermoigne Parish Council believe begging to be a Fairly big problem in Dorchester.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal divergence from the results as a whole for Dorchester but for Bridport a higher proportion of responses from disabled people (37% as opposed to 21%) suggested it was a Very big /Fairly big problem.
Dorchester Town 43.1 56.9 Centre
Very/Fairly big problem Not big/Not a problem
Bridport Town Centre 21.3 78.6
10 Appendix 2
Q10 Over the last 12 months how would you describe the affect that people begging has had on you, when you have been in Dorchester and/or Bridport town centres?
Q10 Seriously Fairly affected Not affected affected
Dorchester 7% 36% 57% Town Centre
Bridport 4% 22% 75% Town Centre
In this case the analysis of the responses was done after excluding those who responded “Not applicable”. In Dorchester 92 (17%) responded “not applicable” and in Bridport 196 (39%). The table above exludes the not applicable responses.
Of those who had a view on the scale of the problem in Dorchester 43% said they were personally affected whilst 57% said they were unaffected. Of those who had a view on the scale of the problem in Bridport 25% said they were personally affected whilst 75% said they were unaffected. Hence the figures show people in both town are affected by the issue of begging but the problems seems to be more significant in Dorchester rather than Bridport. Owermoigne Parish Council felt fairly affected by begging in Dorchester.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal divergence from the results as a whole.
Bridport Town Centre 25.4 74.6
Seriously affected/Fairly affected Not affected
Dorchester Town Centre 42.6 57.4
11 Appendix 2
The council is considering bringing in a measure to deter begging. This measure means that no one will be able to make verbal, non-verbal or written requests for goods, money or donations, unless they are authorised at an appropriate location (for example authorised charity collections).
Q11 Dorchester To what extent do you agree or disagree with the use of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) to deter begging, as outlined above, in public spaces in Dorchester town centre? Q11 Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Don’t agree agree or disagree know/no disagree opinion
To what extent do you agree 39% 28% 11% 7% 7% 7% or disagree with the use of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) to deter begging, as outlined above, in public spaces in Dorchester town centre? 555 people responded to this question with only 7% having no opinion. Of the total respondents 375 (68%) Strongly agree/Agree with the proposal and 76 (14%) Disagree/Strongly disagree with the proposal. This gives a strong net agreement figure of +54. Both Owermoigne and Broadmayne Parish Council strongly agreed with this proposal.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal divergence from the results as a whole.
14% Disagree/Strongly disagree Strongly agree/ 68% Agree
12 Appendix 2
Q12 Do you have any additional comments in relation to this proposal? There were 105 comments on this proposal, 21 of the comments were from those who disagreed/strongly disagreed with the proposal. These comments are summarised below.
Comments from those who disagree/strongly disagree with Dorchester PSPO % Not dealing with the real problem 33 Beggars need help not criminalisation 15 Not a major issue 12 Police powers are sufficient 12 Other 12 Begging not a problem but aggression is but this can be dealt with 9 Part of modern life 3 Wrong - need compassion 3
13 Appendix 2
Q13 Bridport -To what extent do you agree or disagree with the use of a PSPO to deter begging, as outlined above, in public spaces in Bridport town centre?
Q13 Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Don’t agree agree or disagree know/no disagree opinion
To what extent do you 28% 23% 9% 7% 7% 26% agree or disagree with the use of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) to deter begging, as outlined above, in public spaces in Bridport town centre? 525 people responded to this question but a high proportion (26%) had no opinion. Overall 51% agreed or strongly agreed with the proposal. However if you take out those who had no opinion, 69% strongly agreed/Agreed whilst 19% Disagreed/strongly disagreed, giving a net agreement of +50. Broadmayne Parish Council strongly agreed with this proposal.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal divergence from the results as a whole.
19% Disagree/Strongly disagree Strongly agree/ 69% Agree
14 Appendix 2
Q14 Do you have any additional comments in relation to this proposal?
There were 64 comments on this proposal, 22 of the comments were from those who disagreed/strongly disagreed with the proposal. These comments are summarised below.
Comments from those who disagree/strongly disagree with Bridport PSPO % Beggars need help not criminalisation 20 Other 16 Not dealing with the real problem 12 Not a major issue 12 Begging not a problem but aggression is but this can be dealt with 12 Wrong - need compassion 12 Police powers are sufficient 8 Part of modern life 8
15 Appendix 2
Feeding of gulls
Q15 How much of a problem, if any, is the feeding of gulls to people living in, working in or visiting West Bay and/or Lyme Regis?
Q15 Very big Fairly big Not a big Not a problem problem problem problem at all
West Bay 43% 37% 15% 5%
Lyme Regis 50% 34% 12% 4%
Of the total respondents quite a few understandably only had a view on one town or the other or none at all. The table above shows the results excluding those who responded “don’t know”. 380 responded with a view on West Bay and 345 on Lyme Regis.
Of those who responded with a view 80% felt there was a very big or fairly big problem in West Bay and 84% in Lyme Regis. At the same time only 20% felt it was not a big problem or not a problem at all in West Bay and 16% in Lyme. Owermoigne Parish Council feel that the feeding of gulls is a fairly big problem in West bay and Lyme Regis. Lyme Regis Town Council feel that the feeding of gulls is a fairly big problem in Lyme. . Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal divergence from the results as a whole.
West Bay 80.2 19.8
Very/Fairly big problem Not big/Not a problem
Lyme Regis 84.3 15.7
Q16 Has the feeding of gulls affected you in a positive or negative way over the last 12 months, when you have been in West Bay and/or Lyme Regis?
16 Appendix 2
Q16 Positive affect Negative affect Not affected
West Bay 10% 52% 38%
Lyme Regis 9% 54% 37%
397 responded with a view on West Bay and 360 on Lyme Regis. Of those who responded 52% felt they experienced a negative affect in West Bay and 54% in Lyme Regis. At the same time only 10% felt there was a positive affect in West Bay and 9% in Lyme Regis. Over a third of people responded that they had not been affected. Lyme Regis Town Council felt there was a negative affect and say they have received complaints about seagulls on a regular basis in the summer season.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed a higher percentage of disabled people felt the feeding of gull has a positive affect (16% positive affect in West Bay compared to 10% overall and 18% positive in Lyme compared to 9% overall) than the responses as a whole.
West Bay 9.8 51.9 38.2
Positive affect Negative affect No affect
Lyme Regis 9.4 53.6 36.9
17 Appendix 2
Q17 If you haven’t been affected, please tell us how you’ve been affected?
There were 206 comments from people, explaining how they had been affected by gulls. As the table below show the vast majority of comments relate to the issues of having food stolen and the aggressive behaviour of the gulls.
Comments from those who feel they have been affected by gulls % Food stolen 33 Aggressive behaviour 31 Mess from excrement 9 Can't eat outside 9 Put off visiting 3 Other towns should be included as well 3 Noise 3 Scattered domestic waste 2 Visitors do not understand the problem 2 Other 2 Part of nature/visit to the seaside 1 Nesting on buildings issues 1 Can't relax outside 1 Resources needed to police 1
18 Appendix 2
The council is considering bringing in measures to prohibit the feeding of gulls. The council believes gulls in West Bay and Lyme Regis are causing a public nuisance. Feeding gulls encourages them to return to the area, contributing to the problem. Under this measure, people will be prohibited from feeding gulls in West Bay and in Lyme Regis, including dropping or distributing bird feed unless authorised.
West Bay
Q18 West Bay To what extent do you agree or disagree with the use of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) to control the feeding of gulls, as outlined above, in public spaces in West Bay? Q18 Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Don’t agree agree or disagree know/no disagree opinion
To what extent do you 56% 21% 4% 4% 3% 12% agree or disagree with the use of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) to control the feeding of gulls, as outlined above, in public spaces in West Bay?
546 people responded to this question. Over half of them strongly agreed with the proposal to introduce a PSPO to control the feeding of gulls. A total of 77% strongly agreed/agreed with the proposal and only 7% disagreed/strongly disagreed. This gives a net agreement figure of +70. Both Owermoigne and Broadmayne Parish Council strongly agreed with this proposal.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed a slightly higher percentage of disabled people strongly agreed/agreed with this proposal (89% compared to 77%) compared to the responses as a whole.
19 Appendix 2
7% Disagree/Strongly disagree Strongly agree/ 77% Agree
Q19 West Bay comments - Do you have any additional comments in relation to this proposal?
There were 73 comments on the West bay PSPO proposal regarding the feeding of gulls. The comments were very varied but popular issues raised included: further action needed as well the PSPO including a cull, issues in other towns too, problems with management/enforcement and others where people felt the measures were too draconian and gulls were just part of the seaside scene.
Comments from those about the proposed PSPO in West Bay % Other 29 More action needed like a cull 16 Issues in other towns as well 14 Difficult to enforce/manage 14 Too draconian 9 Gulls are part of the seaside 6 Remove all sources of food e.g bins 4 Difficult to change people's behaviour 3 Not easy to enforce on holiday makers 3 Educate people 3
20 Appendix 2
Lyme Regis
Q20 Lyme Regis To what extent do you agree or disagree with the use of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) to control the feeding of gulls, as outlined above, in public spaces in Lyme Regis?
Q20 Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Strongly Don’t agree agree or disagree know/no disagree opinion
To what extent do you 57% 19% 4% 3% 4% 14% agree or disagree with the use of a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) to control the feeding of gulls, as outlined above, in public spaces in Lyme Regis?
546 people responded to this question. Over half of them strongly agreed with the proposal to introduce a PSPO to control the feeding of gulls in Lyme Regis. A total of 75% strongly agreed/agree with the proposal and only 7% disagreed/strongly disagreed. This gives a net agreement figure of +68. Both Owermoigne and Broadmayne Parish Council strongly agreed with this proposal.
Analysis of the responses of disabled people to this question showed minimal divergence from the results as a whole.
7% Disagree/Strongly disagree Strongly agree/ 75% Agree
21 Appendix 2
Q21 Lyme Regis comments - Do you have any additional comments in relation to this proposal?
Comments from those about the proposed PSPO in Lyme Regis % Difficult to enforce/manage 23 Other 17 Too draconian 12 Educate people 12 Remove all sources of food e.g. overflowing bins 12 More action needed like a cull 11 Better than having rats 5 The gulls are a health hazard 3 Feed gulls in other ways 3 Gulls are part of the seaside 3
There were 71 comments on the Lyme Regis PSPO proposal regarding the feeding of gulls. The comments were very varied but popular issues raised included: problems with management/enforcement further action needed as well the PSPO including a cull, More education needed, better waste management and others where people felt the measures were too draconian and gulls were just part of the seaside scene. Lyme Regis Town Council responded that enforcement of the PSPO must be delegated to town council enforcement officers. They also felt the area to which the PSPO relates must also include Theatre Square (outside Marine Theatre), which is currently not included in the proposed area.
22 Appendix 2
General Comments
Q22 If you have any additional comments or suggestions concerning Public Space Protection Orders (PSPOs) related to anti-social behaviour that are not addressed in this questionnaire please comment here. Any additional areas suggested will need to be consulted on (this would happen when the PSPO is reviewed in 3 years time).
There were 103 general comments. There were no particular themes coming through in the analysis as people had had an opportunity to comment on specific proposals throughout the survey. All the general comments can be read in the appendix.
Q23 The council has a duty to take into account the impact of decisions on people with protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010 (age, disability, gender, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy, maternity, race, religion or belief, and sexual orientation).
Are there any positive or negative impacts that you believe the council should take into account in the decision-making process in relation to protected characteristics? If so, please describe below, and suggest any ways in which the council could reduce or remove any potential negative impact or increase any positive impact.
There were in total 56 comments included in this section. However, many people appear to have misunderstood the specifics of the question and just included general comments, often repeating previous concerns. 13 responses specifically answered the question and these are summarised below. All responses are provided in the appendix.
Comments about the impact on those with protected characteristics % Some street drinkers/beggars possibly have mental health issues and then could be classed as disabled and the policy would negatively impact them 54 Could negatively affect young people 23 Could positively affect older people by protecting them 8 Any affect on religious activities in the street could have a negative impact on that particular group. 8 Disabled may be positively impacted by the proposals 8
23 Appendix 2
About You
Q24 A A A visitor A West Dorset A resident resident to Dorset District representative of West of Councillor of an Dorset Dorset organisation (other than West Dorset)
Are you… 90% 7% 2% 0% 1%
Q25 Official response Personal/professional view
Are you providing your 1% 99% organisation’s official response or a personal/professional view?
Q26 Male Female In Prefer not to another say way
Which of the 58% 38% 1% 3% following describes how you think of yourself?
24 Appendix 2
Q27 Yes No Prefer not to say
Do you consider 7% 87% 6% yourself to be disabled as set out in the Equality Act 2010?
People were asked which type of impairment applies to them. As people may have more than one type of impairment, they were asked to select all the impairments that apply to them. 55 people responded and the number of times each category was selected is included below:
Q28 number
Physical disability 25
Learning disability / difficulty 2
Long-standing illness or health condition 14
Mental health condition 7
Sensory impairment (hearing, sight or both) 6
Prefer not to say 0
Other 1
Q29 Under 18- 25- 35- 45-54 55-64 65 or Prefer 18 24 34 44 over not to say
25 Appendix 2
Which age group 0% 1% 2% 7% 13% 25% 47% 6% do you belong to?
Q30 Which of the following best (only those describes your ethnic origin represented are listed)
White British 88.3%
White Irish 1.1%
Gypsy/Romany or 0.2% Irish Traveller
Any other White 1.4% background
Black or Black 0.4% British - Caribbean
Mixed ethnic 0.2% background - White and Black African
Any other Mixed 0.4% background
Any other ethnic 0.2% background
Prefer not to say 7.6%
26