## Cabinet Report Report Title Public Spaces Protection Order - Marble Arch

| AGENDA STATUS:              | PUBLIC                        |
|-----------------------------|-------------------------------|
| Cabinet Meeting Date:       | 22 July 2020                  |
| Key Decision:               | Yes                           |
| Within Policy:              | Yes                           |
| Policy Document:            | No                            |
| Directorate:                | Community Safety & Engagement |
| Accountable Cabinet Member: | Cllr Anna King                |
| Ward(s)                     | Castle                        |

## 1. Purpose

1.1
To seek authority to undertake the statutory consultation with a view to making a further Public Spaces Protection Order ("PSPO") for Marble Arch, as set out in sections 59 to 68 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime & Policing Act 2014. A PSPO, which was originally made on 8 January 2018 and allowed the gating of the highway known as Marble Arch, which runs from Ash Street to Barrack Road, expires on 8 January 2021.

## 2. Recommendations

That Cabinet:

2.1
Delegates the Chief Executive to undertake a 12 week statutory public 
consultation in the terms set out in Appendix 4 on the proposal to renew the Public Spaces Protection Order (see Appendix 1) that allows the gating of the public highway known as Marble Arch that runs from Ash Street to Barrack Road.
2.2
Receives a further report, following completion of the statutory public 
consultation, which considers any representations received and, if appropriate 
seeks approval of the renewal, for a further 3 years, of the Public Spaces 
Protection Order.

## 3. Issues And Choices 3.1 Report Background

3.1.1
The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 provides Local 
Authorities and the Police with the powers to tackle anti-social behaviour and provide better protection for victims.
3.1.2
 PSPOs are designed to stop all individuals, or a specific group of persons, committing anti-social behaviour in a public space.  The criteria that must be satisfied when considering whether to make a PSPO is whether a particular activity or activities has or is likely to have a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality and that the activity is, or is likely to be, persistent or continuing in nature or that the activity is unreasonable and any restriction is justified.
3.1.3 For the proposed area to be restricted, there is a requirement for the Council 
to undertake a statutory public consultation exercise with the following: (a) The chief officer of police, and the local policing body for the area; (b) Whatever community representatives the local authority thinks it 
appropriate to consult;
(c) The owner or occupier of land within the area; (d) The parish council or community council (if any) for the area; and (e) The county council (if any) for the area.
3.1.4 PSPO's provide Councils with a flexible power to implement local restrictions 
to address a range of anti-social behaviour issues in public places in order to prevent future problems.  
3.1.5 It is important that PSPO's are used proportionately and that they are not seen 
to be targeting behaviour of the children/young people where there is a lack of tolerance and understanding by local people.
3.1.6 A PSPO can be made for a maximum of three years.  The legislation provides 
for the Order to be extended at the end of the period, but only for a further period of up to three years.  However, Orders can be extended more than once.  Local Authorities can increase or reduce the restricted area of an existing Order, amend or remove a prohibition or requirement, or add a new prohibition or requirement.  They can also discharge an Order.  The variation or discharge of an Order are subject to statutory consultation requirements.
3.1.7 Enforcement may be shared between the Council and the Police.  Breach of a 
PSPO is a criminal offence which can result in the issuing of a  Fixed penalty Notice (FPN) or a prosecution resulting in a fine of up to £1,000 on conviction. Enforcement can be undertaken by Council Officers, any person designated by a local authority for the purpose of issuing fines for breaches of a PSPO, and Police Officers.
3.1.8 Before making/renewing the Order, the local authority must notify people who 
are potentially affected by the proposed Order and notify them of how long they have to make representations.  Officers will then consider any representations made with the intention of bringing a report back to Cabinet.
3.1.9 The consultation will last 12 weeks and will be carried out on Survey Monkey 
via the Council's website.  Adjacent properties, businesses and local residents groups will be directly contacted to make them aware of the proposed order. Others will be notified via the Council's website, Facebook and Twitter. Posters will also be put up on site inviting representations.

## 3.2 Issues

3.2.1 Marble Arch had been a hotspot for street drinking, fly tipping and anti-social 
behaviour for many years.  A Police Environmental Audit carried out in 2010 recommended gating this highway but, at that time it was not viable due to previous legislation making it cost prohibitive.  However, since the making of the PSPO restricting access to Marble Arch in 2018, the levels of crime and anti-social behaviour have reduced. (See Appendix 3 - statement of support from area Sergeant Rodney Williams, Northamptonshire Police)
3.2.2 Police had difficulty with dealing with the street drinkers in the area due to the 
layout and with another route being available (Temple Bar) a few hundred 
yards away, making it easy for the drinkers to evade the police and support 
agencies.
3.2.3 Marble Arch has easy access through Ash Street making it an ideal place for 
fly tippers. 
3.2.4 In order to make, or renew, a PSPO the legislation states that the Council 
needs to consult with anyone who could legitimately use that highway as well as those who live nearby.
3.2.5 A PSPO can only be made for a period of 3 years.  At any time before expiry 
the Council can extend a PSPO by up to 3 years following consultation with the local Police and community representatives as the Council thinks appropriate.
3.2.6 The current PSPO expires on 8th January 2021, a new Order needs to be 
made prior to the expiry date, or the gates will have to be removed as agreed with Highways.

## 3.2 Choices (Options)

3.3.1 Do nothing and allow the Order to expire. The gates will then need to be 
removed, which is a requirement from Highways.  This will incur a cost and will allow the original anti-social behaviour to return. If this option were chosen, it is highly likely the anti-social behaviour and criminal activity would return to the area.   If this option were chosen it would be opposed by Northamptonshire Police.
3.3.1 Authorise the Chief Executive to undertake a statutory consultation to renew 
the PSPO for the gating of this area for a further 3 years from 8th January 
2021 in the terms set out in Appendix 4.  The Order has given the local community a period of respite from regular anti-social behaviour and would be the favoured option.  

## 4. Implications (Including Financial Implications) 4.1 Policy

4.1.1 The approach supports the multi-agency Countywide Anti-Social Behaviour 
Policy that Northampton Borough Council is signed up to.

## 4.2 Resources And Risk

4.2.1 A PSPO can be enforced by both the Police and Council. The Council will be 
the agency to process the Fixed Penalty Notices (FPN's), regardless of which agency issues them.  
4.2.2 If the Order is allowed to expire there will be a cost incurred to remove the 
gates.  The gates were bespoke to the area and may not be able to be reused.
4.2.3 Any income generated by payment of FPN's must be directed back into 
management of the PSPO process.

## 4.3 Legal

4.3.1 A PSPO is in effect an enforceable form of byelaw with fixed penalty notice 
powers attached. A PSPO has the potential to enhance local control over a range of matters thus returning greater control to District Councils. PSPOs replaced the previous gating orders.  Such orders remain in place for 3 years following commencement and then must be renewed if a further PSPO is required
4.3.2 A Public Spaces Protection Order can be made by a Local Authority under 
section 59 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014) if satisfied on reasonable grounds that two conditions are met.  that the first condition is that; (i)
Activities carried on in a public place within the authority's area have had a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality; and
(ii)
It is likely that activities will be carried on in a public place within that area and that they will have such an effect
The second condition is that the effect, of the activities is, or is likely to be of a persistent or continuing nature such as to make the activities unreasonable and therefore justifies the restrictions imposed by the notice.   

4.3.3 Under the Act there is a requirement for a local authority to carry out a 
statutory consultation and undertake the prescribed publicity and notification before the making of any PSPO.
Statutory consultation means consulting with –

(a) The chief officer of police, and the local policing body for the police area 
that includes the restricted area
(b) Whatever community representatives the local authority thinks it 
appropriate to consult
(c) The owner or occupier of land within the restricted area
Statutory publicity means - (a) In the case of proposed or variation, publishing the text of it Statutory notification means notifying the following authorities of the proposed order

(a) The parish council or community council (if any) for the area that includes 
the restricted area
(b) In the case of a public spaces protection order made or to be made by a 
district council in England, the county council (if any) for the area that 
includes the restricted area  
4.3.4 The making of a PSPO can be challenged in the High Court by any interested 
person within 6 weeks of the making of the Order, Anyone who is directly affected by the making of the PSPO can challenge the order. 
4.3.5 A challenge can be made on the basis that the Council does not have the 
power to make the order, or that the particular prohibitions or requirements are unnecessary or that procedurally the order is defective.
4.3.6 When making a PSPO the Council must have particular regard to the rights of
freedom of expression and freedom of assembly set out in the European
Convention on Human Rights

## 4.4   Equality And Health

4.4.1 Incidents of ASB will continue to be dealt with in line with our equalities 
framework. 
4.4.2 These legislative changes are designed to have a significant community 
impact in preventing and limiting anti-social behaviour.
4.4.3 An Equality Impact Assessment has been carried out. See Appendix 2.

## 4.5   Consultees (Internal And External)


Head of Community Safety & Engagement, NBC

Legal Services

Environmental Health & Licensing Manager, NBC

Community Safety Partnership Manager

Northants Police

Cabinet Member for Community Safety, NBC

Highways Authority/ KIER WSP

## 4.6  How The Proposals Deliver Priority Outcomes

4.6.1 One of the Council's priorities is "invest in safer, cleaner neighbourhoods" and 
the PSPO has the potential to contribute towards this priority.

## 4.7  Other Implications

4.7.1 Information technology - use of the Council's website and social media 
channels to undertake part of the consultation. 

## 5. Background Papers

5.1  
Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime & Policing Act 2014
5.2  
Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014: Reform of Anti-Social 
Behaviour Powers Statutory Guidance for Frontline Professionals
5.3
PSPO - Marble Arch 8 January 2018
Appendices Appendix 1 - PSPO Marble Arch 2018 Appendix 2 - Equality Impact Assessment Appendix 3 - Statement of Support from Sergeant Rod Williams, Northamptonshire              
Police
Appendix 4 - Proposed consultation questions

## Appendix 2 - Equality Impact Assessment Equality Impact Assessment Part 1: Screening

When reviewing, planning or providing services Northampton Borough Council needs to assess the impacts on people. Both residents and staff, of how it works - or is planning to - work (in relation to things like disability). It has to take steps to remove/minimise any harm it identifies. It has to help people to participate in its services and public life. "**Equality Impact Assessments" (EIAs)** prompt people to think things through, considering people's different needs in relation to the law on equalities. The first stage of the process is known as 'screening' and is used to come to a decision about whether and why further analysis is - or is not - required. EIAs are published in line with transparency requirements. A helpful guide to equalities law is available at: www.northampton.gov.uk/equality. A few notes about the laws that need to be considered are included at the end of this document. Helpful questions are provided as prompts throughout the form.

| 1                                       |
|-----------------------------------------|
| policy/activity/project/practice        |
| Public Places Protection Order - Marble |
| Arch- renewal of Order                  |

## 2. Screening Undertaken (Please Complete As Appropriate)

| Director of Service                      | George Candler                  |
|------------------------------------------|---------------------------------|
| Vicki Rockall                            | Lead Officer for developing the |
| policy/activity/practice                 |                                 |
| Head of Community Safety &               |                                 |
| Engagement, NBC                          |                                 |
| Other people involved in the screening   |                                 |
| (this may be people who work for NBC or  |                                 |
| a related service or people outside NBC) |                                 |
| Legal Services                           |                                 |
| Finance, LGSS                            |                                 |
| Environmental Health & Licensing         |                                 |
Manager, NBC Environmental Services Manager, NBC Northants Police Cabinet Member for Community Safety & Engagement, NBC Highways, KIER WSP

## 3. Brief Description Of Policy/Activity/Project/Practice: Including Its Main Purpose, Aims, Objectives And Projected Outcomes, And How These Fit In With The Wider Aims Of The Organisation.

A Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) allows a local authority to introduce a 
series of measures into a defined locality. 
The PSPO allowed the gating of the highway known as Marble Arch, a hotspot for 
anti-social behaviour for many years.
Gating Marble Arch has made it more difficult for offenders to evade the police.  
Levels of criminal activity and anti-social behaviour have consequently dropped.
This is a legal order that can last for up to three years and it will prohibit a number 
of anti-social behaviour activities in the area including street drinking and flytipping. 
The project is to have the Order extended for a further 3 years, subject to the 
result of public consultation.
There is an alternative route, Temple Bar, 100 yards from and running parallel to 
Marble Arch.
If an element of this order is breached, the outcome could be that the individual is 
issued with a fixed penalty notice for £100 or fined up to a maximum of £1000 if at 
court. 

## 4 Relevance To Equality And Diversity Duties

A Public Spaces Protection Order is designed to stop all individuals or a specific group of persons committing anti-social behaviour in a public space.  This Order allows gating of a highway known as Marble Arch.  This highway is currently for pedestrian through access only.  There is a parallel pedestrian through access only highway, known as Temple Bar, 100 yards away. If you have indicated there is a negative impact on any group, is that impact: No - all individuals/sections of the community will be dealt with in the same manner. Incidents of ASB will continue to be dealt with in line with our equalities framework Legal? N/A Please explain: 

## 5 Evidence Base For Screening Equality Human Rights Commission

http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/resources/case-studies-of-howorganisations-are-using-the-duties/case-studies-equality-impact-assessments/ Section 72 of the Anti-Social Behaviour and Policing Act 2014 requires the Cabinet as decision maker to pay particular regard to rights of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly set out in articles 10 (the right to freedom of expression) and 11 (freedom of assembly and association) of the European Convention on Human Rights in considering the making any such order.  The making of the said order is considered to be proportionate and will fulfil a legitimate aim of curbing anti-social behaviour in public places for the benefit of the law abiding majority and hence will not infringe article 11 ECHR.

## 6 Requirements Of The Equality Duties:

(remember there's a note to remind you what they are at the end of this form and more detailed information at www.northampton.gov.uk/equality) Will there be/has there been consultation with all interested parties?


If Cabinet authorises the consultation period the following will be consulted:-
- A 12 week online public consultation via an open access online survey 
using 'Survey Monkey' Councils social media accounts
- Businesses adjacent to Marble Arch - Councillors - Businesses - Community Safety Partnership - Council Officers - Northamptonshire Office of Police & Crime Commissioner - Northamptonshire Police - Northamptonshire County Council - Community Forums - Residents Panel - Members of the public - Local press and media channels - Town Centre BID -

## Are Proposed Actions Necessary And Proportionate To The Desired Outcomes?

Yes/No  Public Spaces Protection Order is designed to stop all individuals or a specific group of persons committing anti-social behaviour in a public space

## Where Appropriate, Will There Be Scope For Prompt, Independent Reviews And Appeals Against Decisions Arising From The Proposed Policy/Practice/Activity?

Yes/No  The implementation of the PSPO can be challenged by any interested person within 6 weeks of the making of the Order, the challenge is made at the High Court. Anyone who is directly affected by the making of the PSPO can challenge the 

## Order Does The Proposed Policy/Practice/Activity Have The Ability To Be Tailored To Fit Different Individual Circumstances?

Yes/No Public Spaces Protection Orders provide the opportunity to address specific problems in specific areas and create an 'Order' to enable appropriate and proportionate action to be taken.  The Order has been successful in achieving this since January 2018. Where appropriate, can the policy/practice/activity exceed the minimum legal equality and human rights requirements, rather than merely complying with them? The making of the said order is considered to be proportionate and will fulfil a legitimate aim of curbing anti-social behaviour in public places for the benefit of the law abiding majority and hence will not infringe article 11 ECHR.

## From The Evidence You Have And Strategic Thinking, What Are The **Key Risks** (The Harm Or 'Adverse Impacts') **And Opportunities** (Benefits And Opportunities To Promote Equality) This Policy/Practice/Activity Might Present?

| Risks (Negative)              | Opportunities (Positive)   |
|-------------------------------|----------------------------|
| Race                          | There is no evidence that  |
| the 'Order' will impact on    |                            |
| any specific person based     |                            |
| on their race                 |                            |
| Disability                    | Mental Health issues and   |
| physical disability will be   |                            |
| taken into account by         |                            |
| officers.                     |                            |
|                               |                            |
| The 'Order' is more likely    |                            |
| to have the opposite effect   |                            |
| and encourage those that      |                            |
| are drug/alcohol              |                            |
| dependant to engage with      |                            |
| the support that is           |                            |
| available and this in turn    |                            |
| will deliver health benefits. |                            |
| The restriction on the        |                            |
| consumption of alcohol        |                            |
| could also affect those       |                            |
| that are alcohol              |                            |
| dependant.  The proposed      |                            |
| 'Order' will not bring in any |                            |
| new powers in this area       |                            |
| and will simply replace the   |                            |
| existing Designated Public    |                            |
| Spaces Protection Order.      |                            |
Gender or Gender Identity/Gender Assignment
There is no evidence that the 'Order' will impact on any specific person based on their gender
Pregnancy and Maternity (including breastfeeding)
There is no evidence that the 'Order' will impact on any specific person based on pregnancy or maternity. If required pregnant women will be referred into 
safeguarding mechanisms
Sexual Orientation
There is no evidence that the 'Order' will impact on any specific person based on their sexual orientation
Age (including children, youth, midlife and older people)
Young people will be referred into safeguarding mechanisms.  In some cases, parent/guardian of under 16's will be spoken to
Religion, Faith and Belief
There is no evidence that 
the 'Order' will impact on any specific person based on their beliefs or religion
Human Rights
Some people may feel the consultation process will provide the opportunity to capture their views.
The 'Order' has been proposed due to the volume of incidents that are occurring that are having a significant impact on the peoples quality of life.  The introduction of this 'Order' will have a positive impact on residents, businesses, and 

visitors to the town.

## 7 Proportionality

All cases will be treated on an individual basis, and any decisions reached will be within existing legislative guidelines.  Use of the PSPO powers and advice given will be recorded in pocket notebooks and on ECIN's data base.  The information will be analysed to determine whether the implementation of the powers has had a disproportionate effect upon the equality factors. Enforcement action will always be seen as a last resort.  Through the multi-agency groups and individual case management, support and intervention will continue to be offered.

## 8 Decision

Set out the rationale for deciding whether or not to proceed to full impact assessment Full Equality Impact Assessment is not required as all sections of the community are treated the same. The proposed restrictions will impact positively on people whose protective characteristics are impacted upon by the anti-social behaviour the order is designed to address Date of Decision: We judge that a full impact assessment is not necessary since there are no identified groups affected by these changes. 

## 1. Equality Duties To Be Taken Into Account In This Screening Include:

Prohibited Conduct under The Equality Act 2010 including: Direct discrimination (including by association and perception e.g. carers); Indirect discrimination; Pregnancy and maternity discrimination; Harassment; third party harassment; discrimination arising from disability. Public Sector Duties (Section 149) of the Equality Act 2010 for NBC and services provided on its behalf: (due to be effective from 4 April 2011) NBC and services providing public functions must in providing services have due regard to the need to:  eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation; advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations between different groups. 'Positive action' permits proportionate action to overcome disadvantage, meet needs and tackle under-representation. Rights apply to people in terms of their "Protected Characteristics": Age; Gender; Gender Assignment; Sexual Orientation; Disability; Race; Religion and Belief; Pregnancy; Maternity. But Marriage and Civil Partnership do not apply to the public sector duties. Duty to "advance equality of opportunity": The need, when reviewing, planning or providing services/policies/practices to assess the impacts of services on people in relation to their 'protected characteristics', take steps to remove/minimise any negative impacts identified and help everyone to participate in our services and public life. Equality Impact Assessments remain best practice to be used. Sometimes people have particular needs e.g. due to gender, race, faith or disability that need to be addressed, not ignored. NBC must have due regard to the **duty to make reasonable adjustments** for people with disabilities. NBC must encourage people who share a protected characteristic to participate in public life or any other activity in which their participation is too low. Duty to 'foster good relations between people' This means having due regard to the need to **tackle prejudice** (e.g. where people are picked on or stereotyped by customers or colleagues because of their ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation, etc) and **promote understanding**. Lawful Exceptions **to general rules:** can happen where action is proportionate to achieve a legitimate aim and not otherwise prohibited by anything under the Equality Act 2010. There are some special situations (see Ch 12 and 13 of the Equality Act 2010 Statutory Code of Practice - Services, Public Functions and Associations).

## 2. National Adult Autism Strategy (Autism Act 2009; Statutory Guidelines) Including:

3. to improve how services identify and meet needs of adults with autism and their families. 4. Human Rights include: 5. Rights under the European Convention include not to be subjected to degrading **treatment**; 
right to a fair trial (civil and criminal issues); **right to privacy** (subject to certain exceptions e.g. national security/public safety, or certain other specific situations); freedom of conscience (including religion and belief and rights to manifest these limited only by law and as necessary for public safety, public order, protection of rights of others and other specified situations); **freedom of expression** (subject to certain exceptions); freedom of peaceful assembly and to join trade unions (subject to certain exceptions); right not to be subject to unlawful discrimination (e.g. sex, race, colour, language, religion, political opinion, national or social origin); **right to peaceful enjoyment of own possessions** (subject to certain exceptions e.g. to secure payment of taxes or other contributions or penalties); right to an education; **right to hold free elections by secret ballot**. The European Convention is given effect in UK law by the Human Rights Act 1998.

## Appendix 3 Statement Of Support From Sergeant Rod Williams, Northamptonshire Police

I am a Sgt on the Central Neighbourhood Policing team here in Northampton and have specific responsibility for all areas within Castle Ward which include Semilong, Spring Boroughs and the Mounts. I attend meetings with partner agencies and locals and discuss concerns with a view of resolving the highlighted issues that would potentially affect the stability of the area. I have had this responsibility for the last eight years and in that time I feel the adopted multi agency approach of dealing with issues has gone a long way in maintaining the stability within the area and reducing the frequency and regularity of Anti-social behaviour reports. The decision to install gates on the Marble Arch alleyway/cut through was a decision which has had a significant impact on the locals allowing them to have a degree of normality in their everyday lives. This has allowed them to go about their normal lives without feeling intimidated or threatened which can be evidenced by businesses in close proximity. The installation of the gates has also resulted in a reduction in ASB reports and criminality and has prevented large groups from congregating which in turn has resulted in a reduction of discarded needles being recovered and reports of people seen defecating and urinating. I have been extremely happy with the overall impact on criminality and ASB the installation of the gates has had and would oppose any decision to alter or remove them from their current location. Sgt Rodney Williams Northamptonshire Police 

## Appendix 4 Proposed Consultation Questions

Q1 Do you think anti-social behaviour is an issue in the area of Marble Arch? Q2 Have you experienced any anti-social behaviour in this area? Q3  How close to Marble Arch do you….

| Within 50m radius   | 50-100 m radius   | Farther than 100m   |
|---------------------|-------------------|---------------------|

Live Work Q4  How often do you pass through the area of Marble Arch? Q5 Do you support the continued closure of Marble Arch for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week? Q6  Do you agree Temple Bar is an acceptable alternative route to March Arch?  (see map) Q7  Do you have any other comments to add?