Issue - meetings

Issue - meetings

Graffiti prevention and removal

Meeting: 27/03/2017 - Scrutiny Committee (Item 107)

107 Graffiti prevention pdf icon PDF 294 KB


Background Information

In April 2016 the Committee considered how the Council reacts to and removes unwanted graffiti. The Scrutiny Committee requested a separate report on proactive initiatives to prevent and reduce unwanted graffiti in the city. 

Why is it on the agenda?

For the Scrutiny Committee to receive a briefing on initiatives to reduce unwanted graffiti in the city.  The Committee is asked to note and comment on the report.

Who has been invited to comment?

Councillor Dee Sinclair, Board Member for Community Safety, Richard Adams, Community Safety Service Manager and Alison Cassidy, Anti-Social Behaviour Investigation Team - Case Manager will attend to answer the Committee’s questions.



The Anti-Social Behaviour Investigation Team - Case Manager presented the report. She said it was difficult to catch people who tag as you need to catch them in the act. Her focus was on the proactive approach to graffiti and she had been working with street artist to find them free wall space within the city to paint street art. Artists tend to self-police and once something is considered street art, it is not often defaced.


The Committee discussed the following:


They asked why people can’t be identified by their tag. The Anti-Social Behaviour Investigation Team - Case Manager said the police have investigated doing this but a lot of people tag to acknowledge other people.


They asked about the ongoing maintenance costs of street art. If it isn’t maintained over time places look shabby.   The Anti-Social Behaviour Investigation Team - Case Manager agreed and said that some artists have applied for money get shabby artwork re-painted.


There is some work being done to encourage children to produce street art rather than tagging.


There is currently no formal policy or agreed consultation process for deciding the type of street art being produced or where it should go. Projects have been consulted on in an ad hoc manner as funding for projects comes from different sources and involves different artists. Creating a consistent policy across of the city is something for officers to look at.


They questioned whether the Council was reacting fast enough to tagging. The committee requested an update on the Council’s role in removing tagging.


The Committee noted the report.


The Committee requested a report on how the Council reacted to the negative elements of graffiti.


That a policy which encourages engagement with residents before art is commission and outlines how the long term maintenance of sites will be funded be created.


The Committee asked officers to email all members to:

·         Suggest spaces or walls in their ward that could be used by street artists.

·         Talk to residents about appropriate spaces/ what they would like to see produced

·         Use CIL money when appropriate to fund street art projects in their ward.