Sutherland Safety Audit Report
Sutherland Safety Audit Report
Introduction
The Sutherland Commercial Business District Community Safety Audit was held on 27
August 2006, as a response to concerns voiced by some members of the local
community. It was a joint initiative of the Sutherland Shire Community Crime Prevention
and Safety Committee and local residents. The safety audit involved background research
including a business survey, resident comments, demographic examination and a
reported crime profile of the target area in addition to a physical examination of the CBD
and other key areas. The recommendations in this audit report are designed to be a
starting point for further investigation and action rather than the complete solution.
Community Safety is a key area of interest for residents of the Sutherland Shire as
identified in “Our Shire Our Future – Our Guide to Shaping the Shire to 2030”. In 2005, the
Sutherland Shire Community Plan 2005-2010 was endorsed. The plan is based on official
crime statistics and comprehensive local consultation in which residents identified that
shopping areas and public space could be a source of fear of crime. As a result, the plan
included a strategy to audit main suburban centres throughout the Sutherland Shire.
Although the Community Safety Audit was coordinated by Sutherland Shire Council, with
the invaluable assistance of a wide rage of residents and other stakeholders as evident in
the audit participant list.
Participants
Invitations to participate in the Community Safety Audit were distributed through a wide
range of community groups, local businesses and residents. Effort was made to
encourage participation from a diverse range of people to reflect the differing needs and
ways that people use public space.
The audit teams that were formed on the night were comprised of a police officer with
training in Safer By Design (4), Councils staff (4), Councillor (1), Local MP (1) and local
businesses (4).
Contributors to this report included both direct participants in the safety audit and all those
who provided comment in the form of workshops, letters, email or by telephone. A number
of key community organisations have been involved in the process. Sutherland Shire
Council, NSW Police Sutherland Local Area Command, the Sutherland Shire Crime
Prevention and Community Safety Committee, Shire Wide Youth Services and the Fire
Service were all represented at the audit.
What is a safety audit?
Community Safety Audits help identify areas which may stimulate fear of crime or criminal
opportunity. They give local residents a chance to survey public areas, and inform private
and public agencies of existing or potential problem areas that could reasonably be made
safer. This can then result in minimised opportunities for crime and anti-social behaviour
and an increased perception of safety. Community Safety Audits are based on the key
principles of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED). CPTED
encourages the application of design features, routine activities and space management
practices which alter conditions that create opportunities for disorderly and/or criminal
behaviour (Safer By Design, NSW Police, 1999).
Research shows that many offences occur as a result of opportunities made available to a
potential offender. CPTED seeks to remove or minimise these opportunities by either
creating the perception or the reality that the costs of committing the crime far outweigh
any potential benefits. This can be done in three ways:
There are three main principles within the CPTED framework. These are:
1. Surveillance
Studies have shown that natural and organised surveillance is capable of influencing
perceptions and fear of crime. This is achieved when legitimate space users are able to
see and be seen by others. Coupled with this is the concept of capable guardians. A
capable guardian is someone who would be willing to intervene, challenge or report an
incident or unauthorised use of an area.
2. Access Control
Access control is the management of pedestrian and vehicular movement used to
establish or maintain territory and to increase the effort required to commit crime. It uses
movement predictors such as pathways and roads to encourage safety in numbers and
employs both real and symbolic barriers to restrict or channel movement in a particular
area.
3. Territorial Reinforcement
A community’s sense of responsibility for public places and facilities increases the
likelihood of an individual acting as a capable guardian. This responsibility is enhanced
through design features, actual and symbolic barriers, space definition and activity
management strategies.
Space Management
The three principles of CPTED are underwritten by the concept of space management.
Space management is the complete circle of surveillance, access control, territoriality and
capable guardianship. It involves the control and care of public space by responsible
authorities and the legitimate users of that space.
Community Safety Audits utilise checklists or other forms to note any issues of concern
and relate potential solutions to CPTED principles. The audit results will therefore highlight
ways in which the built environment positively and negatively influences crime
opportunities and fear of crime.
Once a Community Safety Audit is completed, the notes of all participants and
contributors are collated and a report on the findings is developed. The report will often
include a range of potential remedies and community suggested solutions to the issues
raised. The report is made available to all key stakeholders in the targeted area and
copies are sent to those agencies responsible for implementing key recommendations. It
then becomes a community responsibility to ensure appropriate action is undertaken in all
reasonable areas of concern.
Audit Process
NSW Police Volunteer in Policing (ViPs) undertook a detailed Crime and Safety Survey
will all businesses in the Audit zones. Every business was invited to complete a survey
and to participate in the audit. After advertising the details regarding the audit, registration
to attend was opened, and contact details for other submissions were supplied to the local
community. Particular organisations were also individually approached and invitations for
representatives extended. This was to ensure, as much as possible, that the audit was
representative of all sections of the community including a wide range of ages,
occupations and viewpoints.
The audit was divided into two parts. The first being a daytime audit and the second was
an evening audit with a focus on lighting issues. The participants met at Council’s
Administration Building before each audit where a general briefing was held. The
participants then audited the entire zone as a group. A map of the audit area is included in
this report. Opportunity was allowed at the end of each audit for the participants to discuss
their observations and concerns and to decide on their personal priority areas. Evaluation
forms were also filled in at this time.
Audit Area
The main audit area was broken into 4 colour-coded zones (pink, blue, orange and green)
with an audit team assigned to each area. The same team completed both the day and
the night audit. Comment and recommendations for these areas are included in the main
body of this report. The following page contains a map if the audit area.
Audit Area Map
All participants were given an evaluation form at the debriefing. The majority of
participants completed the form and the results are outlined below. Participants were
asked to rate the quality of particular aspects of the audit. A total of 10 feedback forms
were recived. The average rating for each aspect is presented.
Rating scale 1 = extremely poor: 2.5 = poor: 5= neutral: 7.5 = good: 10 = extremely good
Item Average Rating/10
Advance / Advertising Notice 9.3
Audit location 9.0
Initial Briefing 9.1
Audit Form 9.2
Other handouts 9.1
Practical Material (pens, clipboards) 9.2
Refreshments 9.6
Debriefing 9.3
The results from the evaluation were overwhelmingly positive, and in general an
improvement on past audits.
The pre-audit briefing and practical materials were also well received by most participants.
The briefing allowed for all participants to be introduced, and the concepts of the audit to
be discussed.
The audit de-briefing and refreshments were also well received with the short break giving
all participants a chance to discuss issues with each other and decide on priorities for
action.
The main area where improvement from previous audits was required was the audit form,
and it had been substantially altered. The new forms were well received and will continue
to be used into the future.
Background Information
The unemployment rate in Sutherland was similar to Sutherland Shire in 2001 at about
4%. The unemployment rate remained fairly stable between 1996 and 2001, while the
Sutherland Shire also remained stable over this period.
Sutherland had a notable proportion of its population in less traditional households,
especially lone person (31%) and couple only households (28.2%). The basis for the
greater concentration of these household types relates to a number of things, such as the
much stronger share of flats, apartments and other higher density dwelling types, which
tends to attract smaller households.
Household income levels in 2001 for Sutherland relative to Sutherland Shire revealed a
lower share of high income households and a greater concentration of households at the
low income end.
The distribution of educational qualifications across the population of Sutherland in 2001
showed a highly educated workforce, with significant skills. About 44% of the population
noted some form of educational qualification, with the most significant being those people
with vocational qualifications.
The population of Sutherland is approximately 8,500 while the population of the entire
Sutherland LAC is approximately 110,600. This means that Sutherlands population is
roughly 7.7% of the population of the LAC.
STEALING
MALICIOUS
VEHICLE/VESSEL
ASSAULT
BREAK AND
ROBBERY
DAMAGE
ENTER
STOLEN
Stealing was the most reported crime in the suburb of Sutherland in 2006. Two hundred
and twenty nine (229) stealing offences were reported in Sutherland. Forty six per cent
(46%) of all stealing offences in Sutherland were further classified as steal from motor
vehicles. Sutherland Recorded 18% of all stealings, and 20% of all steal from motor
vehicle offences in the LAC
Malicious Damage was the second most reported crime in Sutherland in 2006 with two
hundred and five (205) incidents. Malicious Damage in Sutherland is most likely to occur
on a Friday or Saturday night. August recorded the most Malicious Damage during 2006.
Eighty five per cent (85%) of the Malicious Damage in Sutherland was to property and
fifteen percent (15%) was Graffiti. Sutherland recorded 12% of malicious damage in the
LAC.
Break and Enter. One hundred and forty eight (148) Break and Enter incidents were
reported in Sutherland in 2006. Break and Enter offences in Sutherland are most likely to
occur on a Thursday or Friday night. Sutherland recorded 18% of all Break and Enters in
the LAC
Other Offences Sutherland had a higher rate of assault than other suburbs within the LAC
(22% of recorded assaults). Sutherland also had a higher rate of Robbery than other
suburbs; however the number of offences is very low when compared with Sydney as a
whole
Business Safety Survey
The Sutherland Business Safety Survey was undertaken in the weeks leading up to the
Community Safety Audit. Volunteers in Policing from Sutherland Local Area Command
(LAC) went to every business in the audit area and spoke to the manager or owner if
available. If neither were available the survey and an invitation to participate in the audit
were left with a staff member. Businesses had the option of filling out the survey
immediately and returning it to the volunteer, or filling it out at a later time and returning it
via mail or fax. A total of 36 surveys were returned. The results are presented below.
Type of Business:
Service 10 Professional 12
Retail Goods 5 Café 1
Take away food 1 Other 5
Health and Beauty Industry 2
Staff levels
The vast majority of respondents ran small businesses with 75% employing between 1
and 5 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff. A total of 5 businesses had between 5 and 10 FTE
staff and 3 businesses had up to 21 FTE staff.
Crime Victimisation
Businesses were asked whether they had been a victim of particular types of crime in the
previous 12 months and how many times they had been victimised. No respondent
indicated that they had experienced vehicle theft or damage to vehicles. A total of 7
businesses indicated they had been a victim of attempted burglary, with three of those
businesses being victimised twice in the previous 12 months. A total of 12 instances of
break and enter were reported, however 7 of these occurred at the one business. Only 3
cases of personal injury or violence were reported and only incident of robbery. 18
incidents of theft were reported with 3 of those being staff-related. Once business reported
a case of arson. 22 cases of vandalism (not graffiti) were reported, with a broad range of
businesses being affected. The largest offence reported was graffiti, with 87% indicated
that they had been victimised at least once in the previous 12 months. The majority of
businesses thought that crime was most likely to occur on a Friday, Saturday or Sunday
night (58%) or weeknights (28%)
Reporting Crime
For every criminal incident businesses were asked whether they reported it to the police.
The following are the most significant results:
No damage to vehicle incidents were reported to police.
The majority of attempted burglary, and all actual burglaries were reported.
The 3 personal injury/violence and the single robbery were reported to police.
One third of the theft by employee offences and all other thefts were reported.
Less than half of the vandalism cases were reported to police.
Almost 80% of graffiti offences were not reported. This includes businesses which
state that they have been victimised “almost weekly” and “many times”.
The main reasons for not reporting crime to police were:
Small or no loss/damage 63%
No confidence in police 8%
Too time consuming 20%
Other reasons for not reporting included “not our responsibility’, not much police can do”
and “no witnesses or evidence”.
Impact on business
The crime, whether reported or not, had an impact on most businesses. One quarter of all
business noted that crime had increased their insurance premiums, whilst 14% stated that
crime damaged their business image. 11% of businesses stated that crime had disrupted
trading and another 11% indicated that they had changed the layout of their businesses in
response to crime. Lower staff morale due to crime was reported in 8% of cases and
another 8% stated that they had either lost business or postponed investment in their
business due to crime.
In spite of these negative impacts only 16% of businesses thought crime was a serious
problem, whilst 38% thought it was a problem, 25% thought it was a small problem and
17% thought it was no problem or they didn’t know.
Security Measures
Businesses were asked about the security measures they have in place. 10 respondents
chose not to answer this question and more than one answer was allowed. The most
popular form of security was a monitored alarms (70%), followed by computer security
devices (30%). Another 20% of businesses had duress alarms, business alarms or
camera surveillance, and a quarter had implemented some sort of security related staff
training. Other measures used included bars, and private security patrols. Less than 10%
of businesses sought advice from the Chamber of Commerce or local police. Only 5% of
businesses were aware of Council Community Crime Prevention and Safety Committee.
Priority Issues and recommendations
Although participants in the audit and other contributors were free to comment on any
aspect of Sutherland, participants were also asked to rate their top 3 concerns for priority
treatment.
Forby Sutherland Gardens Council Dense vegetation adjoining foot path Thinning out of vegetation to improve outlook.
Stage vegetation close to footpath
Forby Sutherland Gardens Council Signage shows “Shire Clerk” Update signage to display Administrative rules
Forby Sutherland Gardens Council Informal pathway off Eton Street Consider making ‘Formal Pathway’
Forby Sutherland SSC Vandalised garbage Bin Is there abetter location for the Bin?
Gardens/All garbage Bins
All Garbage bins outside SSC Internal bin can be easily removed and used Secure bins with padlock
Cripps & Cripps Real Est. destructively
Forby Sutherland Gardens SSC Missing sign on entrance to car park Replace sign
Corner garden ext to Cripps SSC Timber stakes marking cut water mains Place garden around to prevent people ‘tipping’
& Cripps Real Est.
Garden/vegetation outside SSC No guardianship – concealment Thinning out of vegetation or reduce height
Cripps & Cripps Old Princes
Hwy across shop fronts in
general
Eton Street Shops – in Various Businesses Lack of street nmbering – is an offence to ‘not Remind businesses of legislation
general display’
Better Choice Home Loans Better Choice Home Damaged sign face – looks poorly Contact business to repair
Loans
736 Eton Street, Sutherland Business Burnt out shop not well secured Request owners improve appearance of
building/boarding
Electricity Box outside ANZ Energy Australia Graffiti Contact owner to remove
Bank
Garden near Solitaire Neighbouring fast food Plastic bread delivery containers dumped in Garden Contact Eton Hot food request alternative
Jewellers/Eton Arcade stores arrangements
Eton Arcade Entrance Private businesses Graffiti on panels supporting roller shutter Contact to request removal
St. George Bank St. George Bank Glass Graffiti Contact business to rectify as will worsen
Australia Post Australia Post Lack of under awing lights Suggest Australia Post improve lighting
Sutherland Kebab house Sutherland kebab Intoxicated people loitering outside Suggest closing before licensed premises to
House prevent loitering.
Garbage Bin outside Kodak Neighbouring Businesses dumping rubbish next to bin Remind business owners these bins are not for
Express on Corner Businesses commercial use.
Curves Fitness centre – 39 Curves Fitness Double gate has gap of 20cms. – sufficient room to Request that gate be extended to reach the
Eton Street – Car park get underneath ground
Australia Post Car Park Australia Post Could be easily climbed Suggest Aust. Post increase fencing height
Fencing
Australia Post Car Park Australia Post Graffiti Request business have removed
Signage at front of Surgery – 2/27a Eton St Signage damaged and unstable – sign in ground Request owner to rectify damage
2/27a Eton Street, rear of driveway
Sutherland
Greendoor between 29 - 27 Private business Tagged Remove
Eton Street
Crossing opposite SSC No clear sign for pedestrians that this is a shared Investigate options for improvement
Entertainment Centre area
Rear Southside Elements Southside Elements Huge amount of rubbish dumped in loading zone Write to business
Rear Southside Elements Southside Elements Graffiti on brick wall, gate, display board & garage Request business to remove
door
ANZ – rear night safe ANZ No real surveillance – set back off street and Determine whether night safe still being used and
concealed in an alcove if it is - suggest they relocate or install camera to
front wall or close alcove off altogether.
Rearof Liquor Land Liquor Land Large bins, junk etc. in drive way – areas to hide Need some form of fencing or division to create
boundary – encourage business to implement.
Chemist – 9 Eton Street Chemist Graffiti on signage Request business to remove
Bushland next to 711 SSC Poor surveillance – could be used for underage Have bush, shrubs etc tinned out to allow
opposite Cripps & Cripps drinking/drugs etc – evidence and path worn surveillance.
through
711 711 Rubbish next to store in bushland Request they remove rubbish and also remove
graffiti
Public car park outside SCC Sphere lighting doesn’t throw enough light Investigate potential lighting improvements
administration area
Directors Car Park SCC Light closest to Credit Union entrance not working Replace Globe
Sutherland Forby Gardens SSC Number of lights out Replace light globes and repair where necessary
Round-a-bout opposite 711 SSC 2 Street lights out. Light over pedestrian crossing – Renew globes
Pedestrian crossing Old Princes Hwy
Car Park area – Old Princes SSC Lighting doesn’t appear to be good even distribution Investigate potential lighting improvements
Highway of lighting or colour rndition – currently sodium
lighting
Old Princes Highway – In Individual businesses Relying on Street lighting only Suggest businesses improve under awning
General lighting – General recommendation for all
Old Princes Highway – Car SSC Lighting not working Replace Globes
park entrance
Pedestrian crossing Old SSC Light not working Replace Globes
Princes Hghwy outside
Chemist
Cnr Old Princes Hwy& Flora SSC Light not working Replace globe
St
Eton St, from Flora Individual businesses Very Poorly lit encourage business to install sensor lighting
Fabrics/Cripps &
Cripps/Liquor Land/Rest.