Loughton High Road could get four times more cameras in council plans

East London and West Essex Guardian Series: Plans for £45k boost to town centre CCTV Plans for £45k boost to town centre CCTV

TRADERS have welcomed plans to nearly quadruple the number of CCTV cameras in a town centre.

Epping Forest District Council plans to spend £45,000 on replacing the existing six cameras in Loughton and adding 17 more.

The scheme would see CCTV coverage extended up the High Road to the section between Brooklyn Avenue and Trap’s Hill, which has been welcomed by shopkeepers there.

Natalia Brandy, 29, manager of Hob hairdressers, near the junction with Brooklyn Avenue, said: “I think it’s a good idea.

“We have late-night openings and our cars are parked around the back.

“Hair products are on display on the shelves and it’s better to have CCTV. In the past couple of years, we’ve had someone trying to break in.”

Chantelle Morris, 22, of Forest of Loughton fragrances a few doors down, said: “It would be good for security reasons – I know there have been a few break-ins down this end.

“It means more security and it’s easier to catch people who steal things.”

The money will come from a £15,000 saving in the council’s spending on CCTV in The Broadway, as well as £14,000 from High Road developers, £6,000 from current running costs, as well as an extra £10,000 from council coffers.

The council said in a report that the current six cameras, which were installed in 2006, were not providing good enough coverage for the High Road and were unreliable.

It added that the police supported the plans and had asked for 30 images from the council’s system in the town centre between January and October.

The latest crime figures available, for September, show there were five reports of anti-social behaviour on or near the High Road and three of theft, as well as one each of shoplifting, drug crime, violent crime, criminal damage and arson and one other crime.

The council's cabinet is due to rubber stamp the spending at a meeting on Monday.

Comments (8)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:58am Tue 27 Nov 12

stickmanny says...

how about putting them in every living room? nothing to hide nothing to fear
how about putting them in every living room? nothing to hide nothing to fear stickmanny
  • Score: 0

8:14am Tue 27 Nov 12

Isaythat says...

What is needed is alarm systems having a taser attachment. seriously!!
What is needed is alarm systems having a taser attachment. seriously!! Isaythat
  • Score: 0

10:26am Tue 27 Nov 12

stewyripper says...

wire everything you want to keep to the mains or get a hungry lion.
wire everything you want to keep to the mains or get a hungry lion. stewyripper
  • Score: 0

10:26am Tue 27 Nov 12

stewyripper says...

wire everything you want to keep to the mains or get a hungry lion.
wire everything you want to keep to the mains or get a hungry lion. stewyripper
  • Score: 0

1:08pm Tue 27 Nov 12

stickmanny says...

But enough of the funnies. how about employing a policeman? they do actually cut crime. CCTV does not.

I really should work in local government, with all my radical ideas...
But enough of the funnies. how about employing a policeman? they do actually cut crime. CCTV does not. I really should work in local government, with all my radical ideas... stickmanny
  • Score: 0

1:08pm Tue 27 Nov 12

stickmanny says...

But enough of the funnies. how about employing a policeman? they do actually cut crime. CCTV does not.

I really should work in local government, with all my radical ideas...
But enough of the funnies. how about employing a policeman? they do actually cut crime. CCTV does not. I really should work in local government, with all my radical ideas... stickmanny
  • Score: 0

3:26pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Thunderbird4 says...

" . . six cameras, installed in 2006, were not providing good enough coverage for the High Road and were unreliable." So, inefficient and waste of public money?

" . . figures available, for September, show five reports of anti-social behaviour on or near the High Road, three of theft, one each for shoplifting, drug crime, violent crime, criminal damage and arson and one other
crime." Fourteen crimes. Were these from camera sighting or public reports?

Between 8 -10 months: " . . police had asked for 30 images from the council’s system in the town centre between January and October."
This suggests the figures for September were reported by the public.

Would it be cheaper to dump the CCTV? Cameras seem inefficient when it comes to detecting crime; perhaps people on the streets are better at detecting and reporting crime? How much does it cost to run a camera spy system?

I think councils will have to keep buying cameras, because if they don't, the company will go out of business and as there are 3 million unemployed and no jobs for them, the ex employees could turn to crime. Better still, they could become community support officers, then no need for expensive cameras and operating systems.
" . . six cameras, installed in 2006, were not providing good enough coverage for the High Road and were unreliable." So, inefficient and waste of public money? " . . figures available, for September, show five reports of anti-social behaviour on or near the High Road, three of theft, one each for shoplifting, drug crime, violent crime, criminal damage and arson and one other crime." Fourteen crimes. Were these from camera sighting or public reports? Between 8 -10 months: " . . police had asked for 30 images from the council’s system in the town centre between January and October." This suggests the figures for September were reported by the public. Would it be cheaper to dump the CCTV? Cameras seem inefficient when it comes to detecting crime; perhaps people on the streets are better at detecting and reporting crime? How much does it cost to run a camera spy system? I think councils will have to keep buying cameras, because if they don't, the company will go out of business and as there are 3 million unemployed and no jobs for them, the ex employees could turn to crime. Better still, they could become community support officers, then no need for expensive cameras and operating systems. Thunderbird4
  • Score: 0

5:41pm Tue 27 Nov 12

Isaythat says...

stickmanny wrote:
But enough of the funnies. how about employing a policeman? they do actually cut crime. CCTV does not.

I really should work in local government, with all my radical ideas...
more police? what a thought - you would be laughed out of office!
Seriously, a good idea stickmanny, plus bring back barbed wire, razer wire, broken glass etc. Who ever made those things illegal? that's the funniest thing in all of this - it is illegal to use any of those deterrents, then once they are in your home, it was illegal to use force to defend yourself - this country has become a laughing stock! thankfully the latter has been overturned, but until the law sides wholeheartedly with the victim, it is all a bit of a joke.
[quote][p][bold]stickmanny[/bold] wrote: But enough of the funnies. how about employing a policeman? they do actually cut crime. CCTV does not. I really should work in local government, with all my radical ideas...[/p][/quote]more police? what a thought - you would be laughed out of office! Seriously, a good idea stickmanny, plus bring back barbed wire, razer wire, broken glass etc. Who ever made those things illegal? that's the funniest thing in all of this - it is illegal to use any of those deterrents, then once they are in your home, it was illegal to use force to defend yourself - this country has become a laughing stock! thankfully the latter has been overturned, but until the law sides wholeheartedly with the victim, it is all a bit of a joke. Isaythat
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree