The idea of graffiti walls to curb vandalism has been rejected in one part of Kent, despite a majority of people being in favour.

Tonbridge and Malling council has been considering how best to deal with the problem of graffiti - which it defines as “unauthorised writing, drawing or scratches that are scribed, painted, or engraved upon walls and other surfaces without the owner’s express permission”.

One idea put forward was the erection of one or more graffiti walls - places where taggers would be encouraged to leave their mark in the hope that they would then leave other walls, railway bridges and bus shelters alone.

The borough carried out a six-week consultation on the subject, starting in January, and the results were recently reported to the council’s environment scrutinee committee.

Only a small number of people responded to the survey - 115 from the borough’s population of over 130,000.

But of those, 57 were in favour of the graffiti walls and 47 against, with 11 undecided.

Comments in favour included:

“Some graffiti is actually very good. Local parks would be a great place to have a graffiti wall.”

“Times are changing, as is the style of art. We should embrace these changes.”

“Graffiti workshops are great. I would like to see these run in leisure centres. It educates on the art of graffiti and teaches how to create stunning art work that can actually add to a community.”

“Graffiti brightens up dingy alley ways.”

“Work with graffiti artists, embrace them, offer collaborations with shops, leisure facilities, libraries, graffiti walls, get them to run workshops, teaching others their skills make them feel valued.”

“Instead of saying no and excluding, how about saying yes and being inclusive, God knows we need some young, fresh creativity in this town, you never know Tonbridge may just have the next Banksy!”

“Hopefully the result would be realistic artwork not just a lot of tag scrawls which mean nothing to anyone apart from the “artist“.

“Please have the walls, the young people need something to do in their lives!”

“I would like to see quality urban artists employed to teach the graffiti taggers the skills to make quality artworks on the graffiti walls that you are proposing.

“Graffiti can be an art form, in the right place.”

“It would be an opportunity for some to exhibit their skills.”

“Graffiti does not kill people. Speeding traffic does.

“Areas such as under bridges could be improved by allowing them to be used as a graffiti wall. No additional construction would be needed as the "wall" already exist to be used.”

Some thought that the borough should go even further:

One person suggested: “Commission local artists to get the ball rolling on this wall and set a high standard that values skill and creativity.”

“I would love to see a graffiti wall in Tonbridge. You should kick-start it by getting some respected local graffiti artists to help create it”

“Maybe an annual residents vote for the best artwork?”

However, there were also plenty of comments from those opposed to graffiti walls:

“Some of the graffiti in Tonbridge is obscene and a graffiti wall will only encourage this to be done under the guise of art”.

“Graffiti walls encourage tagging which will spread to areas around the wall. It would be naive to think those doing it would stick to the allocated areas.”

“It will make people think it is ok to deface buildings in this way”

“It will still be an eyesore.”

“I never let my kids draw on my walls at home so why would I on walls outside?”

“Allowing it legally just raises the likelihood that more people will get into it.”

“It is just an invitation to crime.”

What’s next? A used chewing gum wall?

“Why should tax-payers money be wasted on this?”

“There are enough eyesores in the town.”

“What’s next? A used chewing gum wall?”

Cllr Frani Hoskins observed that some people in favour of the walls had some “very logical and exciting ideas”.

While Cllr Mark Rhodes (Con) suggested the best use of a graffiti wall would be to ensure it was covered by CCTV cameras, so that the taggers could be identified.

When the council’s cabinet members met to decide on the issue last Tuesday they heard from Alsion Finch, the council’s communities manager, that she had been unable to find any evidence supporting the theory that graffti walls reduced the level of graffiti elsewhere. She recommended against the use of such walls.

Cabinet members agreed but did vote to adopt a new graffiti policy that sets out the borough’s ambitions in dealing with graffiti on council property .

Offensive graffiti, by which they mean things like racial slurs, would be removed within two working days. while non-offensive graffiti would be removed within 10 days.

It is up to the owners to arrange graffiti removal from private property, but Ms Finch said the council had identified three areas where it was thought that offenders under the Community Payback scheme could be used to clear it up. Work on one of those areas - New Wharf Road - was expected to start soon.

Cllr Wendy Palmer (Ind Alliance) wanted to know: “Where would the council stand if Bansky turned up?”

Ms Finch confessed that she didn’t have the answer to that one.

Tunbridge Wells council already has a graffiti wall in Grosvenor and Hilbert Park. While in Margate, in Sepetember 2022, a group of artists entitled Rise up Residency - with the support of Thanet Council and the building’s owners - created 17 giant murals on walls acorss the town

KentOnline would like to hear from readers of examples of either “good” or “bad” graffiti they have found in the Tonbridge and Malling area.

Please send your photographs, with the location, to reporter Alan Smith on ajsmith@thekmgroup.co.uk