Public Document Pack

SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE

Date: Wednesday 5th January, 2011 Time: 6.30 pm Venue: Town Hall, Southport

AREA COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP

Ainsdale Ward Birkdale Ward Councillor Councillor Jones, Conservative Party Brodie - Browne, Liberal Democrats Porter, Conservative Party Hands (Chair), Liberal Democrats Preece, Liberal Democrats Shaw, Liberal Democrats

Cambridge Ward Dukes Ward Councillor Councillor Glover, Conservative Party Byrom, The Labour Party McGuire, Liberal Democrats Pearson, Conservative Party Preston, Liberal Democrats Sir Ron Watson, Conservative Party

Kew Ward Meols Ward Councillor Councillor Booth, Liberal Democrats Dodd, Liberal Democrats Weavers, Liberal Democrats D Rimmer, Liberal Democrats Tattersall, Liberal Democrats

Norwood Ward Advisory Group Members Councillor Lord Fearn, Liberal Democrats Mr. J. Fairhurst Mr. S. Sugden B Rimmer (Vice-Chair), Liberal Democrats Mrs. M. Pointon Sumner, Liberal Democrats

COMMITTEE OFFICER: Paul Fraser Telephone: 0151 934 2068 Fax: 0151 934 2034 E-mail: [email protected]

If you have any special needs that may require arrangements to facilitate your attendance at this meeting, please contact the Committee Officer named above, who will endeavour to assist.

A G E N D A

(This first part of the meeting will take place in the Birkdale Room).

1. Apologies for Absence

2. Declarations of Interest Members and Officers are requested to give notice of any personal or prejudicial interest and the nature of that interest, relating to any item on the agenda in accordance with the relevant Code of Conduct

3. Minutes of the Previous Meeting (Pages 5 - 22) Minutes of the meeting held on 17 November 2010

Part A These items are for consultation or information of interest to the local communit y. Anybody attending the meeting is welcome to speak (subject to the Chair’s discretion)

There are no items for consideration in Part A

Part B These are formal decisions to be taken by Members of the Council. Only in exceptional cases will the Chair allow contributions from the Public (Advisory Group Members may speak but not vote) 4. Budget Monitoring (Pages 23 - 28) Report of the Neighbourhoods and Investment Programmes Director

5. Southport Cycle Town - Weld Road Roundabout (Pages 29 - 34) Improvements Report of the Planning and Economic Development Director

6. Southport Cycle Town - Crossens Training Bank (Pages 35 - 78) Report of the Planning and Economic Development Director

7. Water Lane Crossens - Request For Traffic Calming (Pages 79 - Report of the Planning and Economic Development Director 104)

8. Wavell Avenue, Southport - Provision Of Alleygates (Pages 105 - Report of the Planning and Economic Development Director 110)

9. Balfour Road Southport - Amendment To Traffic (Pages 111 - Regulation Order 116) Report of the Planning and Economic Development Director

10. Arundel Road/Woodstock Drive Birkdale - Proposed (Pages 117 - Extension To Existing Traffic Regulation Order 126) Report of the Planning and Economic Development Director

11. Southport Park And Ride Service (Pages 127 - Report of the Planning and Economic Development Director 134)

12. Victoria Park Southport - Extension to Caravan Club Site (Pages 135 - Report of the Leisure and Tourism Director 140)

13. Merseyside Police Request For Funding Support (Pages 141 - Towards Purchase Of Bicycles For Community Support 144) Officers Report of the Neighbourhoods and Investment Programmes Director

Part C (The next part of the meeting will take place in the Council Chamber at 7:30pm)

These items are for general discussion. Anybody attending the meeting is welcome to speak (subject to the Chair’s discretion)

14. Police Issues Report of the Neighbourhood Inspector

Update on crime statistics and area interventions since the last meeting

15. Public Forum A period of up to one hour (or longer at the discretion of the Chair) will be set aside for a Public Forum.

Members of the public can ask questions, raise matters, or present petitions on issues which are relevant to Sefton Council. The person asking the question will be allowed one supplementary question and, provided the questioner is present or represented, any interested members of the public will be permitted to ask supplementary questions, provided the total time on each issue does not exceed five minutes.

A Question Form indicating the person’s name and address must be completed and submitted to the Committee Administrator as soon as possible and by no later than 12.00 noon on the day before the meeting. For the avoidance of doubt, this deadline applies to written, faxed or on-line submissions http://forms.sefton.gov.uk/openforumquestion/ Question forms can be obtained from the Committee Administrator prior to the meeting.

(If the questioner does not attend the meeting or nominate a representative to attend (at the discretion of the Chair), the question will not be read out, but a written response will be forwarded to the questioner).

If a response to a question cannot be provided at the meeting, the Neighbourhoods Division will contact the relevant department for a formal response and the resident will be contacted directly in writing

16. Area Management Update (Pages 145 - Report of the Neighbourhoods and Investment Programmes 148) Director

Update on area management issues resolved since the last meeting

17. Future Agenda Items

18. Date of Next Meeting The next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 16 February 2011, at the Town Hall, Lord Street, Southport commencing at 6:30pm

Agenda Item 3 THE “CALL IN” PERIOD FOR THIS SET OF MINUTES ENDS AT 12 NOON ON FRIDAY 26 NOVEMBER, 2010. MINUTE NOS. 93, 94, 95, 97, 101, 102, 103, 104 AND 105 ARE NOT SUBJECT TO "CALL-IN"

SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE

MEETING HELD AT THE TOWN HALL, LORD STREET, SOUTHPORT ON WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

PRESENT: Councillor Hands (in the Chair) Councillors Byrom, Dodd, Lord Fearn, Glover, Jones, McGuire, Pearson, Porter, Preece, D Rimmer, Shaw, Sumner, Tattersall and Weavers Local Advisory Group Members: Mr J Fairhurst and Mr S Sugden ALSO PRESENT: Councillors Griffiths and Parry and Inspectors J. Atherton and T. Jones, Merseyside Police 28 members of the public in attendance

90. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Booth, Brodie- Browne, Preston, B. Rimmer and Sir Ron Watson and Local Advisory Group Member Mrs. M. Pointon.

91. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

No declarations of interest were received.

92. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING

RESOLVED:

That the Minutes of the meeting held on 6 October 2010 be confirmed as a correct record.

93. SEFTON'S STRATEGY FOR OLDER CITIZENS

The Committee received a presentation by Mr. Roger Pontefract, Chair of the Sefton Partnership for Older Citizens (SPOC) on Sefton’s Strategy for Older Citizens and considered the report of the Director of Equalities thereon.

Mr. Pontefract’s presentation raised the following points:

• The population of Sefton had a significantly large proportion of older people (approximately 50% of its citizens) presenting challenges in respect of the services provided, cost of care, leisure activities, housing, transport, employment and so on.

• The SPOC, which had prepared the Sefton Strategy for Older Citizens, was a multi-agency partnership, the membership of which included a number of older citizens (people aged 50 plus), and had

Page92 5 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

been formed for the support of older people, to enable them to be part of the planning of services.

• The Strategy challenged stereotypes of older people and set out how SPOC was responding to the opportunities and challenges of an ageing population, whilst recognising the constraints upon public expenditure during the next 3-5 years.

• The key points underpinning the strategy were:

v Improving Communications between partners and between them and their communities v Raising standards in the delivery of front-line services and in ‘age-proofing’ them v Strengthening networks and collaboration by increasing social interaction and linking public services more effectively

The Strategy was striving to achieve the following outcomes for older people:

(i) Financial security in respect of an adequate income, work opportunity and the availability of financial information, advice and support; (i) high quality services that were local and accessible, planned to take the needs of older people into account and with public transport in Sefton meeting the needs of older people using public services; (ii) health and wellbeing services for older people were joined up and effective, in terms of physical, mental and emotional health, access to a range of activities and green spaces and a sustainable environment; (iii) personal safety and social connectivity with older people and their carers receiving suitable support, feeling safe at home and in the community and having suitable and decent accommodation; (iv) being well informed and able to make a positive contribution to community life, building links with younger people and playing an active part in decision making; and (v) agencies value the contribution which older people make, and that older people are free from discrimination.

Mr. Pontefract concluded by indicating that Sefton’s population was changing and getting older and for a minority this would mean increased dependence, poor health and frailty. However, for most, this meant leading full, active and healthy lives for longer; playing a key role in the local community through continued employment or voluntary work, enjoying sport, social and leisure activities; and using computers and other forms of technology to stay in touch with family and friends and to shop and find information.

Page93 6 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

The SPOC wanted Sefton to be a place where old age was enjoyed rather than endured and had therefore prepared a Strategy which responded to the challenge of meeting the varied needs and expectations of Sefton’s older people together with an Action Plan with a whole series of steps on how it hoped to deliver.

RESOLVED: That

(1) Mr. Pontefract be thanked for attending the meeting and for his interesting and informative presentation; and

(2) the prioritisation of older people as a cross-cutting theme be supported.

94. GREEN BELT STUDY - DRAFT FINDINGS

The Committee considered the report of the Planning and Economic Development Director advising of the draft findings of the Green Belt Study and seeking views about the implications for the Southport Area.

The report detailed why it was necessary to consider future housing development in the Green Belt; and that the draft results of the Green Belt study would inform the preparation of the Core Strategy options that would set out what scale and some of the possible locations where future development could occur.

Mr. Alan Young and Mrs. Ingrid Berry, Planning and Economic Development Department, presented the report and indicated that based on existing population, Southport needed to find space for a further 3,100 extra homes, but that available land identified in the urban area was only capable of accommodating fewer than 2,000 more homes, which meant that roughly 1,100 homes would be required in other areas to meet locally generated needs. However, the Green Belt Study had indicated that there may be some scope to the north east of Southport, and south and west of Ainsdale. Land on the other edges had been ruled out of consideration for a variety of factors such as internal and national wildlife designations, or because the areas were at higher risk of flooding and should only therefore be developed as a last resort. Areas had also been excluded that were used for recreation, including golf courses since these formed an important part of our tourism offer and were also subject to wildlife designations.

In total, capacity for about 550 new homes had been identified on sites with few constraints, with scope for a further 300-400 homes on more constrained sites; the implications of this were that needs generated in the Southport area were not likely to be met in the local area, as there was insufficient capacity identified in both the urban area and the adjacent Green Belt. This was a significant issue, given that Southport had one of the highest affordable housing needs in Sefton, and all the evidence indicated that this need should be met in the area where the need was generated.

Page94 7 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

Mrs. Berry concluded by indicating that the next steps, detailed in Section 5 of the report, would involve consultation with local people early next year on the findings of the Green Belt and Green Space Studies and on the Core Strategy Options. This would involve holding workshops in each Area Committee area seeking views on issues pertinent to each area. The view of the Members were sought on whether any particular groups should be invited to these workshops and what specific issues should be considered.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the Green Belt Study draft findings which would be used to inform the preparation of the Core Strategy and the proposals for ongoing consultation in the new year be noted; and

(2) the Planning and Economic Development Director be requested to present the Green Belt Study draft findings to any local groups who request such a presentation.

95. PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON THE THIRD MERSEYSIDE LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN

Further to Minute No. 71 of 6 October 2010 the Committee considered the report of the Planning and Economic Development Director advising of the consultation on the Preferred Strategy for the third Merseyside Local Transport Plan (LTP) and seeking the views of the Committee on the priorities for the next LTP within its area.

The report indicated that the Merseyside LTP provided a long term transport strategy in accordance with the Government's requirements for transport planning; that two previous LTPs had been produced and consultation was now being undertaken on LTP3 that would set out the longer term transport strategy to 2024; and that the Area Committee was requested to provide a response to the following questions:

1. Does the Area Committee support the proposed 'vision' for LTP3, as set out in paragraph 2.2 of the report?

2. Does the Area Committee support the proposed 'goals' for LTP3, as set out in paragraph 2.3 of the report?

3. Does the Area Committee support the priorities for highway maintenance, road safety and freight movements that were identified by the Sefton workshop?

4. Does the Area Committee have any comments on the proposals in the public consultation document for LTP3?

Page95 8 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

5. Does the Area Committee have any specific issues that it considers are priorities for their area that should be addressed in the next LTP implementation programme?

RESOLVED: That

(1) the consultation process on the Merseyside Local Transport Plan 3 be noted; and

(2) the following responses be referred to the Cabinet Member - Technical Services for inclusion in the full response from Sefton Council:

1. the Area Committee supports the proposed 'visions' for LTP3 as set out in paragraph 2.2 of the report;

2. the Area Committee supports the proposed 'goals' for LTP3 as set out in paragraph 2.3 of the report; and the following deficiencies in local bus services be highlighted:

• there is no bus service to Ocean Plaza; • from the central/north end of Lord Street there is no direct bus service to Southport DGH, KGV or Asda; • the 43/46 bus service does not stop on Lord Street • the 42/44 bus service travelling north stops on Lord Street but not when travelling south.

3. the Area Committee supports the priorities for highway maintenance, road safety and freight movements identified by the Sefton Workshop and would also add its concerns about the current high fare levels and how this impacted on sustainable travel as the option of choice;

4. no comments were made on the proposals for public consultation document for LTP3;

5. in the next LTP implementation programme, the Area Committee considers that it is a priority to extend the route of the park and ride shuttle bus service to cover Ocean Plaza and other Town Centre destinations to increase the usage of the service; and

(3) the Planning and Economic Development Director be requested to submit a report to the next meeting of the Area Committee on the extension of the park and ride bus service as referred to in paragraph (2)5 above.

96. POLICE ISSUES

Inspector Atherton reported that during the recent 'mischief' night and bonfire night period, there had been a lot less anti-social behaviour than Page96 9 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

previously; and that the firework display at Victoria Park was very well attended.

Inspector Jones confirmed that there were 200 fewer reported incidents of anti-social behaviour than during the same period last year; indicated that a large quantity of illegal fireworks had been seized in Southport; and urged members of the public to be extra vigilant during the darker nights.

Members of the public/Councillors raised the following issues:

• Concern was raised about the number of accidents on the Coastal Road. Comments were made about painting the posts white or attaching reflectors to them to demarcate the side of the road from the carriageway. Mr. Marrin, Traffic Services Manager, indicated that he would respond in writing to the questioner.

• The term 'mischief night' should stop being used as it only encouraged trouble or criminal behaviour.

• A petition from residents from Leicester Street was referred to. The petition highlighted the number of drivers using a nearby roundabout who did not indicate correctly. The police were asked to target this problem. Inspector Jones indicated that action could only be taken if the failure to indicate correctly caused an accident and then a prosecution for driving with undue care and attention could be pursued.

• Concern was raised about speeding traffic in the Wennington Road/Roe Lane/Tithebarn Road area. Inspector Jones indicated that this area had been targeted by Road Traffic Officers and fixed penalty notices had been issued.

• Concern was raised about drivers parking on school zigzag road markings. A request was made for officers to target such illegal parking, and speeding traffic, in the Matlock Road area. Inspector Atherton indicated he would arrange for the problems to be investigated.

• What was the law regarding the use of lights on cycles. Inspector Jones indicated that lights were required to be used on cycles during darkness.

• A complaint was made about cyclists going through red lights. Inspector Atherton indicated that this offence was hard to detect as offenders tended not to cause such offences when Police were present.

Page 9710 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

97. PUBLIC FORUM

During the Public Forum, the following questions/comments/petitions were submitted:

(a) Local Advisory Group Member Mr. J. Fairhurst asked that in the event of severe winter weather was the Council ready to forestall further criticisms such as those raised at last January's Area Committee meeting with regard to inadequate gritting of, for instance, Monument Square, pedestrian crossings on Lord Street and the area around Southport Town Hall. Mr. Fairhurst stated that these locations were more important, at least in winter, than the Diana Memorial Gardens which apparently was currently on the Council's footway gritting list.

The Committee Administrator advised that Mr. J. McConkey, Acting Assistant Director, Environmental and Technical Services had provided the following response:

"The footway gritting routes in Southport Town Centre covered the following locations:-

Lord Street from Duke Street to Leicester Street Scarisbrick Avenue from Lord Street to Promenade Nevill Street from Lord Street to Promenade London Street from Lord Street to Chapel Street Chapel Street from London Street to Eastbank Street Eastbank Street from Lord Street to Roundabout

These areas included Monument Square and in front of the Town Hall as queried by Mr Fairhurst.

Further details of the winter service policy could be found at www.sefton.gov.uk "

(b) Ms. A Owen, who was not present at the meeting, on behalf of Path-n-Pedal, referred to the pending proposals for the King Street and Market Street area in Southport. She indicated that, whilst the published plans appeared to offer an improved and safer environment for shoppers on foot, no consideration had been given to movement of cyclists; and asked was there any reason why a cycle contra-flow lane could not be introduced into these two streets during implementation of the scheme. Without this facility, riders would have to either cycle right round or end up pushing their bikes once more, as per Chapel Street. As a Cycle Town, Southport should be facilitating travel bike - and not making it more difficult.

She also stated that West Street, Stanley Street, Princes Street, Wright Street and the part of Botanic Road in Churchtown that was one-way would also benefit from a cycle contra-flow lane. A simpler and low-cost alternative would be to install plates excepting cyclists from the no-entry

Page98 11 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

requirements at the end of these streets; and concluded by requesting the Committee to give its fullest consideration to this/these measures.

The Committee Administrator advised that the Traffic Services Manager had responded in writing to Ms. Owen. The letter indicated that the current plans for the area around the Market did not include any changes to traffic movements. Consequently, cyclists would still be able to cycle both ways on King Street.

Whilst contra-flow cycle lanes could be introduced on the roads mentioned in the question, to do so would involve significant works and the removal of a considerable number of parking bays in order to accommodate the lanes. Whilst there was no funding available for such works at the current time, the Council would also have to be mindful of the potential loss of parking spaces and the impact this would have, not only on local businesses, but also on Council finances.

The point was noted regarding a more simple low cost alternative and whilst the Council would be able to consider such an option, it would have concerns about its safe introduction. Whilst signing can be put in place, the Council would have to ensure that the likely presence of cyclists would be known to motorists progressing the correct way down the one-way streets and this would include making this clear at all entry points onto the streets. The Council would bear Ms. Owen's request in mind for future progression. However, the Council were unable to progress it at the current time.

(c) Mr. J. Lee asked that in view of the unprecedented financial situation in which Sefton now found itself, what measures were going to be taken on the number of Councillors, their allowances and expenses.

The Committee Administrator had responded in writing to Mr. Lee. The letter indicated that by way of an example Telford and Wrekin Council previously asked the Boundary Commission to review their Council size with a view to looking at single member wards. The Boundary Commission had to be asked to do this rather than the Council deciding themselves. The upshot was that the Boundary Commission were unable to start the review until 2012 and any decisions they took would not take effect until 2015.

A proposal to change the electoral arrangements would usually come about as a result of moving to 4 yearly elections and the next opportunity the Council had to consider this was in 2013 for implementation in 2014. Even after that the Boundary Commission would still need to undertake the review as in Telford.

Secondly, the Council at its meeting held on 2 September 2010 made the following changes to the Members' Allowance Scheme:

(i) payment of daily Special Responsibility Allowances to cease

Page 9912 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

(ii) the rates of all Special Responsibility Allowances be reduced by 5%

The above decisions would generate a saving of £14,800 in 2010/11 and £25,400 in 2011/12.

Finally, Members of the Council could not claim expenses for any activity undertaken within the borough. In 2009/10, the total costs of expenses paid to all 66 Members of the Council was £5,400.

Mr. Lee indicated that a reduction in allowances of 25% would have been more appropriate.

(d) Mr. P. Turner, who was not present at the meeting, had asked could the Councillors identify any brownfield sites suitable for development in the Southport area and, if so, could they give an assurance that these options would be exhausted before any consideration was made on the decimation of further green belt land.

The Committee Administrator advised that Mrs. I. Berry, Planning and Economic Development Department, had responded in writing to Mr. Turner. The letter indicated that as part of the preparatory work for preparing our Core Strategy, the main planning policy document that would shape development in Sefton over the next 15 - 20 years, the Council had carried out a number of studies that looked at the capacity of the urban area to meet our future housing, employment and other needs. These assessments had been made via a rigorous assessment process in accordance with national guidance and independently appraised by specialist consultants.

Based on the Regional Spatial Strategy housing figure of 500 dwellings per year, which the Council believed to be still broadly appropriate, the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment had estimated that we had enough land in our urban area to build about 5,300 new homes, leaving an outstanding requirement for a further 4,200 homes. In Southport it was calculated that there was scope to build roughly 1,150 homes in addition to the 600+ homes that already had planning permission. Both of these figures had been discounted by 20%, in accordance with best practice advice, to allow for not all the sites coming forward.

This included land at Town Lane, Kew (which was anticipated to deliver about 650-675 homes) as an essential part of our supply. Development was due to start in 2012 and would deliver new homes over a 14 plus year period. Other large sites which contributed to this supply included the Leaf site at Virginia Road (currently under construction for 94 units) and surplus land at the Southport and Formby General District Hospital at Town Lane (estimated to accommodate 114 homes).

The Council were required at all times to demonstrate that it had a five year supply of housing land available for development. Currently we have

Page100 13 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

this and expect this to be the case for the next three to four years but not beyond that period.

When the Council prepared its Core Strategy, it had to look forward 15-20 years. We do not have enough land in the urban area to meet all of our future housing and employment needs. We would, therefore, have to consider land in the Green Belt to meet our needs during the latter part of the plan period. This would only be developed as a last resort. The Council could assure you that land in the Green Belt would not be developed until the majority of land in the urban areas had been developed. Furthermore, it would only be envisaged that a very small percentage of land in the Green Belt would be developed and this would be located on the edge of the urban areas.

No decisions had yet been taken about which areas should be developed and would not be taken until we asked the general public what they thought. This consultation would take place next year.

(e) Mr. N. Ashton asked what was the effect of the collapse of the contractor ROK on the project to redevelop Southport Indoor Market.

(f) Mrs. D. Lloyd, who was not present at the meeting, had asked what was the future for Southport Market now that the contractors had gone into administration.

Mr. A. Corfield, Assistant Director - Leisure and Tourism, provided the following response to the questions raised in (e) and (f) above:

The unfortunate collapse of ROK into administration whilst in the early stages of the refurbishment of the Market Hall had resulted in work ceasing whilst ROK's Administrator developed proposals setting out how they intend to progress this and other contracts.

It was understood that the Administrator was actively seeking a buyer for either the whole company or parts of it. It was the Council's understanding that they expect to be in a position to advise the Council of their proposals for the ongoing delivery of the contract in the very near future.

Until that information was known, the Council was unable to report any impact other than a delay to the construction programme whilst the situation was resolved.

Mr. Ashton asked, as a supplementary question, what was Plan B if the contract to refurbish the market was not taken up by any other company.

Mr. Corfield responded that the preferred option was for the administrator to deliver the contract. If this was not the case, then a variety of options would be developed for consideration by the Cabinet.

(g) Mr. D. Pullin stated that during the Area Committee meeting on 6 October 2010, some Wards allocated monies from their devolved

Page101 14 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010 budgets towards dog fouling/litter enforcement projects so that targeted enforcement could take place at weekends and other times. Mr. Pullin asked what happened to any monies from any fines given during the activities funded from the Ward budgets.

Mr. P. Cowley, Principal Solicitor, had responded in writing to Mr. Pullin. Mr. Cowley indicated that where Fixed Penalty Notices were issued for dog fouling or littering, the penalty of £75 was paid to the Council's Environmental Protection Department (there was a discount to £50 if the penalty was paid within 10 days). If, however, the person issued with the Notice did not pay the penalty within the specified period, the matter was referred to the Magistrates' Court for legal proceedings. Any fines that were imposed by the Court were paid to Central Government and not the Council.

Mr. Pullin asked, as a supplementary question, whether the monies received from fixed penalty notices could be ploughed back into Ward budgets or to undertake more enforcement work in those Wards that had allocated resources from their devolved budgets.

RESOLVED:

That the Environmental and Technical Services Director be requested to submit a report to the Area Committee on the potential for the allocation of monies received from fixed penalty notices to Ward budgets or for funding additional enforcement activity as referred to in the supplementary question raised by Mr. Pullin.

(h) Mr. T. Dawson stated that since it appeared that the Sefton Primary Care Trust had let down the people of Southport and Formby by 'leading us up the garden path' for the last two years over plans for a local children's minor injury and ailment service which they had suddenly decided was not clinically viable or a priority for expenditure, would the Southport Area Committee lend its backing to the campaign by Southport's Member of Parliament to persuade General Practitioners in the area to prioritise this service for local parents and their children.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the Area committee fully supports the proposal to persuade General Practitioners in the area to prioritise a children's minor injury and ailment service in Southport for local parents and their children; and

(2) the question raised by Mr. Dawson be submitted to the Formby Area Committee for consideration.

(i) Mrs. J. Diamond submitted a petition containing the signatures of 100 residents in the following terms:

"This petition is presented on behalf of residents of Water Lane, Bartons Close and the Plough Estate requesting traffic calming measures on Water

Page102 15 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

Lane (A565). There are numerous issues with speeding traffic, noise, log jams, road safety, visibility, access from properties and entering and exiting the Plough Estate via Baytree Close.

We have recently seen Sefton Council spend hundreds of thousands of pounds relating to traffic calming and road safety measures on Fylde Road, Marshside Road and Preston New Road and these roads have nowhere near the volume of traffic that use Water Lane which is the only route into Southport from the north and probably the busiest section of road in the town.

Will Sefton Council conduct a comprehensive survey on Water Lane with the intention of calming the traffic etc. and reduce the anxiety of the local residents, then report back to the Southport Area Committee?"

Letters were submitted with the petition from J. Wall, Mr. I. Lowe, Mr. G. Aspinall, R. and S. Eaton, C.A. Richards, Mrs. J. Shepherd, Mrs. F. Valentine and T. Forfar which detailed the traffic problems being experienced and in support of the terms of the petition.

RESOLVED:

That the Planning and Economic Development Director be requested to submit a report on the petition to the next meeting of the Area Committee.

98. AREA MANAGEMENT UPDATE

The Committee considered the report of the Neighbourhoods and Investment Programmes Director on the area management activities that had taken place in Southport since the last meeting.

The report indicated that the Neighbourhoods Division provided a co- ordination role for dealing with area issues. Queries were forwarded to the Neighbourhoods Division in a number of ways, via a number of different sources; and that in order for Members to be aware of progress made on these issues the area management report had been compiled.

Partner Agencies would also be included in this report in the future to update Members as to how other agencies were working on area issues. The provision of this information would enable better co-ordination and would feed into future neighbourhood plans.

RESOLVED:

That the Area Management Update report be noted.

99. BUDGET MONITORING

Further to Minute No. 72 of 6 October 2010, the Committee considered the report of the Neighbourhoods and Investment Programmes Director indicating that the balance of the budget available for allocation during

Page103 16 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

2010/11, including sums set aside for the provision of litterbins and street signs, was as follows:

Ward Available Funds £ Ainsdale 10,895.83 Birkdale 17,981.98 Cambridge 7,472.08 Dukes 16,828.53 Kew 8,464.54 Meols 9,591.50 Norwood 22,718.09 Town-wide 12,178.75 Total 106,131.30

Details of the allocations made by each ward against the general provision in the current year were set out in the report.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the remaining balance of £106,131.30 of the budget available for further allocation for the rest of the year be noted; and

(2) allocations from the 2010/11 Ward budgets agreed to date and indicated in paragraph 2.1 of the report, be noted.

100. SOUTHPORT MARKET GATEWAY FEATURES (PUBLIC ART)

The Committee considered the report of the Leisure and Tourism Director that presented the stage 1 designs for the new Gateway Features to be placed at the corners of King Street/Eastbank Street and Market Street/Lord Street as part of the improvements to the public realm within the immediate vicinity of the Southport Market.

The report indicated that the vision for the Gateway Features was that they would highlight the presence of Southport Market; that they must provide an eye catching and relevant image associated with the area and be supported by the local community; and that ideally, they would be memorable and capable of further development for further use in other variations in other appropriate areas of the town centre.

The report also detailed the artist's brief; the appointment of the lead artist (Broadbent Studio); and images of the Gateway Features.

The report concluded that the Gateway Features should be completed by September 2011.

Page104 17 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

RESOLVED:

That this Area Committee cannot, in all conscience, support the spending in the current financial climate, of £112,000 of public money in the way suggested and the Cabinet be advised accordingly.

101. RADNOR DRIVE SOUTHPORT - REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT TO TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDER

The Committee considered the report of the Planning and Economic Development Director on a proposed Traffic Regulation Order, the effect of which would extend the existing "At Any Time" restriction on the north west side of Radnor Drive at its junction with Marshside Road, Southport.

It was proposed to introduce an individual Order for the road incorporating all the existing restrictions.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the Traffic Regulation Order as shown on the plan in Annex A and as set out in the Schedule in Annex B of the report, be approved; and

(2) the Traffic Services Manager be authorised to undertake the necessary legal procedures, including those of public consultation and advertising the Council's intention to implement the Order.

102. PRESTON NEW ROAD AT ITS JUNCTION WITH BRIDGE WILLS LANE SOUTHPORT - REQUEST FOR TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDER

The Committee considered the report of the Planning and Economic Development Director on a proposed Traffic Regulation Order, the effect of which would introduce 20 metres of 'At Any Time' restrictions to prohibit waiting at any time on Preston New Road at its junction with Bridge Wills Lane, Southport.

It was proposed to introduce an individual Order for the road incorporating all the existing restrictions.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the Traffic Regulation Order as set out on the plan in Annex A and as set out in the Schedule in Annex B of the report, be approved; and

(2) the Traffic Services Manager be authorised to undertake the necessary legal procedures, including those of public consultation and advertising the Council's intention to implement the Order.

Page105 18 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

103. ST. ANDREW'S PLACE AND STANLEY STREET SOUTHPORT - CONSOLIDATION OF TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDERS

The Committee considered the report of the Planning and Economic Development Director recommending the progression of simplified Traffic Regulation Orders at St. Andrew's Place and Stanley Street, Southport.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the Traffic Regulation Orders be approved, as set out in the schedule in Annex A; and

(2) the necessary legal procedures, including those of public consultation and advertising the Council's intention to implement the Orders, be approved.

104. COURT ROAD SOUTHPORT - PROPOSED DISABLED PERSON'S PARKING PLACE

The Committee considered the report of the Planning and Economic Development Director seeking authorisation for the provision of a dedicated disabled parking bay outside 9 Court Road, Southport.

The report indicated that all new Traffic Regulation Orders for Disabled Parking Permits allowed for the provision of a numbered permit which restricted the use of the bay to the applicant only.

It was proposed to introduce an individual Order for the road incorporating all the existing restrictions.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the Traffic Regulation Order providing a numbered permit, as set out in the plan at Annex A and detailed in the report, be approved; and

(2) the Traffic Services Manager be authorised to undertake the necessary legal procedures, including those of public consultation and advertising the Council's intention to implement the Order.

105. SOUTHPORT CYCLE TOWN - TOUCAN CROSSING TOWN LANE KEW

Further to Minute No. 7 of 26 May 2010, the Committee considered the report of the Planning and Economic Development Director seeking approval for further development of the Southport Cycle Town East-West link (the Link) by the introduction of a Toucan Crossing on Town Lane, Kew between the roundabouts with Wight Moss Way and Town Lane.

The report indicated that the Toucan crossing would be adjacent to the entrance to Newlands Community Woodland, on the most direct link to the

Page106 19 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

east-west route into town and would improve access to the Business Park and existing/proposed housing at Kew; that the proposed location of the crossing was directly in line with the change in speed limit from 30-40 mph on Town Lane, Kew. This speed limit was introduced before the construction of the roundabout forming the entrance to the Business Park and that in order to avoid signing the speed limit change, directly next to the proposed Toucan crossing, where the signs may not be clearly visible, it was proposed to relocate the change in speed limit to a location the other side of the Wight Moss way roundabout, adjacent to Fine Janes Brook. This would be a more appropriate location for the speed limit change than on the short stretch of carriageway between the two roundabouts.

The report concluded that it was not proposed to carry out a public consultation, other than liaison with the Forestry Commission and David Wilson Homes, as no frontages were directly affected by the proposals.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the introduction of a Toucan crossing and associated landscaping works on Town Lane, Kew, as shown in Annex A to the report, be approved; and

(2) the Planning and Economic Development Director be authorised to carry out the necessary consultation and legal procedures to relocate the start of the 40mph speed limit on Town Lane, Kew to a more appropriate location adjacent to Fine Janes Brook.

106. SOUTHPORT TOWN CENTRE MANAGEMENT

The Committee considered the report of the Neighbourhoods and Investment Programmes Director setting out the review process being used to determine the future direction of Southport Town Centre management in the light of area working and budget constraints; and providing a snapshot of the key highlights of Town Centre management activity.

The report indicated that Southport Business Enterprise (SBE), set up in 2002, was a partnership between retailers, the Council and the Police; that its function was to manage and develop the retail sector in Southport as a destination for customers and retailers and to support an integrated approach to the administration of the Town Centre in partnership with retail stakeholders; and that SBE had expressed a keen desire to be part of the area arrangements and to be the voice of the retail sector in Southport. A review was currently being undertaken of all Business Village Partnerships to ensure that they were delivering an efficient and cost effective service; and the review process was attached as Annex A to the report.

The report also detailed the key highlights of recent and planned activity in Southport Town Centre relating to:

Page107 20 Agenda Item 3 SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE- WEDNESDAY 17TH NOVEMBER, 2010

• Business Improvement District • new improved floor space attracting new brands to Southport • retail store news • general information • marketing the retail offer • environmental and safety issues in the Town Centre

RESOLVED: That

(1) the current activities and the proposed review process in the light of area working and budget constraints be noted; and

(2) the outcomes of the review be fed back to the Area Committee for information.

107. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

RESOLVED:

That further to Minute No. 26(2) of 16 June 2010, the Neighbourhoods and Investment Programmes Director be requested to investigate the establishment of a St. George's Day celebration in Southport in 2011 and subsequent years,

108. DATE OF NEXT MEETING

RESOLVED:

That in accordance with the agreed programme of meetings for this Area Committee, the next meeting be held on Wednesday, 5 January 2011, at the Town Hall, Southport, commencing at 6.30 p.m.

Page108 21 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 22 Agenda Item 4 Committee : SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE Date of Meeting : 5 January 2011 Title of Report : BUDGET MONITORING

Report of : A Lunt Neighbourhoods and Investment Programmes Director

Contact Officers : Steve Honess Area Co-ordinator – Southport Neighbourhoods Division Telephone No 0151 934 3455

This report contains Yes No CONFIDENTIAL √ Information/ EXEMPT information by virtue of paragraph(s)...... of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local √ Government Act, 1972 (If information is marked exempt, the Public Interest Test must be applied and favour the exclusion of the information from the press and public). Is the decision on this report DELEGATED ? √

Purpose of Report

To update Southport Area Committee on available resources for the Area Committee area and progress to date on those items approved at previous meetings.

Recommendation(s)

That the Area Committee:

(i) note the Ward budgets & Town Wide budget for 2010/11

(ii) note the items agreed in 2010/11

Page 23 Agenda Item 4 Corporate Objective Monitoring

Corporate Positive Neutral Negative Objective Impact Impact Impact

1 Creating a Learning Community ü

2 Creating Safe Communities ü

3 Jobs and Prosperity ü

4 Improving Health and Well-Being ü

5 Environmental Sustainability ü

6 Creating Inclusive Communities ü

7 Improving the Quality of Council Services and ü Strengthening local Democracy

8 Children and Young People ü

Financial Implications

Any financial proposals contained within this report can be contained within the Area Committee’s delegated budgets.

Departments consulted in the preparation of this Report

FD 583 - The Interim Head of Corporate Finance & Information Services has been consulted and his comments have been incorporated into this report.

List of background papers relied upon in the preparation of this report

None

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 In 2002/03 the Council allocated funds to Area Committees for expenditure on local priorities that would not otherwise be funded from Council budgets. Each Area Committee receives an amount each year and then decides how best to split it across the wards and whether or not to hold a central budget. Southport Area Committee have a dedicated town wide budget as well as individual ward budgets. The overall amount for the Area Committee includes an amount for litter bins and street name plates for each ward which has been amalgamated together with the Ward allocations as agreed at the meeting on 28 th July 2010.

Page 24 Agenda Item 4 2.0 2010/2011 CURRENT BUDGET POSITION

2.1 The following sets out the latest position on the budget and the amounts available to spend in each area, as well as commitments made in this year. As requested the amount for street name plates & litterbins has been incorporated within the report as a defined amount per ward.

2010/11 Total 2010/11 2010/11 Balance Balance b/f Allocation Budget Commitments Available £ £ £ £ £ Ainsdale 7889.33* 9,219.50 17108.83 5925.25 11,183 58

Birkdale 12228.73* 9,219.50 21,448.23 3,023.59 18,424.64

Cambridge 1,318.83 9,219.50 10,538.33 3,111.25 7427.08

Dukes 11,225.28 9,219.50 20,444.78 3,616.25 16,828.53

Kew 1,931.29 9,219.50 11,150.79 2,686.25 8,464.54

Meols 4,577.25 9,219.50 13,796.75 4,705.25 9,091.50

Norwood 17,609.84 9,219.50 26,829.34 4,111.25 22,718.09 Town-wide 2,312.50 7,662.50 9,975.00 - 2,203.75 12,178.75 provision Total 59,093.05 72,199.00 131,292 05 24,975.34 106,316.71

Adjustments to balance brought forward from 2009/10 since November 17 meeting:

*Ainsdale: £1936.75 credit from 2009/10 re Smartwater installations at schools – money not spent *Birkdale: £350 credit from 2009/10 re Birkdale tree pits – actual cost £350 less than budgeted for

For information only – Allocations made during 2010/11

Ainsdale Ward 2010/11 Commitments Date Approved Cost £ Information plaque at Ainsdale Beach 1 25 May 2010 980.00 Roundabout 2 Provision of garden at Shoreside School 25 May 2010 500.00 Support for legal proceedings at Ainsdale 3 25 May 2010 350.00 Show

4 Southport Veterans Day Parade 16 June 2010 250.00

10% from 2010/11 Ward Allocation 5 28 July 2010 766.25 towards Southport Town Wide budget Replacement bin – Kenilworth Rd, 6 October 2010 380.00 Ainsdale 7 Contribution to local Girl Guide troop October 2010 200.00

Page 25 Agenda Item 4

8 Dog fouling / littering project October 2010 850.00

9 Contribution to community garden project November 2010 999.00 150.00 10 Churches Together Christmas event November 2010

Support for coffee shop / meeting place 11 November 2010 500.00 for young people 5925.25

Birkdale Ward 2010/11 Commitments Date Approved Cost £ Contribution to 2 benches in Bedford 1 Park (reduced from £500 originally 24 May 2010 407.34 allocated – actual cost £407.34) 10% from 2010/11 Ward Allocation 2 28 July 2010 766.25 towards Southport Town Wide budget 6 football training sessions at Bedford 3 October 2010 1000.00 Park 4 Dog fouling / littering project October 2010 850.00 3023.59

Cambridge Ward 2010/11 Commitments Date Approved Cost £ Provision of plastic bin by bus shelter on 1 18 May 2010 210.00 Emmanuel Road 2 Highways signage improvements in Ward 16 June 2010 1,000.00 North Meols Civic Society Project for the 3 28 July 2010 150.00 ongoing renovation of the Fog Bell 10% from 2010/11 Ward Allocation 4 28 July 2010 766.25 towards Southport Town Wide budget 5 Cul de sac sign – Knob Hall Gardens October 2010 90.00 6 Dog Fouling / littering project October 2010 850.00 7 Wall mounted nameplate, Hornby Road December 2010 45.00

3111.25

Dukes Ward 2010/11 Commitments Date Approved Cost £

1 10% from 2010/11 Ward Allocation 28 July 2010 766.25

Page 26 Agenda Item 4 towards Southport Town Wide budget 2 Dog fouling / litter enforcement project October 2010 850.00 Contribution to deep cleansing in 3 October 2010 2,000.00 Southport Town Centre

3616.25

Kew Ward 2010/11 Commitments Date Approved Cost £ Robust litterbin – cycle track on Portland 1 16 June 2010 380.00 St playing fields 2 ‘No Ball Games’ signs – 49 Janes 2 16 June 2010 220.00 Brook Road & 28 Loxley Road Metal litterbin at end of Colchester Road 3 28 July 2010 380.00 on footpath leading to Handsworth Walk 10% from 2010/11 Ward Allocation 4 28 July 2010 766.25 towards Southport Town Wide budget

5 Street nameplate – Warwick Close July 2010 90.00

6 Dog fouling / littering project October 2010 850.00

2686.25

Meols Ward 2010/11 Commitments Date Approved Cost £ 1 Churchtown Primary School project 16 June 2010 614.00 2 Highway signage improvements 16 June 2010 1,000.00 3 Hanging Baskets along Botanic Road 28 July 2010 500.00 Churchtown Primary School Project with 4 28 July 2010 200.00 the residents of Sunny Road 10% from 2010/11 Ward Allocation 5 28 July 2010 766.25 towards Southport Town Wide budget

6 62 nd Scout Troop HQ refurbishment October 2010 990.00

Street Sign – Balmoral Road – wall 7 October 2010 45.00 mounted

8 Street sign – Turnbery Way – free October 2010 90.00 standing Improvements to Crossens Community 9 November 2010 500.00 Association 4705.25

Page 27 Agenda Item 4

Norwood Ward 2010/11 Commitments Date Approved Cost £ 1 Hanging baskets on Bispham Road 5 May 2010 995.00 2 Transport for Elvardo Morris Dancers 21 May 2010 300.00 Funding for a fun day for young people in 3 28 July 2010 200.00 the High Park area on 19 th August 10% from 2010/11 Ward Allocation 4 28 July 2010 766.25 towards Southport Town Wide budget 6 football training sessions at Canning 5 October 2010 1000.00 Rd Recreation Ground Dog fouling / litter enforcement 6 October 2010 850.00 programme

4111.25

Town Wide 2010/11 Commitments Date Approved Cost £ 1 Southport Veterans Parade 16 June 2010 250.00 CREDIT - 10% from each of the 7 2 2010/11 Ward Allocations towards 28 July 2010 -5363.75 Southport Town Wide budget 3 Deep cleansing in Town Centre October 2010 2910.00 - 2203.75

Recommendation(s)

That the Area Committee:

(i) note the Ward budgets & Town Wide budget for 2010/11

(ii) note the items agreed in 2010/11

Page 28 Agenda Item 5

Meeting: Southport Area Committee

Date of Meeting : 5th January 2011

Title of Report: Southport Cycle Town, Weld Road Roundabout Improvements.

Report of : Andy Wallis This report contains Yes No Director of Planning & Regeneration

CONFIDENTIAL √ Information/

Contact Officer : EXEMPT information by virtue of Dave Marrin 0151 934 4295 paragraph(s)...... √ Peter Hillsdon 0151 934 4808 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972 Is the decision on this √ report DELEGATED ?

Purpose of Report

To inform Members of the details of the proposed cycle improvements to the Weld Road/ Coastal Road roundabout and to seek approval to proceed with the improvement scheme.

Recommendation(s)

It is recommended that:-

(i) Members approve the proposal for the improvements to Weld Road roundabout and widening the coastal cycle path from Weld Road to the path linking to Palace Road.

.

Corporate Objective Monitoring

Page 29 Agenda Item 5

Corporate Positive Neutral Negative Objective Impact Impact Impact 1. Creating a Learning Community √ 2. Creating Safe Communities √ 3. Jobs and Prosperity √ 4. Improving Health and Well-Being √ 5. Environmental Sustainability √ 6. Creating Inclusive Communities √ 7. Improving the Quality of Council Services and √ Strengthening local Democracy 8. Children and Young People √

Financial Implications

2010/ 2011/ 2012/ 2011 2012 2013 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE £ £ £ Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure Funded by: Sefton Capital Resources Specific Capital Resources 50,000 REVENUE IMPLICATIONS Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure Funded by: Sefton funded Resources Funded from External Resources Does the External Funding have an expiry date? Y 31.3.2011 How will the service be funded post expiry?

Departments consulted in the preparation of this Report

Leisure, Coast and Countryside

List of background papers relied upon in the preparation of this Report

Southport Area Committee 5 March 2008 Cycle Town Bid Southport Area Committee 2 July 2008 Cycle Town Bid Southport Area Committee 1 October 2008 Cycling Town Action Plan 2008/9

Page 30 Agenda Item 5

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 Members will recall a number of previous reports concerning the Southport Cycle Town Programme.

1.2 A report made to the Committee on the 5th March 2008 outlined the bidding process, which had to be completed to gain entry into the programme. Members were also consulted further on what should be included in the bid at a Member Officer Working Party held later that month.

1.3 A further report was made to the Committee on the 2nd July 2008. This report indicated that the bid, which was based around three key themes had been successful. The three key themes were:

− Encouraging Tourism & Leisure Cycling – development of a high quality cycle network around the seafront area, access to the Sefton Coast and the development of key linkages to the town centre and all the key leisure attractions for visitors and residents alike.

− Regeneration – providing key links to the two key areas of development within the town, the Marine Park area on the Seafront and the area to the east of the town around Kew, including the business park.

th − Schools – encouraging cycling to high schools and 6 form colleges.

1.4 At its meeting of the 7 th January 2009 Southport Area Committee approved the individual elements of the Cycling Town project following consultation with cycling England. The action plan included:

− Seafront Cycle Route – A key part of the Cycle Town Strategy is to develop a high quality cycle network around the seafront, to encourage tourism and leisure cycling. It was intended to develop these routes through the delivery of the Marine Park development and renovation of Kings Gardens. Following consultation with Cycling England, they have requested that we develop an interim signed route around the seafront to be open for spring 2009. Other parts of the route require civil engineering works and will be developed during the lifetime of the project.

1.5 The work programme was endorsed and approved by the Cabinet Member Technical Services at his meeting of the 14 th January 2009

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 Part of the engineering improvements proposed for the Seafront Loop included improvements to the cycle facilities at the Weld Road roundabout. Due to under spend elsewhere in the cycle Town programme there is sufficient funding available to progress the improvements at this junction and widen a short section of the path along the Coastal Road to Palace Road. 2.2 At present, the cycle facilities at the Weld Road roundabout consist of an on- road cycle lane running around the periphery of the carriageway. This junction

Page 31 Agenda Item 5

provides a key link in the Coastal Path, which also forms National cycle Route 62 and the Transpennine Trail. As a primarily off road leisure route it attracts families, many with young children. The existing on road facility is considered unsuitable for unskilled cyclists and places them at risk. Many users of the route choose to remain on the footpath and cross using the slitter island on Weld Road.

2.3 It is proposed to formalise this arrangement, widening the footpath between Esplanade and the splitter island on Weld Road to 3m, together with the section between Weld Road and the Coastal Road as shown on the plan in Annex A. These short sections will be converted to shared use. As part of the works it is also proposed to widen the first 150m of the Coastal Path to 3m to link to the path which runs back to Palace Road.

2.4 It is also proposed to remove some the vegetation which currently obscures the view of pedestrians and cyclists crossing both Weld Road and Marine Drive as shown on the plan. This causes very poor visibility for pedestrians and motorists road at this location, making it very difficult to cross the road safely.

3. CONCLUSIONS

3.1 The existing cycle facility at the Weld road roundabout is unsuitable for novice cyclists.

3.2 Localised widening of the footpaths around the Weld Road roundabout and removal of some of the overgrown vegetation around the roundabout will improve visibility and provide a safer alternative.

3.3 Due to under spend elsewhere in the cycle Town programme there is sufficient funding available to progress the improvements at this junction.

4.0 RECOMMENDATION

4.1 It is recommended that Members approve the proposal for the improvements to Weld Road roundabout and widening the coastal cycle path from Weld Road to the path linking to Palace Road.

ANNEX A

Page 32 Agenda Item 5

Page 33 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 34 Agenda Item 6

Meeting: Southport Area Committee

Date of Meeting : 5th January 2011

Title of Report: Southport Cycle Town, Crossens Training Bank

Report of : Andy Wallis This report contains Yes No Director of Planning & Regeneration

CONFIDENTIAL √ Information/

Contact Officer : EXEMPT information by virtue of Dave Marrin 0151 934 4295 paragraph(s)...... √ Val Hough 0151 934 4206 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972 Is the decision on this √ report DELEGATED ?

Purpose of Report

To inform Members of the details of the proposed cycle route along Crossens Training Bank and to seek approval to proceed with the improvement scheme.

Recommendation(s)

It is recommended that:-

(i) the details of the scheme along Crossens Training Bank be approved;

(ii) that a Concessionary Cycle Route Agreement be entered into with the landowner; and

(iii) that officers proceed to the implementation of the route subject to planning permission.

Page 35 Agenda Item 6

Corporate Objective Monitoring

Corporate Positive Neutral Negative Objective Impact Impact Impact 1. Creating a Learning Community √ 2. Creating Safe Communities √ 3. Jobs and Prosperity √ 4. Improving Health and Well-Being √ 5. Environmental Sustainability √ 6. Creating Inclusive Communities √ 7. Improving the Quality of Council Services and √ Strengthening local Democracy 8. Children and Young People √

Financial Implications

2010/ 2011/ 2012/ 2011 2012 2013 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE £ £ £ Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure Funded by: Sefton Capital Resources Specific Capital Resources REVENUE IMPLICATIONS Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure Funded by: Sefton funded Resources Funded from External Resources Does the External Funding have an expiry date? Y 31.3.2011 How will the service be funded post expiry?

Departments consulted in the preparation of this Report

List of background papers relied upon in the preparation of this Report

Southport Area Committee 5 March 2008 Cycle Town Bid Southport Area Committee 2 July 2008 Cycle Town Bid Southport Area Committee 1 October 2008 Cycling Town Action Plan 2008/9

Page 36 Agenda Item 6

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 Members will recall a number of previous reports concerning the Southport Cycle Town Programme.

1.2 A report made to the Committee on the 5th March 2008 outlined the bidding process, which had to be completed to gain entry into the programme. Members were also consulted further on what should be included in the bid at a Member Officer Working Party held later that month.

1.3 A further report was made to the Committee on the 2nd July 2008. This report indicated that the bid, which was based around three key themes had been successful. The three key themes were:

− Encouraging Tourism & Leisure Cycling – development of a high quality cycle network around the seafront area, access to the Sefton Coast and the development of key linkages to the town centre and all the key leisure attractions for visitors and residents alike.

− Regeneration – providing key links to the two key areas of development within the town, the Marine Park area on the Seafront and the area to the east of the town around Kew, including the business park.

th − Schools – encouraging cycling to high schools and 6 form colleges.

1.4 At its meeting of the 1 st October 2008 the Southport Area Committee approved the action plan for the Cycling Town project. The action plan was developed following a further Member Officer Working Party (to which all Southport members were invited). The action plan included:

Crossens Training Bank – It is proposed to develop a cycle route along the Environment Agency (EA) training bank between Marine Drive and Banks Road. This 500m route is already used as a permissive walking route and would complete NCN62 north into West Lancashire. Discussions are taking place as part of Ribble Coast and Wetlands Access with Lancashire and EA.

The work programme was endorsed and approved by the Cabinet Member – Technical Services at his meeting of the 8 th October 2008.

2.0 THE PROPOSAL

2.1 The main principle behind the scheme is to introduce an improved surface along the Crossens Training Bank which would provide improved conditions for pedestrians and an environment conducive to cycling.

2.2 Based upon officer discussions with the Environment Agency, a scheme has been developed, which improves the environment along the embankment linking the existing cycle track along Marine Drive to Banks Road, thus avoiding the need to use the busy Plough roundabout.

Page 37 Agenda Item 6

2.3 Capita Symonds were asked to investigate the options and a number of surfaces were considered. The preferred option of the Environment Agency is a stone surface with timber edges.

2.4 Funding is available from the Southport Cycling Town budget to install the route. At this stage £40,000 is in place which would allow construction of approximately half of the route. However, additional funding may be available if there is slippage from other elements of the Cycle Town programme.

2.5 It is intended to begin to install the section of the route at the northern end, this being the most muddy section, and then complete the surfacing as funds allow.

3. HABITAT REGULATIONS ASSESSMENT SCREENING REPORT

3.1 The proposed site is directly adjacent to Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar sites. As a consequence the Council has engaged with the Habitats Directive in line with section 9(1) of the Habitats Regulations 2010. The Council has undertaken a Habitats Regulation Assessment screening which is appended within Appendix A. the Habitats Regulation Screening report finds that the proposed cycle track is unlikely to result in any significant effect on Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar site or any other European Site.

3.2 The screening report will be used to support a planning application.

4.0 RECOMMENDATION

4.1 It is recommended that Members approve the proposal for the improvements to the surface for cycling outlined above and allow officers to proceed with the concessionary cycle route agreement and procuring the works.

Page 38 Agenda Item 6

ANNEX A

Habitats Regulations Assessment

Screening Report for

Planning Application

Creation of a cycle path

Crossens Training Bank, Southport

Page 39 Agenda Item 6

Sefton Council November 2010

Page 40 Agenda Item 6

Document Control Project: Screening Report for Planning Application Creation of a cycle path. Crossens Training Bank, Southport

Prepared for: Sefton Council

File reference:

File Origin: H:\Crossens Cycle route - HRA screening draft

Document Checking:

Prepared by: Rachael Rhodes Ecologist

Checked by: Christine Bennett Ecology Team Leader

Verified by: Christine Bennett Ecology Team Leader

Issue Date Status

1 27.10.2010 1st Draft for internal review 2 04.11.10 2nd Draft for client review

Page 41 Agenda Item 6

Contents

SUMMARY ...... 1

SCREENING MATRIX – CROSSENS CYCLE TRACK ...... 3

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS REPORT – CROSSENS CYCLE TRACK ..5

CONCLUSION ...... 8

Appendices

Appendix 1 – Reasons for designation and conservation objectives of Natura 2000 sites

Appendix 2 – Detailed assessment of potential impacts for each of the Natura 2000 sites

Page 42 Agenda Item 6

Summary 1. This document sets out Sefton Council’s screening of a proposed cycle path at Crossens Training Bank, Southport in accordance with the Habitats Regulations 1 and the EU Habitats Directive 2. It is the applicants Habitats Regulations Assessment Screening document for this planning application.

2. Our approach is based on the EU document “Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites: Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC” prepared by Oxford Brookes University for European Commission Environment DG and published by European Commission Environment DG, 2001, in particular the Annex 2 assessment forms.

3. Habitats Regulations Assessment is an assessment of the potential effects of a proposed project or plan – either a development plan document (DPD) or a supplementary planning document (SPD) – on one or more sites of international nature conservation importance. Projects and plans can only be permitted where the ‘competent authority’ (in this case, Sefton Council) is satisfied that there will be no adverse effects on the integrity of the relevant nature sites.

4. These sites of international nature conservation importance are the network of Natura 2000 sites. The Natura 2000 sites are of exceptional importance in respect of rare, endangered or vulnerable natural habitats and species within the European Community. Natura 2000 sites include Special Protection Areas (SPAs) designated under the EU ‘Wild Birds’ Directive, Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) designated under the EU ‘Habitats’ Directive and Offshore Marine Sites (OMSs).

5. The UK Government’s Planning Policy Statement 9 (PPS9) ‘Biodiversity and Geological Conservation’ states that Ramsar sites should be taken to be part of the Natura 2000 network and treated accordingly (para 6, PPS9, ODPM 2005). Ramsar sites are wetlands of international importance, designated under the International Wetlands Convention, which took place at Ramsar, Iran. PPS9 also states that proposed sites should be treated in the same way as designated sites for all practical purposes, including for Habitats Regulations Assessment. We have followed this Government guidance, and in this document have used the term ‘Natura 2000 sites’ to refer to all these designations and proposed designations.

6. Stage 1 of the Habitats Regulations Assessment process is the screening of proposed plans or projects for significant effects. If there are none, then no further steps need to be taken. Where significant effects seem likely, a more detailed Appropriate Assessment of the proposed plan or projects is necessary. This process will often establish mitigation measures or alternatives, which can offset all significant adverse effects and enable the plan or project to go forward. Where this is not the case, other more stringent measures need to be considered.

7. After carrying out the Habitats Regulations Assessment screening process as set out in this document, we conclude that the proposed cycle path:

1 The Conservation (Natural Habitats & c) Regulations 1994 as amended. 2 The European Communities (1992) Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Page 43 Agenda Item 6

a) Is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the Natura 2000 sites; b) Is not likely to have a significant effect on each of the following sites: • Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area (SPA) • Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site

Either alone or in combination with other plans or projects;

c) No adverse affect on the integrity of the European sites is likely to occur as a result of the proposal. 8. Accordingly, no “appropriate assessment” is required to be made under Regulations 61, 62 and 68 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations, before the Council decides to undertake, or give any consent, permission or other authorisation for this project.

Page 44 Agenda Item 6

Screening Matrix – Crossens Training Bank cycle path

Brief description of the project or plan 1. The proposed project is for the creation of a cycle path along a 500m section of Crossens training bank. The proposed route is located behind residential properties at Skipton Avenue and runs south east for 500m from Marine Drive (SD 37192083) to Banks Road (SD37632060). There is currently a permissive path present along the proposed cycle route which is currently used by pedestrians. The proposed cycle route would form part of Regional Route 81 and Southport Cycle Town project.

2. Crossens training bank is currently classed as a secondary coastal defence and is owned by the Environment Agency. The embankment plateau is grassed in nature and bounded on both sides by relatively steep slopes leading down to existing water courses of Crossens Pool and a drainage ditch.

3. The north western section of the cycle path (160m section) is directly adjacent to Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar sites. Figure 1 shows a plan of the route in relation to Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar. Plate 1 shows a view of the route.

Brief description of the Natura 2000 sites

Natura 2000 sites within which the application site is contained 4. The proposed site is located adjacent to two Natura 2000 designations: Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area (SPA) and Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site

5. The Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site comprises two estuaries, of which the Ribble Estuary is by far the larger, together with an extensive area of sandy foreshore along the Sefton Coast. The site forms part of the chain of west coast sites which fringe the Irish Sea.

6. The site is formed by extensive sand and mudflats backed, in the north, by the saltmarsh of the Ribble Estuary (with areas of coastal grazing marsh located behind the sea embankments) and, to the south, the sand dunes of the Sefton Coast. The tidal flats and saltmarsh support internationally important populations of waterfowl in winter and the sand dunes support vegetation communities and amphibian populations of international importance.

7. Brief descriptions of the SPA and Ramsar sites plus their conservation objectives and vulnerabilities are provided in Appendix 1.

Other Natura 2000 sites 8. There are several other sites designated as SPA and/or Ramsar within the vicinity of the project area which are considered to have close links with the Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA/Ramsar site. Due to the close proximity of these sites to each other, ornithological consensus is that there is ready exchange of wildfowl and waders

Page 45 Agenda Item 6

between sites depending on tidal conditions, weather, prey availability and other factors including disturbance. These sites are listed below. • Sefton Coast SAC • Martin Mere SPA • Martin Mere Ramsar site • Mersey Estuary SPA • Mersey Estuary Ramsar • Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore proposed SPA • Mersey Narrows and North Wirral proposed Ramsar site • Liverpool Bay potential SPA

9. Advice is that Habitats Regulations Assessment should be ‘appropriate’ and fit for purpose. We believe it inappropriate to screen this project against the above listed sites if the screening of the two sites closest to the scheme shows no likely significant effect i.e. no full Appropriate Assessment is required for them.

Assessment criteria

1. Describe the individual elements of the project (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects) likely to give rise to impacts on the Natura 2000 sites.

The project - Alone 10. The following elements of the project have been considered to determine whether they are likely to give rise to impacts on the Natura 2000 sites: • Disturbance (noise and visual) both during construction and operation 11. The following potential impact pathways have been considered: • Disturbance to bird species for which Ribble and Alt Estuary SPA/Ramsar site has been designated by impacts by the effects of noise and visual disturbance. • Construction related pollutants (soils, dust, crushed stone) entering the Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA/Ramsar site.

In-combination effects with other plans and projects 12. Habitats Regulations Assessment requires us to look at both plans and projects that ‘either individually or in combination with other plans or projects’ which could have an effect on the Natura 2000 sites. Advice is that Habitats Regulations Assessment should be ‘appropriate’ and fit for purpose and that the ‘plans’ focus should be on development plans. Unitary Development Plans and Local Development Frameworks 13. Each of the 4 other Merseyside authorities – Liverpool, Wirral, St. Helens and Knowsley – have an adopted Unitary Development Plan. St Helens Core Strategy is completed, whilst the other authorities are at various stages of work on the preparation of their Core Strategies and other Local Development Framework documents as set out in their Local Development Schemes, including Habitats

Page 46 Agenda Item 6

Regulations Assessment. West Lancashire District Council – our neighbouring Lancashire local authority – adopted their Replacement Local Plan in 2006, and the Lancashire, Blackburn with Darwen and Blackpool Joint Lancashire Structure Plan for 2001 – 2016 was adopted in 2005.

14. However, as we consider that there are no individual elements of the project which are likely to give rise to impacts on the Sefton Natura 2000 sites, we do not consider it appropriate to look at any ‘in combination’ effects of these documents produced by other Merseyside or Lancashire authorities.

15. The Sefton Unitary Development Plan is the key land-use planning document for Sefton, and includes policies for the protection and enhancement of Natura 2000 sites. Likewise, we consider that the adopted Sefton Unitary Development Plan (2006) does not need to be assessed for ‘in combination’ effects.

16. As this is a small-scale proposal and screenings for Appropriate Assessment are carried out at an appropriate level, there are no other plans which require screening for in-combination effects at this time. 17. Projects for which it is considered appropriate to look at ‘in combination effects’:

• The installation of 3 statues and 13 safety markers on Crosby Beach as part of ‘Another Place’; • The permanent installation of the Antony Gormley ‘Another Place’ artwork on Crosby Beach; • Thornton – Switch Island Road link • Marshside footpath • Hightown Outfall repair • Crosby to Formby Point Coastal Defence Strategy

The installation of 3 statues and 13 safety markers 19. The planning application for the installation of the statues and safety markers was granted planning permission on 11 July 2008. A Habitats Regulations Assessment Screening Report was prepared which concluded that “no adverse affect on the integrity of the European sites as a result of the proposal.” This view was confirmed by Natural England (16 June 2008).

The permanent installation of ‘Another Place’ 20. The planning application for the ‘Another Place’ artwork (application reference: S/2007/0031) was granted planning permission on 07 March 2007 (see http://www.sefton.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=6216 ). The report to Planning Committee on 07 March 2007 set out the key issues, including those relating to the Appropriate Assessment carried out for the project, which looked at the potential impacts of the proposal on:

• Coastal processes; • Bird feeding behaviour and functional use of feeding grounds; • Increased visitor numbers and activity on the shore on bird feeding; and

Page 47 Agenda Item 6

• Embryo dune formation and protection through increased trampling from increase visitor numbers and activity.

21. The Appropriate Assessment concluded that “the results of the initial mitigation measures and proposed additional mitigation measures when considered together are considered to avoid (no statues in principal bird feeding areas) or reduce to no significant effects (potential visitor disturbance) the impact of the proposal on the Ribble and Alt Estuary SPA/Ramsar site. These mitigation measures should be secured through appropriate legal agreement and condition of planning consent.” The proposal was granted planning permission, subject to conditions dealing with outstanding mitigation measures. The current proposal is located adjacent to the boundary of the existing area of the artwork.

Thornton – Switch Island Road Link 22. A planning application for a new road link between Thornton and Switch Island has been submitted but has not yet been determined. Habitats Regulation Screening is currently being finalised but is likely to conclude that there is unlikely to be a significant effect on the Ribble and Alt Estuary SPA/Ramsar site.

Marshside Footpath 23. This is a proposal for the construction of a new access path and ancillary works along Marshside Road from Marine Drive to Sefton Coastal Footpath. A Habitats Regulation Assessment was undertaken for this project and concluded that there were no likely significant effects on the European sites as a result of the proposal.

Hightown Outfall Repair 24. The planning permission for Hightown outfall repair (Application reference S/2009/0537) was granted in 21 September 2009. A Habitat Regulations Assessment screening was prepared and concluded that was prepared which concluded that “no adverse affect on the integrity of the European sites as a result of the proposal.”

Crosby to Formby Point Coastal Defence strategy 25. This project is for coastal realignment at Hightown as a coastal defence measure. This project will involve the reinstatement of sand dunes at Hightown and the replacement of hard coastal defences around Blundellsands Sailing Club. Habitat Regulations Assessment screening has not yet been completed for this project.

26. Accordingly, we consider that there are no adverse ‘in combination’ effects arising from the current proposal.

2. Describe any likely direct, indirect or secondary impacts of the project (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects) on the Natura 2000 by virtue of: • Size and scale;

Page 48 Agenda Item 6

• Land-take; • Distance from Natura 2000 sites; • Resource requirements (water abstraction etc); • Emissions (disposal to land, water or air); • Excavation requirements; • Transport requirements; • Duration of construction, operation, decommissioning, etc); • Other.

Size, Scale and Land-take 27. There will be no land-take within the Natura 2000 sites.

Distance from the Natura 2000 sites 28. The closest Natura 2000 sites to the application site are: • Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA • Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site 29. A 160m section of the cycle path at the north western end of the track is directly adjacent to the Natura 2000 sites. Resource requirements from the project 30. The construction of the cycle track will require crushed stone (MOT Type 1), timber edging and sand stone finish. Stone will be delivered by Wagon to the site storage area by the gate at Banks Road. The delivery and storage area is away from the Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA / Ramsar site and therefore there will be no impact on this site or the species for which this site has been designated. Emissions resulting from the project 31. There is potential for construction related pollutants in the form of soils, dust and crushed stone to enter the Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA / Ramsar. However, the small scale of this project will not result in the release of sufficient quantities of construction related pollutants to result in a significant effect. Excavation requirements resulting from the project 32. No excavation with Natura 2000 sites will be required. Minor excavation will be required along the length of the path, this will be undertaken by a mini excavator and dumper truck. Excavation works will excavate to a depth of 200mm along the length of the path and install timber edging and geotextile before laying the type 1 sub base material and sandstone finish.

Duration of the Project 33. It is proposed that works start in late January 2011 and will last 4 weeks. This is within the overwintering bird period, however the project construction period is short and its location is outside of any high tide roost areas and therefore unlikely to result in a disturbance to birds within the Natura 2000 sites. It is unlikely that the timing of the project will result in likely significant effects the Natura

Page 49 Agenda Item 6

3. Describe any likely changes to the sites arising as a result of: • Reduction of habitat area; • Disturbance to key species; • Habitat or species fragmentation; • Reduction in species density; • Changes in key indicators of conservation value (water quality etc.); • Climate change

Reduction of habitat area 34. There will be no reduction of habitat area as a result of the proposed project. Disturbance to key species 35. Disturbance to key species is considered as a potential impact to the Natura 2000 sites. Both the construction and operation stage of the project have potential to result in disturbance. However, this is not considered to be at a level which will result in a likely significant effect on the Natura 2000 site or its key species as:

a. Construction is to be undertaken in late January for four weeks. This is within the overwintering bird season. However, works are short-term and minor, construction is to be undertaken by 4-5 construction workers and the use of a dumper truck and mini-excavator.

b. A 160m of the path runs directly adjacent to the Natura 2000 sites this area of the Natura 2000 sites is not used to a significant extent by key species as this area of the Natura 2000 sites is enclosed by the training bank and embankments of Banks enclosed marsh and as such view lines for over wintering birds are restricted (see plate 2). The vegetation sward height in this area is greater than that favoured for feeding by overwintering birds. As such most birds are to be found within Crossens Marsh to the north of Marine Drive and within Marshside Marsh to the south of Marine Drive approx 300m to north and north-west, (personal observation). Correspondence with Tony Baker, Ribble Sites manager RSPB (email 10.11.2010) confirms that although the outflow from the WWTW to the west of the proposed track is popular with birds, (teal, wigeon, black-headed gulls, moorhens, coots), during cold weather. Generally, the larger flocks (of teal and wigeon) which frequent the adjacent saltmarsh tend to use the channel (of 'the Sluice') further downstream and are probably put off using the area affected by the proposal by the enclosed nature of the waterway here. Tony Baker has confirmed that he does not consider that upgrading the status of the footpath to that of combined cycle path/footpath will have an adverse impact on bird usage of the area.

c. Existing features such as the cattle enclosure, a group of willow trees and hawthorn all help to screen the proposed cycle path, reducing visual disturbance to birds (See Plate 3).

d. The proposed cycle path is to be used by both cyclists and pedestrians. Both cyclists and pedestrians already use the footpath along Marine Drive and pedestrians use the existing permissive path along the training bank. There is therefore already a level of public use at and within the vicinity of proposed cycle track to which birds within the Natura 2000 sites are

Page 50 Agenda Item 6

habituated. Anticipated levels of use are 10-20 users per day. Due to the low level of anticipated use, existing public use along Marine Drive and lack of over wintering bird use of adjacent areas of Natura 2000 site there is unlikely to be a significant impact on the Natura 2000 sites. Habitat or species fragmentation 36. The project is unlikely to result in significant habitat or species fragmentation. Reduction in species density 37. The project is unlikely to result in significant disturbance, fragmentation or other effects which could lead to a reduction in species density.

Changes in key indicators of conservation value (water quality etc.) 38. Appendix 2 provides a detailed assessment of whether the proposal would result in change to any of the key indicators of conservation value. No likely significant impacts were identified. Climate change 39. We consider that there is no likely significant effect from climate change or impact on climate change.

4. Describe any likely impacts on the Natura 2000 sites as a whole in terms of: • Interference with the key relationships that define the structure of the site; • Interference with the key relationships that define the function of the site.

40. It is considered that there are no likely impacts on the Nature 2000 sites, taking each site as a whole, in terms of interference with the key relationships that define structure or function of the sites from this project.

5. Provide indicators of significance as a result of the identification of effects set out above in terms of: • Loss; • Fragmentation; • Disruption; • Disturbance; • Change to key elements of the site (e.g. water quality etc.).

41. It is considered that there are no indicators of significance that are relevant here.

6. Describe from the above those elements of the project or plan, or combination of elements, where the above impacts are likely to be significant or where scale or magnitude of impacts is not known.

42. Potential impacts have been identified and their significance considered against the attributes within the Favourable Conservation tables for the Natura 2000 sites. The details are set out in the tables in Appendix 2.

Page 51 Agenda Item 6

43. No likely significant impacts were identified. No impacts were identified for which the scale or magnitude is uncertain to the extent that it would affect assessment of significance.

44. Thus, we consider that there are no likely significant effects arising from this project either individually or in combination with other plans and projects.

Page 52

Proposed cycle route

Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar Page 53 Agenda Item6

Agenda Item6

Plate 1. View along embankment from Bank Road looking towards Marine Drive

Crossens training bank and Area of Natura 2000 sites proposed cycle route adjacent to the proposed cycle rou te

Marine Drive entrance to proposed cycle route Page 54

Plate 2. View from Crossens training embankment showing area of Plate 3. View of cattle enclosure, willow scrub and hawthorn at Marine Natura 2000 sites between training bank and Banks Enclosed marsh Drive which help provide a screen to bird feeding areas to within the embankment marsh.

Page 55

Agenda Item6

Agenda Item 6

Documents referred to:

Oxford Brookes University for European Commission Environment DG (2001). Assessment of plans and projects significantly affecting Natura 2000 sites: Methodological guidance on the provisions of Article 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC

Page 56 Agenda Item 6

Finding of No Significant Effects Report – Planning Application S/2009/0640

Name of project or plan

The project is : Creation of cycle path at Crossens Training Bank, Southport

Name and location of Natura 2000 sites

A 160m section of the cycle track is directly adjacent to two Natura 2000 designations: • Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area (SPA) • Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site

The boundaries of the two Natura 2000 designations are identical and the site is known as Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA/Ramsar.

The closest Natura 2000 sites to the application site not including those listed above include: • Sefton Coast SAC • Martin Mere SPA • Martin Mere Ramsar site • Mersey Estuary SPA • Mersey Estuary Ramsar • Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore potential SPA • Mersey Narrows and North Wirral Foreshore proposed Ramsar site • Liverpool Bay potential SPA

It is considered unnecessary to screen this project against the second list of Natura 2000 sites if the screening of Natura 2000 sites within which the project site is located shows no significant effects i.e. that no full Appropriate Assessment is required.

Description of the project or plan

The proposed project is for the creation of a cycle path along a 500m section of Crossens Training Bank. The proposed route is located behind residential properties at Skipton Avenue and runs south east for 500m from Marine Drive (SD 37192083) to Banks Road (SD37632060). There is currently a permissive path present along the proposed cycle route which is currently used by pedestrians. The proposed cycle route would form part of Regional Route 81 and Southport Cycle Town project.

Crossens training bank is currently classed as a secondary coastal defence and is owned by the Environment Agency. The embankment plateau is grassed in nature and bounded on both sides by relatively steep slopes leading down to existing water courses of Crossens Pool to the north and a drainage ditch to the south.

The north western section of the cycle path (160m section) is directly adjacent to Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar sites. Figure 1 shows a plan of the route in relation to Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA and Ramsar.

Page 57 Agenda Item 6

Is the project or plan directly connected with or necessary to the management of the sites (provide details)?

No.

Are there other projects or plans that together with the project or plan being assessed could affect the site (provide details)?

It is considered that there are no projects or plans with the potential to result in adverse in-combination effects with the current project.

Page 58 Agenda Item 6

The assessment of significance of effects Describe how the project or plan (alone or in combination) is likely to affect the Natura 2000 sites.

Potential impacts identified were:

1. Disturbance to birds for which the Ribble and Alt Estuary SPA/Ramsar site has been designated. 2. Release of construction related pollutants (soils, dust, crushed stone) into the Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA /Ramsar site.

Explain why these effects are not considered significant.

The potential effects are not considered significant as:

1. There is a low level of overwintering bird use within the area of the Natura 2000 site adjacent to the proposed cycle track. 2. Main areas of overwintering bird roosting and feeding are approximately 300m to the north and north west of the proposed cycle route. 3. The cycle track will not result in significant numbers of additional users and therefore public levels of use and disturbance are not anticipated to be significantly greater that existing levels. 4. The small scale of this project will not result in the release of sufficient quantities of construction related pollutants to result in a significant effect. List of agencies consulted: provide contact name and telephone or e-mail address.

To be completed following consultation.

Response to consultation

To be completed following consultation.

Data collected to carry out the assessment Who carried out the assessment?

Rachael Rhodes, MIEEM Ecologist, Merseyside EAS, Sefton Council

Sources of data

Sefton Council Joint Nature Conservation Committee (website) Natural England

Level of assessment completed

Desktop study is sufficient to support the conclusions of this screening option. Where can the full results of the assessment be accessed and viewed?

Sefton Planning Department, Magdalen House, 30 Trinity Road, BOOTLE L20 3NJ Page 59 Agenda Item 6

9am – 5pm Monday – Thursday, 9am – 4pm Fridays.

Or: On our website: Accessed through the Planning application search facility for

Conclusion 45. On the basis of the above information it is it can be concluded that the proposed project to which the screening report relates – a) is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the sites; and b) is not likely to have a significant effect on each of the following sites: • Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area (SPA) • Ribble and Alt Estuary Ramsar site. either alone or in combination with other plans or projects; c) is not likely to result in any adverse affect on the integrity of the Natura 2000 sites. 46. Accordingly, no “appropriate assessment” is required to be made under Regulations 48, 49 and 54 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats & c.) Regulations before the Council decides to undertake, or give any consent, permission or other authorisation for this plan.

Page 60 Agenda Item 6

Appendix 1 – Reasons for Designation and Conservation Objectives of Natura 2000 sites

Page 61 Agenda Item6

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar Site Brief Description Conservation Objectives Vulnerability The Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site The Conservation Objectives are to maintain in The only factor adversely affecting the site’s comprises two estuaries, of which the Ribble favourable condition: ecological character which has been identified Estuary is by far the larger, together with an is coastal erosion at Formby Point. There is an extensive area of sandy foreshore along the • The habitats for the populations of estimated loss of 4 metres per year. Sefton Coast. The site forms part of the chain of natterjack toads, in particular; west coast sites which fringe the Irish Sea. Dune slacks There is concern because pine woodland on the sand dunes is causing coastal squeeze and The site is formed by extensive sand and • The habitats for internationally important therefore preventing sand dune habitats from mudflats backed, in the north, by the saltmarsh waterbirds (Criterion 5), in particular; rolling back; as such dune slack habitats for of the Ribble Estuary (with areas of coastal Intertidal sand and mudflats natterjack toads are declining/being lost.

Page 62 grazing marsh located behind the sea Saltmarsh embankments) and, to the south, the sand Marshy grassland While this is identified as a Category 2 adverse dunes of the Sefton Coast. The tidal flats and factor (i.e. a factor that is not currently being saltmarsh support internationally important • The habitats for internationally important managed, or where the regulatory regime populations of waterfowl in winter and the sand waterbirds (Criterion 6), in particular; appears to have been ineffective so far), dunes support vegetation communities and Intertidal sand and mudflat mitigation is in place. At Ainsdale Sand Dunes amphibian populations of international Saltmarsh National Nature Reserve, English Nature has importance. Marshy grassland made efforts to restore dune habitats.

The Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site is a Maintenance implies restoration if the feature is The Ramsar site is not subject to adverse wetland of international importance because: not currently in favourable condition. ecological change.

• It supports up to 40% of the GB (Source: based on pp 18-19, English Nature’s ‘Draft (Source: Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands (RIS), JNCC, population of natterjack toads ( Bufo Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries 05/05/2006, via JNCC web-site). European Marine Site’, May 2001). calamita ); which is a vulnerable, endangered or critically endangered species or threatened ecological community (Criterion 2); • It regularly supports 20,000 or more waterbirds – (Criterion 5); • It regularly supports 1% of a number of populations of waterbird species or sub- species (details in Appendix A)

The site also supports nationally important non- breeding populations. The nationally rare plant Petalwort (Petalophyllum ralfsii ) is found in the dune slack areas, and the nationally rare Natterjack toad (Bufo calamita ) is also found in the dune areas.

(Source: English Nature’s ‘Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar classification citation November 2002, and the JNCC’s ‘Information Sheet on Ramsar Wetlands’, May 2006.)

Page 63 Agenda Item6

Agenda Item6

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area (SPA) Brief Description Conservation Objectives Vulnerability The Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA regularly The Conservation Objectives are to maintain in The dunes, intertidal flats and saltmarsh of the supports internationally important populations favourable condition: Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA enjoy a relatively of: robust status and a favourable condition • The habitats for the populations of although in places the site is subject to pressure • Rare or vulnerable bird species (Annex regularly occurring Annex 1 species (Wild from recreation, built development (including 1); Birds Directive) of European importance, coastal defence), wildfowling and industry • Migratory bird species in particular: (including sand winning). Intertidal sand and mudflats Also the Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA is an Saltmarsh Of these vulnerabilities: internationally important site for waterfowl, • The habitats for the populations of especially in winter (and the UK’s second most regularly occurring migratory bird species • Wildfowling has an insignificant impact important site after the Wash), regularly of European importance, in particular: on direct land-take and disturbance due Page 64 supporting over 20,000 birds. Nationally Intertidal sand and mudflats to effective management through the important populations include lapwing and Saltmarsh provision of refuge areas and strict curlew. • The habitats for the populations of regulation on shooting activities. waterfowl that contribute to the • Military activities only take place at (Source: English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the wintering waterfowl assemblage of Altcar Rifle Range, i.e. adjacent to the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’. May 2001). European importance, with particular Alt Estuary. reference to: • Recreation is informal and of relatively Intertidal sand and mudflat low intensity along most of the Sefton Saltmarsh Coast and in the Ribble Estuary. Marshy grassland • Beach activities are managed through the Beach Management Plan. Sand- Maintenance implies restoration if the feature is winning at the Horse Bank, Southport has not currently in favourable condition. now ceased (February 2007). • Much of the SPA attracts beneficial land (Source: pp 18-19, English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 management via the implementation of advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine agreed plans for 3 NNRs, 2 LNRs and Site’, May 2001). other initiatives developed by the Sefton

Coast Partnership.

Although there is little evidence of sea-level rise so far, the extent and distribution of habitats remains vulnerable to changes in the physical environment, either natural or man-induced.

• Formby Pont and Ainsdale are suffering intense coastal erosion, being investigated through the Sefton Shoreline Management Plan. Beach Management practices have led to creation of considerable areas of embryo dunes on the upper shore elsewhere. • The Ribble Estuary is evolving as sediment pattern change. Saltmarsh continues to accrete following past land-claim and the closure of Preston Docks. • The intertidal habitats are vulnerable to accidental pollution from the nearby Mersey Estuary and the Irish Sea oil and gas fields. Oil spill contingency plans are

Page 65 being updated to deal with such events.

(Source: JNCC ‘Natura 2000 Standard Data Form for Ribble and Alt Estuaries SPA’ 05/05/06 via JNCC web-site). Agenda Item6

Agenda Item6

Appendix 2: Impact Tables for Natura 2000 sites Page 66

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar Site Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Herpetological Conservation Trust web-site; North Merseyside Biodiversity Action Plan web-site: Species Plan: Natterjack Toad Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project Intertidal Populations Disturbance in Reduction in No significant reduction Potential No likely ‘in Appropriate sand and of feeding and or in numbers or disturbance combination’ Assessment not mudflat, International, roosting areas. displacement displacement of from noise effects. required. This saltmarsh European of birds. wintering birds in and visual element can be and and National relation to a reference disturbance screened out. marshy importance level. during grassland construction and

Page 67 operation. However, the level of disturbance is not considered to be significant due to low predicted numbers of

users (10-20 Agenda Item6 per day) and lack of overwintering bird use at area of Natura 2000 site adjacent to cycle path. Landscape Open terrain, No significant reduction No likely No likely ‘in Appropriate relatively free in view lines in feeding impacts combination’ Assessment not

Agenda Item6

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar Site Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Herpetological Conservation Trust web-site; North Merseyside Biodiversity Action Plan web-site: Species Plan: Natterjack Toad Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project of obstructions and roosting areas in effects. required. This (feeding, anti- relation to a reference element can be predator, level. screened out. roosting)

Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate Marshy Annex Vegetation Open, short No significant change present within combination’ Assessment not grassland I/Migratory characteristics vegetation or in vegetation height the area of effects. required. This species/ bare ground throughout areas used Page 68 the project. element can be Assemblage predominating for feeding and screened out. (roosting) roosting in relation to a No likely reference level. impacts Food Abundance of No significant reduction Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate availability soil and in presence and present within combination’ Assessment not ground abundance of prey the area of effects. required. This surface species in relation to the project. element can be invertebrates reference level. screened out. No likely impacts Intertidal Extent and Area (ha) No significant decrease Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate sand and distribution of measured in extent from a present within combination’ Assessment not mud flats habitat once per reference level. the area of effects. required. This reporting the project. element can be cycle screened out. No likely impacts Food Presence and Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate availability abundance of present within combination’ Assessment not surface and the area of effects. required. This

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar Site Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Herpetological Conservation Trust web-site; North Merseyside Biodiversity Action Plan web-site: Species Plan: Natterjack Toad Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project sub-surface the project. element can be invertebrates. screened out. Measured No likely periodically impacts Saltmarsh Extent and Area (ha) Habitat not distribution of measured present within habitat once per the area of reporting the project.

Page 69 cycle No likely impacts Vegetation Open, short Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate characteristics vegetation or present within combination’ Assessment not bare ground the area of effects. required. This predominating the project. element can be (roosting). screened out. Measured periodically No likely

impacts Agenda Item6 Food Presence of Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate availability abundance of present within combination’ Assessment not invertebrates. the area of effects. required. This Measured the project. element can be periodically screened out.

No likely impacts Natterjack Sand dune Extent and Area (ha), Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate Toad slacks distribution of measured present within combination’ Assessment not

Agenda Item6

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar Site Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Herpetological Conservation Trust web-site; North Merseyside Biodiversity Action Plan web-site: Species Plan: Natterjack Toad Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project habitat once per the area of effects. required. This reporting the project. element can be cycle screened out.

No likely impacts Ponds and Visual Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate

Page 70 slacks from assessment present within combination’ Assessment not winter through the area of effects. required. This to late summer the project. element can be screened out.

No likely impacts Short grassland Measured Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate and sand for periodically. present within combination’ Assessment not feeding areas Visual the area of effects. required. This assessment the project. element can be screened out.

No likely impacts Open sand Measured Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate ridges for periodically. present within combination’ Assessment not burrows Visual the area of effects. required. This assessment the project. element can be screened out.

No likely

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar Site Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Herpetological Conservation Trust web-site; North Merseyside Biodiversity Action Plan web-site: Species Plan: Natterjack Toad Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project impacts Saltmarsh Extent and Area (ha), Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate distribution of measured present within combination’ Assessment not habitat once per the area of effects. required. This reporting the project. element can be cycle screened out.

No likely

Page 71 impacts

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion

Feature impacts combination’ Agenda Item6 from the effects project Internationally All sub- Disturbance in Reduction or No significant reduction Potential No likely ‘in Appropriate important features feeding and displacement in numbers or disturbance combination’ Assessment not populations roosting areas of wintering displacement of from noise effects. required. This of Annex 1 birds. wintering birds in and visual element can be bird species Measured relation to a reference disturbance screened out. (e.g. golden periodically. level. during plover, construction

Agenda Item6

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project Bewick’s and swan, operation. whooper However, the swan, bar- level of tailed godwit disturbance is not considered to

Page 72 be significant due to low predicted numbers of users (10-20 per day) and lack of overwintering bird use at area of Natura 2000 site adjacent to cycle path.

Absence of Openness of Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate obstructions to terrain present within combination’ Assessment not view lines unrestricted by the area of effects. required. This obstructions. the project. element can be Measured No likely screened out. periodically impacts Intertidal Extent and Area (ha) No decrease in extent Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate sand and distribution of measured from an established present within combination’ Assessment not

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project mudflats habitat once per baseline, subject to the area of effects. required. This reporting natural change the project. element can be cycle screened out. No likely impacts Food Presence and Presence and Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate availability abundance of abundance of prey present within combination’ Assessment not surface and species should not the area of effects. required. This

Page 73 sub-surface deviate significantly the project. element can be invertebrates. from an established screened out. Measured baseline, subject to No likely periodically natural change impacts (frequency to be determined) Internationally Saltmarsh Extent and Area (ha), No decrease in extent Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate important distribution of measured from an established present within combination’ Assessment not populations habitat once per baseline, subject to the area of effects. required. This

of Annex 1 reporting natural change. the project. element can be Agenda Item6 bird species cycle screened out. (e.g. golden plover, No likely Bewick’s impacts swan, whooper swan, bar- tailed godwit

Vegetation Open, short Vegetation height and Habitat not No likely ‘in Appropriate

Agenda Item6

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project characteristics vegetation or extent of bare ground present within combination’ Assessment not bare ground throughout areas used the area of effects. required. This predominating for feeding and the project. element can be (roosting). roosting should not screened out. Measured deviate significantly periodically from an established No likely baseline, subject to impacts

Page 74 natural change. Internationally All sub- Disturbance in Reduction or No significant reduction Potential No likely ‘in Appropriate important features feeding and displacement in numbers or disturbance combination’ Assessment not assemblage roosting areas of wintering displacement of from noise effects. required. This including birds wintering birds from and visual element can be internationally measured and established disturbance screened out. important using 5 year baseline, subject to during populations peak mean natural change construction of migratory information on and species populations. operation. Measured However, the periodically level of (frequency to disturbance is be not determined) considered to be significant due to low predicted numbers of users (10-20 per day) and lack of

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project overwintering bird use at area of Natura 2000 site adjacent to cycle path.

Absence of Openness of No increase in No likely No likely ‘in Appropriate

Page 75 obstructions terrain obstructions to existing impacts combination’ Assessment not unrestricted by bird view lines. effects. required. This obstructions. element can be Measured screened out. periodically. Intertidal Extent and Area (ha), No decrease in extent No likely ‘in Appropriate sand and distribution of measured from an established No likely combination’ Assessment not mudflats habitat once per baseline, subject to impacts effects. required. This reporting natural change. element can be cycle screened out.

Food Presence and Presence and No likely ‘in Appropriate Agenda Item6 availability abundance of abundance of food No likely combination’ Assessment not sub-surface species should not impacts effects. required. This invertebrates. deviate significantly element can be Measured from and established screened out. periodically baseline, subject to (frequency to natural change. be determined). Food Presence and Presence and No likely No likely ‘in Appropriate availability abundance of abundance of food impacts combination’ Assessment not

Agenda Item6

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project eelgrass and / species should not effects. required. This or green deviate significantly element can be algae. from an established screened out. Measured baseline, subject to periodically natural change. (frequency to be

Page 76 determined). Saltmarsh Extent and Area (ha), No decrease in extent No likely No likely ‘in Appropriate distribution of measured from an established impacts combination’ Assessment not habitat once per baseline, subject to effects. required. This reporting natural change. element can be cycle screened out. Food Presence of Presence and No likely No likely ‘in Appropriate availability abundance of abundance of food impacts combination’ Assessment not invertebrates. species should not effects. required. This Measured deviate significantly element can be periodically from and established screened out. (frequency to baseline, subject to be natural change. determined). Food Presence and Presence and No likely No likely ‘in Appropriate availability abundance of abundance of food impacts combination’ Assessment not soft leaved species should not effects. required. This and seed deviate significantly element can be bearing from an established screened out. plants. baseline, subject to Measured natural change. periodically

Ribble and Alt Estuaries Special Protection Area Based on English Nature’s ‘Draft Regulation 33 advice for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine Site’, May 2001 – Table 2: Favourable Condition for the Ribble and Alt Estuaries European Marine site, pp 24-27; Feature Sub- Attribute Measures Site-specific target Possible Possible ‘in Conclusion Feature impacts combination’ from the effects project (frequency to be determined) Vegetation Open, short Vegetation height No likely No likely ‘in Appropriate characteristics vegetation or throughout areas used impacts combination’ Assessment not bare ground for feeding and effects. required. This predominating roosting should not element can be (roosting). deviate significantly screened out.

Page 77 Measured from an established periodically baseline, subject to (frequency to natural change. be determined).

Agenda Item6

This page is intentionally left blank

Page 78 Agenda Item 7

Page 79 Agenda Item 7

Page 80 Agenda Item 7

Page 81 Agenda Item 7

Page 82 Agenda Item 7

Page 83 Agenda Item 7

Page 84 Agenda Item 7

Page 85 Agenda Item 7

Page 86 Agenda Item 7

Page 87 Agenda Item 7

Page 88 Agenda Item 7

Page 89 Agenda Item 7

Page 90 Agenda Item 7

Page 91 Agenda Item 7

Page 92 Agenda Item 7

Page 93 Agenda Item 7

Page 94 Agenda Item 7

Page 95 Agenda Item 7

Page 96 Agenda Item 7

Page 97 Agenda Item 7

Page 98 Agenda Item 7

Page 99 Agenda Item 7

Page 100 Agenda Item 7

Page 101 Agenda Item 7

Page 102 Agenda Item 7

Page 103 Agenda Item 7

Page 104 Agenda Item 8

Meeting: SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE

Date of Meeting : 5th JANUARY 2011

Title of Report: PROVISION OF ALLEYGATES – WAVELL AVENUE, SOUTHPORT

Report of : This report contains Yes No

Andy Wallis Director of Planning and Economic CONFIDENTIAL √ Regeneration Information/ Contact Officer : EXEMPT information by virtue of Brian Mason (Highways Development paragraph(s)...... of Part √ Control) 934 4175 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972 (If information is marked exempt, the Public Interest Test must be applied and favour the exclusion of the information from the press and public). Is the decision on this report DELEGATED ? √

Purpose of Report

To obtain approval to proceed with a Gating Order following a request from the Neighbourhoods Division for the area identified in the report and as shown upon the attached plan.

Recommendation(s)

It is recommended that:-

(1) The Director of Planning and Economic Regeneration in conjunction with the Legal Director be authorised to:-

(a) Process a Gating Order application pursuant to s129a of the Highways Act 1980 by advertising the Council’s intention to install gates to the effect of which would be to restrict access to the passageway as highlighted in the report and shown on the attached plan numbered DC0707 (b) Subject to there being no objections during the statutory advertising period, the Legal Services Director be authorised to confirm the respective Order. Where an objection is raised, a report will be

Page 105 Agenda Item 8

prepared to the Area Committee, unless the objection is raised by the Emergency Services in which case, the matter would be referred to a Public Inquiry.

Corporate Objective Monitoring

Corporate Positive Neutral Negative Objective Impact Impact Impact 1. Creating a Learning Community √ 2. Creating Safe Communities √ 3. Jobs and Prosperity √ 4. Improving Health and Well-Being √ 5. Environmental Sustainability √ 6. Creating Inclusive Communities √ 7. Improving the Quality of Council Services and √ Strengthening local Democracy 8. Children and Young People √

Financial Implications

2010/ 2011/ 2012/ 2013/ 2011 2012 2013 2014 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE £ £ £ £ Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure Funded by: Sefton Capital Resources Specific Capital Resources REVENUE IMPLICATIONS Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure Funded by: Neighbourhoods £2000 Sefton funded Resources Funded from External Resources Does the External Funding have an expiry date? No When? How will the service be funded post expiry?

Departments consulted in the preparation of this Report

Planning and Economic Regeneration, and Legal Services.

List of background papers relied upon in the preparation of this Report None

Page 106 Agenda Item 8

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 Various locations have been highlighted for Alleygating as shown upon the attached plan. Funding has been allocated from the Neighbourhoods Division to Alleygate those areas which would most benefit from the scheme to reduce incidents of anti – social behaviour within the associated communities.

1.2 The application has been assessed to determine if it meets the essential criteria and the Director of Planning and Economic Regeneration is satisfied that the application should be processed in accordance with s129a-g of the Highways Act 1980, particularly as the general public are provided with a reasonable suitable alternative.

1.3 It is therefore considered that the support for the Order is sufficient to justify its introduction and the making of the Order will be of benefit to the residents and the environment.

1.4 Any objections raised during the statutory advertising period will be submitted to the Area Committee, in due course.

1.5 Under Section 129A of the Highways Act 1980, a person desiring a highway to be gated may request the Highway Authority (in this case the Council) to make a Gating Order, in respect of that, the highway is facilitating high and persistent levels of crime and anti-social behaviour which adversely affects local residents.

1.6 The Council must give 28 days notice of making the Order specifically to adjoining owners/occupiers and statutory undertakers and in addition must publish notices on the Council website, in a local newspaper and also display a site notice.

1.7 Any person who receives the notice referred to above, or uses the highway or who would be aggrieved by the proposed gating of the highway has a right to be heard. Under the Council’s present constitution, the Area Committee will carry out this consideration. The Council can determine the continuation of the Gating Order, even if objections are made and it is in the best interests of the local community to do so.

1.8 If the Order is confirmed the passageway will be maintained as a public highway, however its effect is to end the right of the public to use it as a highway until such a time that the Order is revoked.

2.0 Conclusion

2.1 An application has been received from the Neighbourhoods Division for the gating of various passageways, as shown upon the attached plans. The Director of Planning and Economic Regeneration is satisfied that the applications meet the strict criteria and as such, can be processed under

Page 107 Agenda Item 8

s129a-g of the Highways Act 1980. Subject to there being no objections being raised during the statutory advertising period, the Legal Director will confirm the Order however, if any objections are raised, a report will be prepared to the Area Committee for consideration.

2.2. The cost of processing the application including the gates will be funded by the Neighbourhoods Division.

ANDY WALLIS Director of Planning and Economic Regeneration

Page 108 Agenda Item 8

Page 109 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 110 Agenda Item 9

Meeting: SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE

Date of Meeting: 5 JANUARY 2011

Title of Report: AMENDMENT TO TRO – BALFOUR ROAD, SOUTHPORT

Report of : Andy Wallis This report contains Yes No Director of Planning & CONFIDENTIAL Economic Development Information/

Contact Officer : EXEMPT information by Dave Marrin 0151 934 4295 virtue of Paula Butt 0151 934 4227 paragraph(s)...... of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972 Is the decision on this report DELEGATED ?

Purpose of Report

To seek approval for a traffic regulation order, the effect of which will introduce ‘No Waiting & No Loading Sat 1pm – 5pm between 01 Aug – 31 May & Tues 6pm – 10pm between 01 Aug – 31 May’ on the south east side of Balfour Road, Southport.

Recommendation(s)

It is recommended that :-

(i) The Traffic Regulation Order be approved, as shown on the plan in Annex B and set out in the schedule in Annex C

(ii) the necessary legal procedures, including those of public consultation and advertising the Council's intention to implement the Order(s), be approved

. .

Page 111 Agenda Item 9

Corporate Objective Monitoring

Corporate Positive Neutral Negative Objective Impact Impact Impact 1. Creating a Learning Community √ 2. Creating Safe Communities √ 3. Jobs and Prosperity √ 4. Improving Health and Well-Being √ 5. Environmental Sustainability √ 6. Creating Inclusive Communities √ 7. Improving the Quality of Council Services and Strengthening local Democracy √ 8. Children and Young People √

Financial Implications

2010/ 2011/ 2012/ 2013/ 2011 2012 2013 2014 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE £ £ £ £ Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure Funded by: Sefton Capital Resources Specific Capital Resources REVENUE IMPLICATIONS Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure 1500 Funded by: Sefton funded Resources 1500 Funded from External Resources Does the External Funding have an expiry date? N When? How will the service be funded post expiry? Traffic Management Budget

Departments consulted in the preparation of this Report:

None

List of background papers relied upon in the preparation of this report

None

Page 112 Agenda Item 9

1.0 BACKGROUND

1.1 A request was received from a resident for additional waiting restrictions to be introduced along the whole length of Balfour Road, Southport. It is alleged that when Southport FC play home football matches, supporters park their vehicles in Balfour Road as it is the closest road to Southport FC’s ground where supporters can park their vehicles without penalty; and these parked vehicles prevent access difficulties for residents.

1.2 Site surveys carried out when Southport FC are playing home matches, reveal that Balfour Road is solidly parked up on both sides, and that the large number of parked vehicles may present access problems to residents.

1.3 In addition, Southport FC were recently promoted therefore larger numbers of supporters will be visiting Southport FC for their home games as they will be playing against more well known teams. This will lead to a greater number of supporters parking in Balfour Road. The existing traffic regulation order in Balfour Road is shown on the plan in Annex A.

2.0 CONDITIONS AND OBSERVATIONS

2.1 The section of Balfour Road for the purpose of this committee report is located between Forest Road to the north and Scarisbrick New Road to the south. It contains residential properties that have off-street parking availability for at least one vehicle, it is subject to a speed limit of 30 mph and it has a carriageway width of approximately 7.5 metres.

3.0 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENT RECORD

3.1 There has been no personal injury accidents recorded within the latest three- year study period along the length of Balfour Road, Southport.

4.0 DISCUSSION AND PROPOSAL

4.1 Balfour Road as it is the closest road to Southport FC’s ground where supporters can park their vehicles without penalty and it runs parallel to Haig Avenue where Southport FC’s football ground is located. As the parking problems for residents occur when Southport FC play home matches, it is recommended that the ‘matchday’ waiting restrictions currently in place on Haig Avenue are replicated along the full length of one side of Balfour Road.

4.2 The proposal was discussed at a recent meeting of the Traffic Management Liaison Group (TMLG) where full approval to the proposal was given.

4.3 It is proposed to introduce a traffic regulation order, the effect of which will introduce ‘No Waiting & No Loading Sat 1pm – 5pm between 01 Aug – 31 May & Tues 6pm – 10pm between 01 Aug -31 May’ on the south east side of Balfour Road, as shown on the plan in Annex B and as detailed in the Schedule in Annex C. Andy Wallis Director of Planning & Economic Development

Page 113 Agenda Item 9 APPENDIX Annex A

SEFTON COUNCIL

Page 114 Agenda Item 9 APPENDIX

Annex B

SEFTON COUNCIL

Page 115 Agenda Item 9 APPENDIX Annex C Schedule: 12

Restricted Roads (No Waiting at Certain Times)

1 2

Roads and parts of roads in which waiting is prohibited at certain times Days and Times of Prohibition

Balfour Road:

South-east Side - from the south-west kerbline of Forest Road to a point 10 metres north- Sat 1pm-5pm between 01 Aug and 31 west of the north-west kerbline of Scarisbrick New Road May and Tues 6pm-10pm between 01 Aug and 31 May

Schedule: 14

Restricted Roads (No Loading at Certain Times)

1 2

Roads and parts of roads in which loading and unloading is prohibited at certain Days and Times of Prohibition times

Balfour Road:

South-east Side - from the south-west kerbline of Forest Road to the north-west kerbline Sat 1pm-5pm between 01 Aug and 31 of Scarisbrick New Road May and Tues 6pm-10pm between 01 Aug and 31 May

SEFTON COUNCIL

Page 116 Agenda Item 10

Meeting: SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE

Date of Meeting : 5 JANUARY 2011

Title of Report : ARUNDEL ROAD/WOODSTOCK DRIVE, BIRKDALE - PROPOSED EXTENSION TO EXISTING TRAFFIC REGULATION ORDER

Report of : This report contains Yes No Andy Wallis CONFIDENTIAL √ Director of Planning & Economic Information/ Regeneration

Contact Officer : EXEMPT information by virtue of Dave Marrin – 934 4295 paragraph(s)...... of Part 1 of Karen Boyle – 934 4540 Schedule 12A to the Local √ Government Act, 1972 (If information is marked exempt, the Public Interest Test must be applied and favour the exclusion of the information from the press and public). Is the decision on this report √ DELEGATED ?

Purpose of Report

To seek approval to extend the existing ‘At Any Time’ parking restrictions at the junction of Arundel Road/Woodstock Drive, Birkdale.

Recommendation(s) It is recommended that:

(i) The Traffic Regulation Order, as set out on the plan in Annex A, and as detailed in the schedule Annex D, be approved;

(ii) The necessary legal procedures, including those of public consultation and advertising the Council's intention to implement the Order(s), be approved.

Page 117 Agenda Item 10

Corporate Objective Monitoring

Corporate Positive Neutral Negative Objective Impact Impact Impact 1. Creating a Learning Community √ 2. Creating Safe Communities √ 3. Jobs and Prosperity √ 4. Improving Health and Well-Being √ 5. Environmental Sustainability √ 6. Creating Inclusive Communities √ 7. Improving the Quality of Council Services and √ Strengthening local Democracy 8. Children and Young People √

Financial Implications

2008/ 2009/ 2010/ 2011/ 2009 2010 2011 2012 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE £ £ £ £ Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure Funded by: Sefton Capital Resources Specific Capital Resources REVENUE IMPLICATIONS Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure 1000.00 Funded by: Sefton funded Resources 1000.00 Funded from External Resources Does the External Funding have an expiry date? Y/N When? How will the service be funded post expiry? How will the service be funded post expiry?

Departments consulted in the preparation of this Report None

List of background papers relied upon in the preparation of this Report None

SEFTON M.B.C.

Page 118 Agenda Item 10

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 A request was received from a Ward Councillor in late 2009 to extend the existing ‘At Any Time’ parking restrictions at the junction of Arundel Road/Woodstock Drive, Birkdale.

1.2 It is alleged that vehicles are being parked indiscriminately/obstructively when children are being ‘dropped off’ or ‘picked up’ from Farnborough Road School and causing access problems for residents.

1.3 This matter was reported to Southport Area Committee on 6 January 2010, where it was agreed to defer the report pending a site meeting with Ward Councillors.

1.4 Ward Councillors and Officers from the Technical Services Department met on site where Ward Councillors requested that the proposed junction protection parking restrictions be continued on alternative sides of Woodstock Drive.

1.5 It was agreed that this matter would be discussed at a future meeting of the Traffic Management Liaison Group (TMLG).

2.0 CONSULTATIONS

2.1 TMLG indicated that it felt that the introduction of further parking restrictions in Woodstock Drive would have an adverse affect on residents and their visitors, therefore, it was agreed to recommend the original proposal of junction protection only (Annex A) and monitor the situation.

2.2 This matter was reported to Southport Area Committee on 28 July 2010, where it was agreed to defer the report pending consultation with residents.

2.3 Ward Councillors consulted with the residents of Woodstock Drive on three options and these options are shown as Annex A, B and C. Following the consultation a petition was forwarded to Traffic Services from residents indicating their objection to further parking restrictions other than those shown in Annex A. A copy of the petition is attached in Annex E.

2.4 The matter was further discussed with the TMLG who again indicated that they favoured the restrictions shown in Annex A.

2.5 In view of the above Officers continue to feel that the most appropriate course of action will be to introduce the restrictions as shown in Annex A.

3.0 PROPOSALS

3.1 It is proposed to extend the existing ‘At Any Time’ parking restrictions at the junction of Arundel Road/Woodstock Drive, Birkdale, as shown on Annex A and as detailed in the schedule Annex D.

A. WALLIS Director of Planning & Economic Development Page 119 Agenda Item 10

b 0 a 0 0 ANNEX A 3 0 3

c

0 d

0 0 12 3 0 3 302a 302b

2 2 0 3

2

0 # TCB # 3

#

2 a 1

1

LB 8

5 1

1 10.4m 2

1

9

Crown Hotel

1 (PH) 2

a t

S

b

u

S E l

V E s I g

n i

R d l i

D u

B

n

w 6 K o

0 r 3 5 OC C T S

D

2

O 1 O 9 8 W 7

9.8m 2

8

1 3 2

Key : 9 7 Existing double yellow lines Proposed double yellow lines

METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF SEFTON Title Drawn KMB

A. Wallis Arundel Road/Woodstock Drive, Scale NTS

Director of Planning & Economic Regeneration Birkdale DEC 09 Date

Page 120 Agenda Itemc 10 0 d 0 0 12 3 0 3 ARU 3 NDE 02a L RO AD ANNEX302b B

2

0

2 3

2

0

# 3

TCB #

5 1

a 1 1 1

1 10.4m 2

1

9 Crown Hotel (PH) a t

S

b

u

S s 7 E l g E V n I i d l R i u

D B

n

w 6 o K 0 r C 3 O C T S

D

O 1 O 9 W

9.8m

2 3

8 1

1

3 2

9 7

Key :

Existing double yellow lines 29

0 Proposed double yellow lines 9 33 METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF SEFTON Title Drawn KMB

A. Wallis Arundel Road/Woodstock Drive, Scale NTS

Director of Planning & Economic Development Birkdale AUG 10 Date

Page 121 Agenda Item 10 c 0 d 0 0 12 3 0 3 ARU 3 NDE 02a L RO AD ANNEX302b C

2

0

2 3

2

0

# 3

TCB #

5 1

a 1 1 1

1 10.4m 2

1

9 Crown Hotel (PH) a t

S

b

u

S s 7 E l g E V n I i d l R i u

D B

n

w 6 o K 0 r C 3 O C T S

D

O 1 O 9 W

9.8m

2 3

8 1

1

3 2

9 7

Key :

Existing double yellow lines 29

0 Proposed double yellow lines 9 33 METROPOLITAN BOROUGH OF SEFTON Title Drawn KMB

A. Wallis Arundel Road/Woodstock Drive, Scale NTS

Director of Planning & Economic Development Birkdale AUG 10 Date

Page 122 Agenda Item 10

ANNEX D

Schedule: 11

Restricted Roads (No Waiting At Any Time)

Roads and parts of roads in which waiting is prohibited twenty four hours a day

1 2

Street Side

Arundel Road South-west Side

from a point 10 metres north-west of the north-west kerbline of Woodstock Drive to the north-west kerbline of Liverpool Road

Woodstock Drive Both Sides

from the south-west kerbline of Arundel Road to a point 10 metres south-west of the south- west kerbline of Arundel Road

Page 123 Agenda Item 10 ANNEX E

Page 124 Agenda Item 10

Page 125 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 126 Agenda Item 11

Meeting: Southport Area Committee

Date of Meeting : 5 January 2011

Title of Report: Southport Park & Ride Service

Report of : Andy Wallis This report contains Yes No Director of Planning & Development

CONFIDENTIAL √ Information/

Contact Officer : EXEMPT information by virtue of Dave Marrin 0151 934 4295 paragraph(s)...... √ of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act, 1972 Is the decision on this √ report DELEGATED ?

Purpose of Report

To respond to a request from members to consider changes to the service to better serve Ocean Plaza and Southport College.

Recommendation(s)

It is recommended that Members note the report

Page 127 Agenda Item 11

Corporate Objective Monitoring

Corporate Positive Neutral Negative Objective Impact Impact Impact 1. Creating a Learning Community √ 2. Creating Safe Communities √ 3. Jobs and Prosperity √ 4. Improving Health and Well-Being √ 5. Environmental Sustainability √ 6. Creating Inclusive Communities √ 7. Improving the Quality of Council Services and √ Strengthening local Democracy 8. Children and Young People √

Financial Implications

2010/ 2011/ 2011 2012 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE £ £ Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure Funded by: Sefton Capital Resources Specific Capital Resources REVENUE IMPLICATIONS Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure Funded by: Sefton funded Resources Funded from External Resources Does the External Funding have an expiry date? Y How will the service be funded post expiry?

Departments consulted in the preparation of this Report

None

List of background papers relied upon in the preparation of this Report

Report to Southport Area Committee, 6th September 2006- Fairway Park and Ride Site Extended Opening Hours

Report to Southport Area Committee, 3 rd December 2008 – Kew Park and Ride – Bus Route

Page 128 Agenda Item 11

1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT

1.1 At the last meeting of the Area Committee during consideration of a report concerning consultation for Local Transport Plan 3, a Member raised the issue of the route of the existing Park & Ride service in Southport and requested that consideration be given to ensuring that the service better served the needs of Ocean Plaza and Southport College.

1.2 It was resolved that:

“the Planning and Economic Development Director be requested to submit a report to the next meeting of the Area Committee on the extension of the park and ride bus service as referred to in paragraph (2)5 above”.

“Paragraph (2)5 indicated: in the next LTP implementation programme, the Area Committee considers that it is a priority to extend the route of the park and ride shuttle bus service to cover Ocean Plaza and other Town Centre destinations to increase the usage of the service”

1.3 Officers have subsequently been asked to also address:

• Use of service to pick up / drop off passengers en-route • Use of Kew site to serve Hospital • Review of extended opening of Fairways funded by Area Committee in 2006

2.0 CURRENT SERVICE

2.1 There are three park and ride sites situated within Southport. These are:

• PR1 - Esplanade • PR2 - Kew • PR3 - Fairway

2.2 In February 2010, the operation of the PR2 service from the Kew site was suspended due to financial pressures. At the current time it is not possible to say when the service may recommence operation.

2.3 The PR1 service from the Esplanade operates Monday to Sunday, October to March and Monday to Saturday, April to September (on Sundays in Summer the Esplanade site operates as a pay car park with park and ride relocating to the Fairway site). The route taken is via the Promenade, Leicester Street, Lord Street (Monument), with return via Lord Street, Duke Street and Victoria Way

2.4 The PR3 service from Fairways operates Saturday, October – March and Saturday and Sunday, April – September. The route taken is via the Promenade, Leicester Street, Lord Street (to turn at the Monument) and return

Page 129 Agenda Item 11

2.5 Services operate every 10 minutes from 7.30am – 6.30pm Monday to Saturday and 10.00am to 6.30pm Sundays and the current charge is £1 per car to park, regardless of the number of passengers. This will increase to £1.50 per car from April 2011.

2.6 Peak demand for the service is on Summer Saturdays when up to 1300 vehicles park at Esplanade. The maximum number of vehicles using the Fairways site on any one day is approx 330.

2.7 At times of peak demand, some passengers may have to stand during the journey to the town centre and on rare occasions passengers may have to wait for the next service.

2.8 During customer satisfaction surveys undertaken in June 2009 and January 2010, no comments were made about the route of the service.

2.9 With the current route the closest stop to Ocean Plaza is at the Ramada Hotel (approx 450m walk) and the closest stop to the college is on Lord Street between Union Street and Hill Street (approx 370m walk).

3.0 Route Options

3.1 Ocean Plaza

3.1.1 To better serve Ocean Plaza the service could be re-routed from the Esplanade site to operate via Marine Drive and Marine Parade. There is an existing shop / shelter located at Ocean Plaza. Once the service had re-joined the Promenade it would then follow the existing route to Lord Street and back to the Esplanade.

3.1.2 Following this route would add 0.27 mile to each return journey. In order to estimate the additional time taken for the amended route, two exercises have been undertaken. The first involved using the notional speed of 12mph which is used by the operator as an average for a bus in an urban environment. The second involved driving the routes for three separate trips and taking an average timing.

3.1.3 It is estimated that the additional time taken to operate over the amended route would be between 1min 22secs (based on 12mph average) and 2mins (based on actual timings). However, it should be noted that the timings were undertaken mid week in November. Traffic levels and consequent delays will be far more significant during the summer season.

3.2 Southport College

3.2.1 To better serve the College the service could be re-routed to operate as at present to Leicester Street then via Manchester Road, Hoghton Street and London Street, rejoining the current route at the Monument.

Page 130 Agenda Item 11

3.2.2 This would add 0.19 miles to the journey length and would take between between 58secs (12mph ave) and 1min 08secs (timed).

4.0 Discussion on Route Options

4.1 The current route from Esplanade to the Town Centre is direct and serves the whole of Lord Street. It is timed at 10 minutes with a total round trip time of 20 minutes to allow two vehicles to operate the service every 10 minutes. At busy times the buses can struggle to keep to this time due to both passenger numbers and traffic levels.

4.2 If the service were to be changed to serve Ocean Plaza then only one stop would be missed out (Promenade, opposite Coronation Walk) which is little used.

4.3 If the service were to be re-routed to serve the College then two stops on Lord Street would be omitted. These are well used stops and a significant number of customers use them to alight to visit the shops at the north end of Lord Street.

4.4 The stop that would be used on Hoghton Street for the college would leave a walk to the college of 240 metres (as opposed to 370m from Lord Street).

4.5 Either change would add additional mileage to the route (which could result in a higher charge from the operator) and would also result in the bus taking longer to complete the route. At peak times the buses only just have enough running time to keep to the schedule and it would not be possible to keep to the timetable if the diversions were added to the route. The alternative would be to change the schedule so that the buses only ran every 12 or 15 minutes. However, this would reduce the overall capacity of the service. This capacity is required at busy times.

4.6 In view of the above it is suggested that no change be made to the route taken by the PR1 service

5.0 Other Issues

5.1 Use of service to pick up / drop off passengers en-route

5.1.1 The contract with the operator and the registration of the service with the Traffic Commissioner does not allow for the carriage of passengers other than those using the park and ride site.

5.1.2 Officers have consulted with colleagues at Merseytravel regarding this matter and have concluded that there would be significant difficulties in registering the service to allow passengers to be carried between stops en-route.

5.1.3 In order to carry passengers en-route the services would have to be registered with the Traffic Commissioner as a local bus service. However, as the service

Page 131 Agenda Item 11

is in effect subsidised by the local authority it could be seen to be abstracting passengers and therefore income from the operators of commercial services which operate along the same sections of route (Lord Street), thereby potentially affecting their commercial viability. Commercial operators could object, complain directly against the Authority in respect of the abstraction and seek redress .

5.1.4 In addition to the above, if the service were to accept concessionary travel passes then an agreement would have to be reached with Merseytravel for the reimbursement of these journeys.

5.1.5 The current contract does not allow for the taking of fares on the bus and the current operator could ask for the contract to re-negotiated to allow for their increased costs in cash handling, etc.

5.1.6 Finally, any such change, if it were possible, would place a significant additional administrative burden on the Council in handling income from fares from the operator and the reimbursement of concessionary travel income from Merseytravel.

5.2 Use of Kew site to serve Hospital

5.2.1 A report to Area Committee in December 2008 considered the re-routing of the PR2 service to serve the Hospital. It was concluded that routing the service to the front of the Hospital would result in the service being less attractive to town centre commuters and shoppers. However, in February 2009 the service was re-routed via Scarisbrick New Road and a stop provided close to the pathway leading to the Hospital. This stop was little used following the re-routing of the service.

5.2.2 Prior to the opening of the Kew site in 2007 costings were obtained for the operation of a minibus service for the Hospital / Business Park, these amounted to approx £80,000 a year for a peak hours only service. However, no funds were available to operate this service.

5.2.3 Discussions have recently been held with the Hospital and the largest business on the Kew Business Park regarding their parking requirements. These discussions are on-going but they are aware of the current situation as outlined in paragraph 2.2 above

5.3 Review of extended opening of Fairways funded by Area Committee in 2006

5.3.1 In Summer 2006 the Area Committee funded the opening of the Fairways Park & Ride Site, seven days a week for a period of a month from the 24 th July 2006.

5.3.2 The Area Committee considered a report at its September 2006 meeting which updated members of the effect of this opening.

Page 132 Agenda Item 11

5.3.3 The report concluded that the additional costs of opening the site for an additional 18 days were £12,272.21 and the income taken was £2008 giving a net cost of £10264.21. It was also noted that there was spare capacity on the Esplanade site on all the days that Fairways was in operation and the average number of cars parked on the site per day was 111.

5.3.4 Members should note that the current operation of the Fairways site will be considered as part of budget process to see if any savings can be made.

Page 133 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 134 Agenda Item 12

Meeting: Southport Area Committee

Date of Meeting : 17 th November 2010

Title of Report: Victoria Park,Southport – Extension to Caravan Club site.

Report of : Graham Bayliss, This report contains Yes No Leisure and Tourism Director

0151 934 2381 CONFIDENTIAL √ Information/ Contact Officer : Tony Corfield EXEMPT information by virtue of Asst Leisure and Tourism Director paragraph(s)...... of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local √ 0151 934 2315 Government Act, 1972 (If information is marked exempt, the Public Interest Test must be applied and favour the exclusion of the information from the press and public). Is the decision on this report √ DELEGATED ?

Purpose of Report

To inform Members of the proposals submitted by the Caravan Club to extend onto adjoining Council land in Victoria Park, Southport known as the “Archery Ground”.

Recommendation(s)

That Members note the report and provide initial feedback on the principle of progressing the Caravan Club’s proposal.

Corporate Objective Monitoring

Corporate Positive Neutral Negative Objective Impact Impact Impact 1. Creating a Learning Community √ 2. Creating Safe Communities √ 3. Jobs and Prosperity √ 4. Improving Health and Well-Being √ 5. Environmental Sustainability √ 6. Creating Inclusive Communities √ 7. Improving the Quality of Council Services and √ Strengthening local Democracy 8. Children and Young People √

Page 135 Agenda Item 12 Financial Implications

2009/ 2010/ 2011/ 2012/ 2010 2011 2012 2013 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE £ £ £ £ Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure Funded by: Sefton Capital Resources Specific Capital Resources REVENUE IMPLICATIONS Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure Funded by: Sefton funded Resources Funded from External Resources Does the External Funding have an expiry date? Y/N When? How will the service be funded post expiry?

Departments consulted in the preparation of this Report

Planning.

List of background papers relied upon in the preparation of this Report

Southport Investment Strategy, Southport Visitor Economy Strategy.

Victoria Park Southport – Extension to Caravan Club site.

1.0 Purpose

1.1 To report on the proposals submitted by the Caravan Club for a new Lease to cover their existing site and an extension on Council owned land, commonly known as the “Archery Ground”, in Victoria Park Southport.

2.0 Lease Details

2.1 The Caravan Club occupy their existing site in Victoria Park Southport, under a Lease from the Council, for a term of thirty years from 1 st January 1996. The site area is 5.5 acres or thereabouts and can accommodate 100 pitches for touring caravans. The site generates notable economic benefit into the Borough which is supportive of the Council’s Classic Resort vision for Southport.

2.2 The rent payable to the Council under the Lease is based on a formula according to the gross pitch fee income generated by the site in a season, backed up by certified accounts. The Caravan Club pay the Council a percentage of the Page 136 Agenda Item 12 annual gross pitch fee income, ranging from 10% to 12.5%, based on the occupancy of the site or “outfit nights” in a season, as it is set out in the Lease. For the last five years, 2005 to 2009 inclusive, the site has generated the higher percentage.

3.0 History of Proposal

3.1 At its meeting on 15 th July 2009, the Cabinet Member for Leisure and Tourism considered a report by the Head of Tourism, detailing an enquiry from the Caravan Club to increase the scale of their presence in Victoria Park.

3.2 Minute 30 resolved that

“(1) the commencement of dialogue by officers with the Caravan Club for establishing the details and implications of their proposal to extend their existing facility in Victoria Park be approved in principle; and

(2) subject to a firm proposal as indicated in (1) above being established, a further report be submitted for the consideration of the acceptability of an extension to the Caravan Club facility”.

3.3 In accordance with the above Minute, Officers have met with the Caravan Club on a number of occasions and obtained from them draft layout plans showing either 48 or 61 additional pitches, a toilet block, two service points, play area and substantial tree planting. This differs slightly from the latest proposals but was deemed sufficiently detailed at the time to get informal advice from the Planning Director on the chances of planning permission being granted.

3.4 Accordingly, Planning have advised that the principle of development for an extended site is acceptable, subject to a number of policy constraints. The layout raises no major issues of concern, subject to site boundaries which retain the visual amenity of the Park, tree planting on the basis of one new tree per pitch and replacement trees for any that are removed, together with payment of a commuted sum for the compensatory provision of “greenspace”. The design of any new development has to make a positive contribution to its surroundings and use materials that are appropriate to the setting.

3.5 The Flower Show’s Lease, for its grounds in Victoria Park, obliges the Council to provide the Company with 3000 car spaces and 300 coach spaces from sites in its ownership on event days. Whilst the Archery Ground is included on the Schedule of sites, there are enough spaces elsewhere in the Council’s ownership to cover the loss of the 500 car spaces detailed therein.

3.6 The proposed site has longstanding and at times severe issues with flooding which presently limits the practical usage of the site. If this project were to proceed this would be resolved by the Caravan Club. There are at present no alternative deliverable proposals to resolving the flooding issue.

4.0 Caravan Club Proposal

4.1 Briefly, the Club’s proposal is based on either of two alternatives - adding net 61 pitches in the first scenario and net 48 pitches in the second. To enable this to proceed they would look to the Council to agree a surrender of their existing Page 137 Agenda Item 12 Lease and grant a new Lease of their existing site plus extension, commencing 1st January 2011 on terms to be agreed.

4.2 These sketch proposals are shown on the plans attached with this report and envisage land take in the region of 4.5 acres and 3.6 acres respectively.

4.3 The schemes show substantial tree planting to the various boundaries, together with the erection of a new toilet block. The toilet block on the existing site would be refurbished and additional showers provided. Capital investment in the region of £1.5m is envisaged for the larger extended scheme.

4.4 Each new pitch provided would be a hard-standing to accommodate caravans with several extending in depth to service larger motor caravans.

4.5 Use of the extended site will be as a touring caravan site for caravans, motor caravans, trailer tents and tents. The Club agrees to admit non members.

4.6 Officers have discussed how the proposals would impact on use of the land locked remainder of the site, which would be left in Council ownership, if one of these schemes is considered acceptable. In further discussions the Caravan Club have confirmed that they would be willing to discuss the principle of them taking on the whole site, extending to Weld Road. Their initial view is that this would be feasible and would enable them to accommodate an additional 100 pitches rather than the 48 or 61 pitches as shown in the accompanying plans.

4.7 A substantial belt of planting to shield the site from the overlooking highway at Weld Road would be required in this instance. Facilities in the toilet block shown on the plans would need to be increased to reflect the additional plots on site. The footprint of this building would need to be extended compared to that shown on the plans.

Recommendation(s)

That Members note the report.and provide initial feedback on the principle of progressing the Caravan Club’s proposal.

Page 138 Agenda Item 12

Drawing above is 61 extra pitches option. Drawing below is 48 extra pitches option.

Page 139 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 140 Agenda Item 13

Meeting: Southport Area Committee

Date of Meeting : 5 January 2011

Title of Report: Request by Merseyside Police for funding support towards purchase of bicycles for Community Support Officers

Report of : This report contains Yes No A Lunt CONFIDENTIAL √ Neighbourhoods and Investment Information/ Programmes Director Contact Officer : EXEMPT information by virtue of Steve Honess 0151 934 3455 paragraph(s)...... of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local √ Government Act, 1972 (If information is marked exempt, the Public Interest Test must be applied and favour the exclusion of the information from the press and public). Is the decision on this report DELEGATED ?

Purpose of Report

To submit a request for funding from Merseyside Police towards provision of bicycles for Community Support Officers in Southport

Recommendation(s)

Consider the request for funding and respond to representatives from Merseyside Police accordingly.

Corporate Objective Monitoring

Corporate Positive Neutral Negative Objective Impact Impact Impact 1. Creating a Learning Community X 2. Creating Safe Communities X 3. Jobs and Prosperity X 4. Improving Health and Well-Being X 5. Environmental Sustainability X 6. Creating Inclusive Communities X 7. Improving the Quality of Council Services and X Strengthening local Democracy 8. Children and Young People X

Page 141 Agenda Item 13

Financial Implications

2009/ 2010/ 2011/ 2012/ 2010 2011 2012 2013 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE £ £ £ £ Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure Funded by: Sefton Capital Resources Specific Capital Resources REVENUE IMPLICATIONS Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure Funded by: Sefton funded Resources Funded from External Resources Does the External Funding have an expiry date? Y/N When? How will the service be funded post expiry?

Departments / organisations consulted in the preparation of this Report

Merseyside Police

List of background papers relied upon in the preparation of this Report

Information re bicycles (costs, suppliers etc) received from Merseyside Police

Background

Following an informal request by Merseyside Police to Sefton Council for funding support towards purchase of bicycles to help Community Support Officers in Southport to perform their duties, they were directed to route their request through Southport Area Committee. This report summarises the request.

Details of suppliers and costs

Merseyside Police have an approved supplier of bicycles, Abbey Cycles in Mossley Hill, Liverpool. The cost per bicycle, including various necessary additional features and fittings, is £726.67.

Merseyside Police have also identified another supplier if bicycles in Southport – Moscrops Cycles, 78 Bispham Road. They can provide a model similar to that

Page 142 Agenda Item 13 offered by Abbey Cycles for £697.34 and there is the obvious additional advantage of giving the business to a Southport based trader.

Justification for funding

Merseyside Police consider that Southport Area Committee support for this request would have the following positive effects:

• Making Community Support Officers more effective and responsive in their duties • Demonstrating Council support for local Police in tackling Anti Social Behaviour • Making Police more visible to residents and the general public • Potential support of local trader (if Southport supplier used) • Good PR / media opportunity for both Council and Police.

Details of request

Merseyside Police will be grateful for any financial support offered, though it is hoped that total support would enable the purchase of 4 cycles.

This request is made by Merseyside Police on a Southport-wide basis, so it is envisaged that all seven Southport wards will benefit from the provision of bicycles to PCSOs.

Specifically, Merseyside Police would wish to use any funds granted by Southport Area Committee to go towards the purchase of cycles as follows:

Ainsdale and Birkdale – one cycle Southport Town Centre (ie Dukes Ward) – one cycle Southport North East (ie Cambridge, Kew, Meols and Norwood Wards) - two cycles

Page 143 This page is intentionally left blank

Page 144 Agenda Item 16

Meeting: SOUTHPORT AREA COMMITTEE

Date of Meeting : 5 JANUARY 2011

Title of Report: AREA MANAGEMENT UPDATE

Report of : This report contains Yes No Alan Lunt CONFIDENTIAL √ Director Neighbourhoods & Information Investments Programme Contact Officer : EXEMPT information by virtue of paragraph(s)...... of Part 1 of Steve Honess – 0151 934 3455 Schedule 12A to the Local √ Government Act, 1972 (If information is marked exempt, the Public Interest Test must be applied and favour the exclusion of the information from the press and public). Is the decision on this report DELEGATED ?

Purpose of Report

To update the Area Committee on area management activities that have taken place in Southport wards since the last meeting.

Recommendation(s)

Note the contents of the report.

Corporate Objective Monitoring

Corporate Positive Neutral Negative Objective Impact Impact Impact 1. Creating a Learning Community x 2. Creating Safe Communities x 3. Jobs and Prosperity x 4. Improving Health and Well-Being x 5. Environmental Sustainability x 6. Creating Inclusive Communities x 7. Improving the Quality of Council Services and x Strengthening local Democracy 8. Children and Young People x

Page 145 Agenda Item 16

Financial Implications - None

2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 £ £ £ Amount Amount Amount Overall Expenditure:

Area Expenditure (what expenditure has/will take place in the AC area) Funding Source:- Sefton MBC (please specify mainstream or core funding) - External funding (please specify) - If external, what is grant end date?

How will the service be funded once the grant ends?

Consultation and Engagement in the preparation of this Report

Various Sefton Council departments / service providers as listed on table overleaf

List of background papers relied upon in the preparation of this Report

None

Page 146 Background

The Neighbourhoods Division provides a co-ordination role for dealing with area issues. Queries are forwarded to the Neighbourhoods Division in a number of ways, via a number of different sources. In order for members to be aware of progress made on these issues an area management report has been compiled. Partner Agencies will also be included in this report in the future to update members to how other agencies are working on area issues. The provision of this information will enable better co-ordination and will feed into future neighbourhood plans.

If there are any queries about the information provided in the report you can contact the lead officer in the Neighbourhoods Division for this area (contact details on front page of this report).

1) Update on issues raised at Area Committee meetings

Query / Issue AC date raised Summary of Action agreed Dept / Organisation / Current status Date Officer responsible Completed Former Southport 6 October 2010 Submit further update report Regulatory Services / sandwinning site April/May 2011 Jim Alford

Posts along sides of 17 November 2010 Respond to question about making Traffic Services / Ainsdale/Birkdale coast road them more visible Dave Marrin Page 147 Re monies received from 17 November 2010 Submit report on justification (or Environmental Protection fixed penalty notices during otherwise) of monies going back to Peter Moore/Rob Monks Area Committee funded Area Committee funds or supporting enforcement exercises further enforcement activity

Southport Town Centre 17 November 2010 Feed back the outcomes of the Neighbourhoods Management review to the Area Committee for Steph Prewett information

Agenda Item16 Investigate the 17 November 2010 Cllr Jones, Steve Honess and Steve Neighbourhoods establishment of a St. Booth (Southport Town Centre George's Day celebration in Manager) to meet early in new year Southport to discuss

2) Update on ongoing issues raised outside Area Committee meetings Agenda Item16

Date Originator / source Issue / activity Progress Remarks originated Ward

11 October Cllr Booth Most lights out on footbridge from Passed to Dave Mulvaney / Tony Lights not working due to black paint Kew Virginia St to Asda Melia on them! Replacements on order

25 October Cllr Booth Enquired re feasibility and cost of bin at KGV College have offered to Kew bus stop on Scarisbrick New Road provide 2 bins – relayed to Cllr Booth – ongoing

12 November Cllrs Sumner, Fearn, Ongoing issues with cleansing e-mail to Gary Berwick / Phil Stirk Cllr Sumner arranging visit/meeting Rimmer – Norwood 24.11.10 directly with Phil Stirk/Gary Berwick @ (ward visit 12.11.10) 29.11.10

12 November Cllrs Sumner, Fearn, 17 Russell Rd – ASB issues (CS also Capita Symonds Lighting (Dave Rimmer – Norwood involved). Fix street lamp and raise wall Mulvaney) confirmed lamp will be

Page 148 (ward visit 12.11.10) between house and alley if possible inspected and guard fitted if necessary (e-mail 23/11/10)

12 November Cllrs Sumner, Fearn, Blast and paint 2 (or maybe just 1?) Response from Dave Mulvaney Rimmer – Norwood cast iron lamp posts 24/11 – will be replacing rather than (ward visit 12.11.10) repainting – probably early next year

12 November Cllrs Sumner, Fearn, Moss Lane – drainage problem – e-mailed Ronnie (and Jerry) e-mailed Dave Mulvaney 30.11.10 Rimmer – Norwood channels need to be cut into top of 24.11.10 asking for input. Ronnie who responded same day to confirm (ward visit 12.11.10) grass bank to allow water to run into suggested asking Dave remedial work had actually been done ditch Richardson if he can fund. by Capita Symonds

17 November Cllr Pearson – Dukes Hollybrook Rd – new street lights Mark Kenny (who was involved in Dave Mulvaney confirmed that lights - raised at 17.11 SAC installed, but 2 of them in middle of installation) on case – has spoken to erected in accordance with guidelines pavement Cllr Pearson and will investigate – Cllr Pearson informed

2 December Inspection visit with Fly tipping behind Heathfield Road Richard Perrett / One Vision Done Richard Perrett – shops Housing will arrange for removal (by One Vision Housing 8 December)