Page 1 Agenda Item 1

AREA FORUM:

At a meeting of the Area Forum: Daresbury Monday, 26 February 2007 Village Hall, Preston Brook

Present: Councillors Bradshaw and C Inch

Apologies for Absence: (none)

Absence declared on Council business: (none)

Officers present: M. Simpson, P. Watts, G. Arnold, P. Reilly-Cooper and J. Weston

Also in attendance: 27 Members of the public

ITEMS DEALT WITH UNDER DUTIES EXERCISABLE BY THE FORUM

Action DAR13 MINUTES

The Minutes of the meeting held on 16 th October 2006, having been printed and circulated, were taken as read and agreed as a correct record.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes be noted

DAR14 PUBLIC QUESTIONS

Questions on the following topics had been submitted in writing in advance of the meeting.

(i) M.W. Byrne, Stokesay, Road, Preston Brook

In an attempt to reduce needless traffic congestion, why does the Highways Department/Council not insist that any temporary traffic lights are fitted with the intelligence PIRS?

Response from Stephen Rimmer, Street Works Inspector:

All temporary portable traffic signals should be fitted with Page 2

detectors to make them work vehicle activated. If they are not, then they need to be physically authorised to work on fixed time or manual.

In the absence of demand, temporary traffic lights should rest on all red.

(ii) T.A. Silker, The Byre, Keckwick Lane, Daresbury

I am very concerned over the proposal, by the time of this meeting perhaps implemented, to close Keckwick Lane at its junction with Road for a period of six weeks, in order to construct a roundabout junction to serve the new Housing Development.

This will seriously inconvenience the residents of Keckwick Lane, Delph Lane and Woodthorn Close, considerably increasing our travel distance and time, especially to Sandymoor and to our nearest post office and general store in Moore.

As a civil engineer myself, I fail to understand why the works involved could not be carried out in phases maintaining access at all but very limited periods. I have already asked the Highways and Planning Departments to review this inconsiderate and unnecessary closure but so far it appears to be going ahead.

I also feel that the Council could have given some prior notification and explanation to the residents affected before proceeding.

(I regret I cannot attend the Area Forum in person, but since these meetings have been changed from Thursday to Monday evenings, I am prevented by a regular commitment.)

Response from Stephen Rimmer – Street Works Inspector:

The option of keeping Keckwick Lane open for the closure of the roundabout was investigated thoroughly. However, due to the need to reconstruct the existing carriageway and the resultant safety zones, it is not possible to keep the road open and carry out the works safely. The Contractor initially asked for the whole junction to be closed for three months to carry out the work, but the Council refused this request.

The contractor has been requested to distribute letters to the Page 3

residents of nearby roads to inform them of the proposed closure and the reasons for the closure.

(iii) J. Atkinson, 4 Gorseywell Lane, Preston Brook

As you know, the village of Preston Brook is divided by the A56. The increasing volume of traffic is causing significant problems within the village, namely:

(1) the A56 road, nor one of the bridges that serves it, were not built to cope with this amount of traffic and they require constant repairs, which disrupt village life considerably.

(2) illegal parking in the bus lay-by in the centre of the village by HGV drivers travelling to/from the local industrial estate, who stop to use the Spar Shop for their supplies (instead of using the motorway cafes) and causing considerable road safety concerns.

(3) noise pollution

(4) air pollution (Hyder have promised to let me have the results of a study into their pollution that they are currently doing on behalf of the Highways Agency in this area).

I appreciate that Economic Development in this area enjoys a certain political flavour but there is an issue of balance that needs to be struck (i.e. at what cost to village life) and as a resident I would like to know where this balance lies in the hearts and minds of the politicians.

I would also like to know what each of the elected Members, as well as all of the other representatives of the various authorities represented at the Area Forum is doing on –

(1) an individual basis; and

(2) a collective basis (either through a local area agreement or through the local strategic partnership – call it what you will) to improve the lives of residents regarding this particular issue in this village. Thank You.

Response from Stephen Rimmer – Street Works Inspector:

Question 1

Page 4

The A56, Chester Road is one of the main roads in the area and prior to the construction of the M56, it was the main route between Chester and . As part of the new town, the Whitehouse Industrial Estate was constructed and the A56 through Preston Brook is one of the main access routes to the area. Most of the residential development to the east/south of the A56 has been constructed in recent times and the puffin crossing has been provided to help pedestrians cross the road to the village shop/hall.

Response from P.C. Ian Stewardson, Police Roads Liaison Officer

Question 2

The Police have been aware of this problem for some time and officers, together with the PCO’s from the neighbourhood policing units had been tasked to monitor and deal with offenders accordingly. In my role as Roads Liaison Officer, I have discussed this problem with Steve Johnson (HBC) and as such, a clearway order is to be implemented on this section of road to increase the powers available to prevent this happening. The NPU will continue to monitor the situation as and when the operational commitments allow. The PCO’s have already issued six tickets in the past few months and were observing the area when they could.

Response from Stuart Baxter, Divisional Manager, Environmental Health

Traffic is one of the most widespread sources of noise, and unfortunately, the most difficult to control.

Whilst the local authority have no general duty at the moment to measure and assess traffic noise from existing road schemes ambient noise measurements are taken regularly for a number of reasons across the borough particularly in connection with new developments. The ambient noise levels in Preston Brook are on the high side but cannot be considered excessive for an urban area.

There are few controls available to control general noise from vehicles whilst they are on the highway.

Where nose from a new or substantially altered road causes an increased level of interference to residents, grants may be available to provide sound insulation measure subject to strict conditions and noise measurements.

Page 5

Excessive noise from the engine of an individual identifiable vehicle can only be controlled by the Motor Vehicles (Construction and Use) regulations, which are administered by the Police. Vehicles must be fitted with an efficient exhaust silencer, and there are general regulations requiring road users not to make excessive noise or run the engine unnecessarily when stationary.

The Highways Agency implements the Government’s policy, which is to mitigate the effects of noise arising from traffic on the strategic network where appropriate. To this end, all improvement proposals are appraised, which considers environmental objectives alongside social and economic concerns. All road construction projects will include high standards of environmental mitigation to ensure that, so fare as reasonably possible, the impact of noise is minimised in accordance with this policy.

Where new roads are to be built or existing roads significantly improved, quieter road surfaces will be specified in future contracts as a matter of course. This will be in addition to other measures such as earth mounds and acoustic fencing, which will also be considered. Whenever a road needs resurfacing, the most appropriate noise-reducing surface will be used.

Response from Stuart Baxter, Divisional Manager, Environmental Health

Hyder Study and the Highways Agency

We have not at the moment ourselves been made aware of the results of any study undertaken by Hyder into either noise or air pollution. The Highways Agency is the network operator for ’s network of trunk roads including motorways. Whilst this network represents only a small proportion of the national road estate it has a far greater significance in terms of the extent to which it is used. Over 30% of all traffic is carried on the HA network and the proportion of HGV traffic is nearer 70% (by vehicle miles). Carrying such large volumes of traffic means that in areas near to busy trunk roads air quality is likely to be significantly influenced by vehicle emissions. In developing strategies to combat transport air quality issues related issues the local authority would liaise with the Highways Agency.

The Local Authority Role

The Government has challenged local authorities under Part IV of the Environment Act 1995 to assess and manage their Page 6

air quality. National health-based standards and objectives have been published to allow air quality to be assessed and to drive forward management policies. Local Authorities are required to consider emissions from a range of sources such as transport industry and domestic that could potentially affect local air quality. In assessing these emissions a number of tools are used including monitoring equipment (real time analysers and diffusion tubes), modelling of the major roads, and emissions data from the industrial sector. Our assessment shows that the air quality objectives for carbon monoxide, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, lead, sulphur dioxide and fine particulate matter (PM10) have been achieved.

We revisit our assessment on an annual basis reporting our findings to the Department of the Environment. The purpose of the updating assessment is to identify any potential pollution sources or features, which may have either changed significantly or emerged since the last review and assessment, and which may now require further assessment.

It is accepted that road transport is a major source of local air pollution, particularly in towns and cities. In urban areas, road traffic accounts for over half of the total emissions and oxides of nitrogen and particles (PM10). However, the vehicles on our roads are becoming excessively cleaner due to the successively tighter EURO standards on both vehicles and fuels imposed by the European Union’s Auto-Oil programme, which was set up in partnership with the oil and motor industries. These standards alone helped reduce emissions of PM10 and No. 2 from road transport by 50% between 1990 and 2000 and are expected to lead to a further reduction of some 30% by 2010.

Local transport authorities, which includes Halton, are required to submit 5-year plans setting out their objectives and targets for transport and their strategies for achieving them in a local transport plan (LTP). The plans have to cover all forms of local transport and establish coherent strategies to tackle problems such as congestion and poor air quality.

An analysis of monitoring data in the vicinity of roads throughout the UK has been undertaken, and provides useful additional guidance to authorities on where exceedences might occur. The report concludes that, outside of major conurbations, exceedence of the annual mean objective are only likely to occur within about 10 metres of the kerbside of single carriageway roads. Despite higher traffic flows, exceedences of the annual mean Page 7

objective are only likely within about 5 metres of the kerbside or hard shoulder of dual carriageways outside of major conurbations.

The advice to local authorities is therefore to focus upon these locations where they expect pollutant concentrations to be the highest (often referred to as ‘hot sports’). If there are no exceedences of the objectives at the most polluted locations, then it can be reasonably concluded that there should be not exceedences elsewhere. Background levels of nitrogen dioxide across the Borough meet the standards but there are two locations – hot spots – (both in Widnes) where the results of a diffusion tube survey indicate that the objectives for nitrogen dioxide (a good indicator of traffic pollution) are being exceeded. We are therefore undertaking further work, particularly in these areas, but including some further modelling of major roads within the Borough.

Lancaster University have been commissioned to develop a computer model of the impact of traffic exhaust emissions of major roads in Halton and of significant point sources in the area on air quality. The study will initially focus on nitrogen dioxide but will also incorporate particulate matter (PM10) as the study develops. This will allow potential future monitoring programmes to be identified (i.e. in areas where the model suggests that air quality standards are not being achieved) and allow for prediction of the impacts on air quality of future developments.

The findings of the latest review and assessment can be found on the Council’s website.

Mrs. Atkinson was given a copy of the response regarding noise and air pollution and it was suggested that if she wished to she could meet with Stuart Baxter to discuss this issue in more detail.

(iv) J.A. Ackroyd, 15 Waterfront,

In June 2006, I was informed that Waterfront would be included on the programme of road sweeping, as it had not been carried out since the Council adopted the road. It was indicated by the Waste Department that cleaning would take place every five weeks. I do not believe that any sweeping has taken place. Please advise.

Response given from Phil Watts – Lead Officer at the Area Forum.

Page 8

After speaking to the Waste Department, it was noted that Waterfront road sweeping was on the schedule. The Waterfront was to be swept next Monday and every five weeks after that.

Should this not happen, residents were to contact Mr. Phil Watts.

(v) R.Peters via the Council’s website.

Can HBC please give a categorical answer as to who is responsible for the area of Green Space to the west of Bridgewater Grange and the east of Watermead Drive.

Response from Mr. Phil Watts, Area Forum Lead Officer.

The land is owned by Morris Homes, who had failed to bring it up to a finished adoptable standard. The only option available to the Council would be to take it off them as seen i.e. unfinished and then the Council would have to make it Operational presentable. This would have to be put into the budgetary Director – process. Mr. Watts would look into this option. Environmental and Regulatory (iv) Andy Guile via email Services

On behalf of the voluntary and community groups, can the Panel confirm there is likely to be a £90,000 budget cut for the voluntary and community sector? Is it also true to say that the Council will not be able to inform groups until two weeks before the start of the new financial year who will be cut? Thus leaving groups in the position where they will have to send out notice of possible redundancy to all staff affected by the Council grants and thus have a massive impact on the morale and stability of the sector.

Also, what are Councillors doing to help soften the blow for groups in this Panel area?

Response from Dwayne Johnson – Strategic Director, Health & Community

This year the Council has received a below-inflation settlement from Government. The Council faces some difficult decisions following the Government announcement of their financial settlement and needs to identify savings of approximately £4m.

A significant number of savings have been identified for the elected Members of the Council to consider. This is work in progress. Page 9

It should be noted that the Council currently invests significant amounts of funding into the voluntary and community sector. This is in the region of £3m. Therefore the reduction of £90,000 is in proportionate terms below 3% of this investment.

In addition, the Council are working on a range of new and different ways of delivering services. Some examples include working with Merseyside to join their community foundation trust and a new resource centre. Members will make their final decision on the budget on 7 th March 2007 at their full Council meeting.

Furthermore, the Forum raised a number of further issues in relation to the closure of Keckwick Lane. Residents from Woodthorn Close raised concerns that there was no access for emergency vehicles and it took an extra 30 minutes to take their children to school that morning. It was noted that the Council had mentioned two other options, one could be to build a temporary road across the land of the Parish Council which would destroy the many daffodils that had recently been planted. Another option would be to put a slip road through the building site. It was noted that this would be the preferred option as an alternative to the current traffic congestion problems.

Members of the public also queried whether better signage Operational could be installed at each end of the A56 requesting that Director – vehicles slow down and discussed the option of diverting the Environmental traffic through the Whitehouse estate. It was noted that Mr. and Regulatory Phil Watts would take these points back to Mr Rimmer and a Services reply would be provided.

The following question was submitted at the meeting:-

G. Pomfret, 2 Moss Lane, Moore

Will you please give, me information on which body is responsible for repairing the railway bridge

When will the repairs be started?

It was noted that the Highways department would respond to this question.

DAR15 CREAMFIELDS UPDATE

The Forum was informed that Creamfields have not Page 10

yet made an application but were going to do so. The application for the licence would be submitted mid-March and it was proposed for a one-day event being 25 th August 2007.

It was noted that anybody living with a ¾ mile radius would be consulted. The festival would be practically the same as last year with a change to the transport plan.

RESOLVED: That the update be noted.

DAR16 PRESENTATION - MERSEYSIDE JOINT WASTE DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT

The Forum received a presentation from Mr. Paul Knott of Merseyside Environmental Advisory Service which outlined the following:

• The Waste Development Plan document was (a) part of the Local Development Framework; (b) a legal requirement; (c) the process was designed to improve the way strategic planning occurs; and (d) the consultation at pre-determined stages to allow the community to influence the process when planning options were being considered. • Background to the Development Plan document • What waste was involved - a pie-chart was shown giving percentages of types of waste; • Developing the Waste Development Plan document • The Waste Development Plan document timetable • Other assessments • How the public can participate • Access of a consultation paper could be accessed via the internet with www.wasteplanningmerseyside.gov.uk • The final process would be to advise the public of the results of the issues and options consultation and then invite the public to participate in the consultation on the preferred options later in 2008.

The Forum asked Mr. Knott how they could participate. In reply it was noted that there would be an announcement in all local presses, posters, a special Page 11

website with an on-line questionnaire and circulation of documents.

Residents of Preston Brook noted that they still do not receive In Touch magazine. Mr. Watts confirmed that he would contact the PR Department giving addresses of Preston Brook residents and this would be looked into immediately.

The Forum discussed the issue of joining with Merseyside rather than with Warrington and it was noted that Merseyside did have a much more developed plan for waste.

In addition, the Forum queried whether results of the consultation would be taken into account and would influence the preferred options. Mr. Paul Knott replied that feedback from the consultation would influence the preferred option.

The Forum raised various other issues regarding whether the facilities would provide power supplies and the future of the ICI proposals for Ineos Chlor. It was noted that there was a meeting at the Pavilions on Monday 5 th March in Weston Point regarding the Ineos Chlor proposals.

The Chairman thanked Mr. Paul Knott for an informative presentation.

RESOLVED: That the presentation be noted.

DAR17 REVIEW OF AREA FORUMS

The Forum considered a report of the Chief Executive, which provided an opportunity to discuss how attendance at Area Forum meetings could be increased. The Council was looking at lessons learnt since the Area Forums were first introduced and ways in which they could be made better. In this respect, a questionnaire was circulated at the meeting.

Members of the Forum noted that Area Forums were well appreciated in the area and were a wonderful means of communicating with Members from the Council.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted and feedback be given and referred to the Corporate Services Policy and Performance Board Area Forum Topic Group.

DAR18 PRESENTATION - REVIEW OF MOBILE LIBRARY Page 12

SERVICE

The Forum received a presentation from Miss Paula Reilly-Cooper in place of Mr. P. Cooke from the Health and Community Directorate which outlined the following:

• Why the mobile library service had been reviewed • gave details of libraries in Halton • explained the role of the mobile library services • set out the objectives of the mobile library service • outlined the consultation process that had been undertaken • set out the proposals for the service • and explained what it meant for residents in their respective communities.

It was noted that there were proposals for the implementation of five new library stops and there was still space for some more. Should any residents have any ideas of additional stops they were to inform Paula Reilly-Cooper.

It was noted that the times of the Library Service were to be extended to reach people out of hours, for instance, after 4.00 pm and all day on Saturday. In addition, the stops were to be lengthened for 20 minutes per stop. Also, technology permitting, access would be increased for internet and computer users in the Mobile Library.

The Chairman thanked Paula Reilly-Cooper for an informative presentation.

RESOLVED: That the presentation be received.

DAR19 COUNCIL BUDGET 2007/2008

The Forum received a presentation from Phil Watts – Lead Officer for the Area Forum which outlined the following:

• draft proposals for the Budget Financial Settlement for 2007/08; • Halton would receive a 2.8% increase; • There was a threat of capping – no more than 5% which would mean that Council Tax could not be increased more than 5%; • Set out the cost pressures, which were the increasing number of elderly people needing support, disabled facility grants, waste Page 13

management, increasing cost of disposal/recycling, repairs and maintenance i.e. backlog of repairs, and alley gates. • Highlighted potential savings, and provide a summary on the budgetary situation.

The Forum was advised that the proposals and all the comments received from the meeting would be reported to full Council on 7 th March 2007 for determination.

RESOLVED: That the presentation be received.

Meeting ended at 8.42 p.m.