Minutes for Southport Area Committee meeting, Sep 30 2009, 6.30PM official page

RESOLVED:   That

(1)       a special meeting of the Area Committee be arranged, if deemed necessary, to consider the consultation responses to the Southport Cycle Town East-West Link Proposals; and

(2)       prior to the special meeting referred to above, the Traffic Services Manager be requested to meet with the Dukes and Kew Ward Councillors.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Sumner and Sir Ron Watson and Local Advisory Group Members Mrs. M. Pointon and Mr. S. Sugden.

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.

No declarations of interest were received.

Minutes of the meeting held on

RESOLVED:   That

(1)       the Minutes of the meeting held on 2 September 2009 be confirmed as a correct record; and

(2)       further to Minute No. 54 (Southport Cycle Town East-West Link Proposals) the local press be congratulated for their efforts in highlighting the proposals and helping residents to engage in the consultation process.

Report of the Planning and Economic Regeneration Director

Further to Minute No. 48 of 2 September 2009, the Committee considered the report of the Planning and Economic Regeneration Director indicating that the balance of the budget available for allocation during 2009/10, including sums set aside for the provision of litterbins, was as follows:-

Ward

Available Funds

£

Ainsdale

     9,850.58

Birkdale

   16,171.18

Cambridge

     8,945.83

Dukes

   14,920.28

Kew

     4,331.29

Meols

   11,817.25

Norwood

   20,514.84

Town-wide

     2,812.50

Total

   89,363.75

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

Ms. S. Prewett, Assistant Director - Neighbourhoods, advised that tenders had recently been received and that the cost for the provision/installation of street nameplates was lower than expected.  Accordingly, more nameplates could be allocated per Ward.  Ms. Prewett urged Ward Councillors to supply her with a list of those locations where they wanted street nameplates to be installed.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)      the remaining balance of £89,363.75 of the budget available for further allocation for the rest of the year be noted; and

(2)      the following allocations be approved:

Scheme

Ward

Amount

£

Match funding for the provision of cycle lights for children

Cambridge

150

Provision of (1) a plastic litterbin on Kenilworth Road at the top of the pathway leading to Bridgend Drive;

(2) a robust litterbin on the square at Sandbrook Way near to the clinic

Ainsdale

590

(3)          Members be requested to provide the Assistant Director - Neighbourhoods with a list of locations within their Wards for the installation of street nameplates.

Report of the Head of Regeneration and Technical Services

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Regeneration and Technical Services advising of the receipt of a petition from residents in Henley Drive, Southport in the following terms:

‘We the residents of Henley Drive PR9 7JU request Sefton MBC cease the practice of ‘patching’ our road hole by hole and that prompt action be taken to resurface the length of the street.

‘In its present state the road surface is a danger to cyclists, a danger to pedestrians; it is unsightly and is adversely affecting property values and property sales.’

The report indicated that the poor condition of Henley Drive was recognised and was included in the prospective three-year Highway Maintenance Programme 2009/10 (the Programme); that however, there were other streets within the Borough which were considered to warrant more immediate treatment; and that based on the level of deterioration evident at the time it was identified in the Programme, Henley Drive may be considered for resurfacing works in 2011/12.

The report concluded that Henley Drive would continue to be inspected on a regular basis and maintenance work undertaken to keep it in a safe condition; and that the petition would be reported to the Cabinet Member - Technical Services and a formal response given to the petitioners following consideration by the Cabinet Member.

RESOLVED:

That the report on the receipt of a petition requesting carriageway resurfacing works in Henley Drive, Southport be noted.

Report of the Head of Regeneration and Technical Services

The Committee considered the report of the Head of Regeneration and Technical Services advising that a range of highway and drainage improvement works were due to be carried out along Scarisbrick New Road in order to eradicate the ponding of water on footways.

The report detailed the package of works to be undertaken; that it was anticipated that the works would start on 5 October 2009; and that residents affected by the works would be notified accordingly.

RESOLVED:

That the report detailing the proposed highway and drainage works on Scarisbrick New Road, Southport, be noted.

Report of the Planning and Economic Regeneration Director

The Committee considered the report of the Planning and Economic Regeneration Director setting out details of current Traffic Regulation Orders in the Southport area which had been approved for implementation.

RESOLVED:

That the report on the monitoring of Traffic Regulation Orders be noted.

Joint report of the Head of Regeneration and Technical Services and the Leisure Director

Further to Minute No. 41(1) of 1 July 2009, the Committee considered the joint report of the Head of Regeneration and Technical Services and the Leisure Director on the respective departmental responsibilities for maintaining hanging baskets and planters funded by the Area Committee.

The report indicated that Area Committee funds could be used for the purchase of items to improve the environment and the amenity of their area such as planters and hanging baskets but they could not, however, use their funding for ongoing revenue commitments such as maintenance.  This meant that maintenance of items installed by Area Committees fell on mainstream Departmental budgets.

Problems occurred, as in this case, when mainstream budgets were insufficient to cover the ongoing maintenance cost.  Officers had done their best to ensure maintenance was undertaken by redirecting funding from other budgets but this was only ever going to be an ad-hoc solution.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)      the report on the departmental responsibility for hanging baskets and planters funded by the Area Committee be noted;

(2)      the issues detailed in the report be referred to the meeting of Leaders and Area Committee Chairs for consideration; and

(3)      the Head of Regeneration and Technical Services and the Leisure Director be requested to submit a joint report on:

          (a)      the capital costs of installing hanging baskets and planters and thereafter the maintenance revenue costs; and

          (b)      on the potential to use the savings from the maintenance budget following the removal of planters on Lord Street for maintaining planters elsewhere in Southport.

The Committee considered correspondence relating to the above.

RESOLVED:

That the correspondence be noted.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)      the Planning and Economic Regeneration Director be requested to submit a report on the length of time of the parking restrictions in Birkdale Village;

(2)      the Planning and Economic Regeneration Director be requested to submit a report on:

          (a)      the traffic problems experienced by drivers leaving Southport following the Air Show; and

          (b)      the potential re-phasing of traffic lights and/or the re-modelling of the junction, in conjunction with West Lancs District Council, on the Sefton/West Lancs boundary to alleviate future problems; and

(3)          following Members' complaints that the Northern Rail service from Wigan/Manchester to Southport did not have the capacity to cope when events such as the Air Show and Flower Show took place; and about the conditions of the rolling stock; representatives of Northern Rail be requested to submit a presentation to a meeting of the Area Committee on plans/proposals they may have in the future to provide additional services when major events took place in Southport and improvements to the rolling stock.

Inspector Moss indicated that there had been a big reduction in incidents of anti-social behaviour in the Larkfield Lane area.

Members of the public/Councillors raised the following issues:

·           parents continued to do three point turns in the cul-de-sac at Farnborough Road School, which caused traffic problems and danger to pedestrians.  Inspector McLoughlin indicated that he would address this problem by his staff enforcing traffic regulations in the area, including the issue of fixed penalty notices; and that the automatic number plate recognition system would be deployed in the wider Birkdale area shortly

·           parking/obstruction problems on Duke Street associated with retailers.  Inspector Moss agreed to investigate this mater

·           anti-social behaviour/drug use in the former church grounds/gym premises, Cemetery Road.  Inspector Moss indicated that he was not aware of such activity but he agreed that his staff would monitor the area

·           following the events operated at Splash World during the summer as part of the Free and Active scheme, the Police representatives were asked whether they had figures for usage of the scheme.  Sergeant Allum did not have such attendance figures, but indicated that during the operation of the scheme there was a marked reduction in anti-social behaviour

·           there had been an increase in the frequency of sirens sounding recently and that this heightened residents' perception of crime.  Inspector Moss explained the procedure for Police using sirens when attending 'grade 1' calls; but stressed that sirens were also used by the Fire and Ambulance Services so the use of all sirens were not necessarily crime related

·           was a machine used to weigh vehicles if they appeared to breach weight restrictions?  Inspector Moss indicated that the Police used the weighbridge at Switch Island

·           do cycles have to be equipped with bells or horns?  Inspector McLoughlin indicated that no prosecutions had been made for cyclists using their bikes without a bell; but that lights were required for cycles

·           what was the law on begging?  Comments were also made regarding the 'aggressive' form of collecting for charity, particularly on Chapel Street; and that often, such charity collections were not authorised by the Council or had the necessary permits.  A further comment was made about the Charities Act 2006 that had not yet been enacted; that the Act contained provisions to enforce such practices but could not be used until the Act had been enacted

Sergeant Allum indicated that beggars would be arrested in the Town Centre and that two beggars were currently in custody; and that enforcement operations had been undertaken to target charity collectors who did not have the appropriate permits.

RESOLVED:   

That the Legal Director be requested to submit a report to the Licensing and Regulatory Committee seeking that Committee's support to request the Home Secretary to enact the Charities Act 2006 to control 'aggressive' charity collectors.

·           a complaint was made regarding mobility scooters being used in Southport that were not equipped with lights.  Sergeant Allum indicated that the only law governing the use of mobility scooters was that they should travel between 4-6 miles per hour

·           an internal Police report was referred to and it was alleged that only one crime was solved for every 1000 CCTV cameras; and the Police were asked whether they considered that this was good value for money.  Inspectors McLoughlin and Moss disputed the figure quoted and indicated that CCTV was a very valuable tool in detecting crime

·           traffic congestion problems following the recent Air Show were referred to.  Sergeant Allum indicated that there were traffic problems due to the attendance at the event by over 90,000 spectators; he also indicated that there were only 21 recorded crimes during the course of the event and bearing in mind the number of attendees in the Town Centre, this was very good.

Members of the public are invited to ask questions, raise matters, or present petitions on issues which are relevant to Sefton Council.  The person asking a 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.

(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 is required which cannot be provided at the meeting or if the question is not reached within the 1 hour period, the Chair will either refer the matter to the appropriate Service Department for a written answer or to the appropriate Cabinet Member for further consideration).

During the Open Forum the following questions/comments/petitions were submitted:

(a)      Local Advisory Group Member Mr. I. Goley indicated that it had been drawn to his attention that there was a Mosquito device on the Southport Town Hall, a device that emitted a high pitched sound and could only be heard by young people, normally aged 17 and below.  Whilst he welcomed the proposals for a greater cohesive Area Committee system to include young people he asked were Members aware that this device was in operation on what was a democratic building; and whether there were any other devices on Council property in operation across the Borough.

          Mr. P. Fraser advised the meeting of the following comments:

          The Head of Civic and Mayoral Services had indicated that a Mosquito Device was installed at Southport Town Hall as a result of continuing vandalism to the exterior of the building and also the immediate area outside the Town Hall with youths in relation to Anti Social Behaviour; and that no other buildings operated by Civic and Mayoral Services had this device installed.

          A strict protocol was established with staff for the use of the system at Southport Town Hall and a short training session provided.  A log book was also introduced in relation to the use of the Mosquito Device and staff had to enter details of the event and why it was used and also report its use to the Head of  Civic and Mayoral Services.

          The system however had not been used as shortly after the installation, a Section 30 Dispersal Order was introduced for the Town Hall Gardens and Chapel Street.  Since this time the system had been switched off and currently not in use.

          The Leisure Director had indicated that on the advice of police, three Mosquito Devices were installed in Leisure Services premises:- outside Southport Arts Centre, Atkinson Art Gallery and Crosby Civic Hall and had been in place for over three years.

          Their installation followed considerable and repeated anti-social behaviour from youths outside these facilities.  All attempts at engagement with the young people - inviting them into our facilities, explaining our concerns regarding their behaviour were largely ignored by the majority of the youths.

          The situation came to a head when (following a fight) the toilets at the Arts Centre were smeared with blood, staff were spat at and abused and in the case of the Atkinson no-one attended an opening, so intimidated were the attendees by those outside.  This led to a number of complaints.

          As a last resort, following police advice the Mosquitoes were installed.  When they were in operation a time lock meant that they were only used in twenty minute bursts when the behaviour of the youths was unacceptable, which was always logged.  The Leisure Director informs that the use of the device was effective in dispersing the young people.

          Due to the implementation of a Section 30 Order in the area involved, the devices in Southport had not been switched on since early summer last year and Crosby Civic Hall’s Mosquito had never been used.

          Whilst the concerns expressed regarding the use of such devices was understood, in the circumstances the Leisure Department felt it had little choice.  All attempts at engagement had failed and considerable inconvenience and intimidation was being experienced by other Leisure Service users, leading to people not attending leisure facilities.

          The Leisure Services Department was one of the staunchest defenders of the rights of young people; however, with that the Leisure Director believed came responsibilities.  Given the behaviour of a significant number of those outside the facilities, including threatening behaviour to staff, it was believed the responsible use of the Mosquito device was warranted until the Section 30 Order resolved the situation.

          No plans were in place to use the Mosquito devices in the foreseeable future; however, should the level and type of anti-social behaviour recommence (once the Section 30 Order was lifted) the Leisure Director would reserve his position to use them once more, unless the Authority decided this should not be the case.

RESOLVED:  

That the Leisure Director and the Head of Civic and Mayoral Services be requested to submit a report to the Area Committee detailing:

(i)          who authorised the installation of the Mosquito devices; and

(ii)          how the protocol was established for the use of the system.

(b)      Local Advisory Member Mr. J. Fairhurst requested that the Environmental Protection Director submit a detailed report to the next meeting of the Area Committee on what the Graffiti Squad was currently achieving and on what had been done to remove graffiti on the Victoria Footbridge, in Ball's Place connecting Eastbank and Tulketh Street, at the Lord Street entrance to Morrisons and in the passageway between "Jaeger" and "East".  Mr. Fairhurst concluded that it would be pleasant if Sefton could gain a reputation for having a zero tolerance to graffiti and a determination to catch offenders and to see them remove the evidence of their vandalism.

          The Assistant Chief Executive (Safer, Stronger Communities) advised that from the period 29 June to 22 August 2009 offenders, as part of the Community Payback Scheme, had removed graffiti from the following locations:

·           Bedford Park

·           Houghtons Place/Anchor Place

·           Beech Court, 38-40 Leyland Road

·           16 Claremont Road

·           111 Radnor Drive

·           Parenting 2000 Mornington Road

·           Alleyway Lord Street between publishers

·           Alleyway Lord Street Henry Piddick Jewellers

·           Cambridge Arcade between Café Matisse/Face Value

·           Demonstrations to Councillors and other visitors - Tulketh Street

·           Royal Terrace (side of chip shop)

·           Makus Shop Virginia Road

·           Length of Ball's Place - Tulketh Street end to Eastbank Street;

and that as part of the Community Payback scheme, work had been/would shortly commence to remove graffiti at the following locations:

·           24, 34 and 36 Pilling Close

·           9 Salwick Close

·           11 Elswick Green

·           55 Elswick Road

·           48 Queens Road

·           4 Roe Park Mews, Park Road/Roe Lane

RESOLVED:   That

(1)      the Cleansing Manager be requested to respond in writing to Mr. Fairhurst; and

(2)      the Legal Director be requested to:

          (a) write to Network Rail, on behalf of the Area Committee, requesting that they remove the graffiti on the Victoria Footbridge and seeking their views on allowing graffiti removal on their structures and land by the Community Payback 'personnel'; and

          (b) submit a report to the Area Committee on the legal position of graffiti removal on non-Council land and premises;

(c)      Mr. S. Hagan asked why Sefton Council charged for the Southport Air Show when others, notably Blackpool and Windermere, did not; and he asked what actual profit did the Southport Air Show make in 2008.

          The Head of Tourism advised that Sefton used to provide a free Air Show at a substantial cost to local Council Tax Payers.  As part of developing a sustainable portfolio of additional large scale regionally significant events such as the Jazz Festival, British Musical Firework Championships and Summer Classics a more commercial approach to staging events had to be taken.  This meant that in the case of the Air Show a charge was made for entry rather than it being free.  As a result in an average year the Air Show would now break even which meant that the money it previously cost was available to support other events such as those mentioned.  In other words Southport had more events at no extra cost to the Council Tax Payer.

          The alternative would be for the Council to either not deliver the extra events or allocate more of its overall budget to tourism events so that they remained free.  The Council had taken the view that it was better for the events to be genuinely sustainable rather than rely on increased handouts from the Council Tax Payers or reduce the number of events back to essentially just the Air Show.

          Other Councils may take a different approach although it was worth noting that a few years ago, Blackpool was awarded around £3.5m by the NWDA specifically to create an events programme just like Southport’s.  It would be interesting to see how sustainable Blackpool’s events programme would be when this funding ran out.  It would also be interesting to see whether Liverpool could afford to fund a number of its free events now that public funding, both European and National, was likely to notably reduce.

          The 2008 Air Show made a small loss due to the poor weather which was such a feature of last year.

(d)      Mrs. E. Gains requested the provision of a litter bin next to the bus stop situated outside 62 Marshside Road, Southport.

          RESOLVED:  

          That the Meols Ward Councillors be requested to consider Mrs. Gains' request.

(e)      Mrs. J. Bowe asked when the weeds in the gutters and on the pavements in Hythe Close, Crockleford Avenue and Ardleigh Avenue were to be removed  Mrs. Bowe indicated that no work had been done to remove weeds on the Kew estate during Summer 2009.

          RESOLVED:  

          That the Senior Team Leader, Capita Symonds, be requested to respond to Mrs. Bowe in writing.

(f)       Mrs. I. Gunn indicated that she regularly led out cycle rides for Age Concern and CTC and that she was concerned about how dangerous it was for cyclists on the cycle path on the sea wall, closest to the beach.  The main dangers were the amount of sand covering the cycle path; obstacles such as waste bins taken from the beach and put onto the cycle path; and last but not least the danger from people crossing the path to and from the beach and not looking.  In view of these dangers she requested that the Council look at moving the path to a safer location and that she would be interested to know if any accidents had been reported in the 14 months or so that the path had been open.

          The Traffic Services Manager advised that he was not aware of any actual accidents along this length of path since its opening in July 2008, but that he was aware of regular conflict between cyclists and pedestrians and the issue of windblown sand.  These issues had been raised at the Cycle Forum and the Council was presently seeking a suitable alternative route to overcome these issues.

(g)      Mr. S. Taylor asked that now Sefton had joined the Liverpool City Region, could the Councillors please supply to the public five reasons why joining was to the advantage of Southport residents.

          Members provided Mr. Taylor with their views on his question.

In accordance with the agreed programme of meetings for this Area Committee, the next meeting will be held on Wednesday, 28 October 2009 at the Town Hall, Lord Street, Southport, commencing at 6.30p.m.

RESOLVED:

That the next meeting be held on Wednesday, 28 October 2009 at Southport Town Hall, Lord Street, Southport, commencing at 6.30 p.m.