REPORT TO:

CABINET MEMBER – TECHNICAL SERVICES

DATE:

20 OCTOBER 2010

SUBJECT:

SOUTHPORT CYCLE TOWN – PROPOSED CYCLE TRACK – BIRKDALE TO AINSDALE

WARDS AFFECTED:

AINSDALE AND DUKES

REPORT OF:

ANDY WALLIS – DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

CONTACT OFFICER:

DAVE MARRIN 0151-934-4295

EXEMPT/ CONFIDENTIAL:

NO

PURPOSE/SUMMARY:

To inform Cabinet Member of a recently completed consultation exercise on the above proposal and to seek a way forward. REASON WHY DECISION REQUIRED:

To enable progress to be made with the scheme.

RECOMMENDATION(S):

It is recommended that Cabinet Member:

1. Note the report, the petitions and the resolution of the Area Committee

2. Authorise the progression of the scheme to a planning application and should the application be successful, to construction.

KEY DECISION:

No

FORWARD PLAN:

Not appropriate

IMPLEMENTATION DATE:

N/A

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS: None available

IMPLICATIONS:

Budget/Policy Framework:

Financial: The proposal will be funded by a grant from Cycling England, specifically provided for this project.

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE

2010/ 2011 £

2011/ 2012 £

2012/ 2013 £

2013/ 2014 £

Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure 125,000

Funded by:

Sefton Capital Resources 125,000

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?

Legal:

Risk Assessment:

N/A

Asset Management:

N/A

CONSULTATION UNDERTAKEN/VIEWS

CORPORATE OBJECTIVE MONITORING:

Corporate Objective

Positive Impact

Neutral Impact

Negative 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

√√√√

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS RELIED UPON IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT

NIL

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 This proposal was first reported to Cabinet Member on the 13th January and

to Cabinet on 14th January 2010 when it was included in the Capital Programme.

1.2 The resolution of the Cabinet Member gave officers the authorisation to

proceed with the scheme and this resulted in a planning application being submitted in February 2010

1.3.1 A number of objections to the planning application were received and

allegations were made that there had been insufficient consultation.

1.4 Following consultation with the Cabinet Member – Technical Services, it was decided that it would be prudent to withdraw the planning application. With the intention to undertake a far more extensive consultation process in June / July before submitting a further planning application for the route.

1.5 Attached as Annex A is a copy of a report to the Southport Area Committee

which informs members in detail of the latest position with the proposal. This includes the response to the latest consultation exercise. The report also asks that the members of the Area Committee give their view on the proposal to the Cabinet Member.

1.6 Also attached as Annex B is a copy of the conclusion reached in the

Appropriate Assessment which was commissioned to support the original planning application. This will be updated if a further planning application is submitted

2.0 CONSULTATION 2.1 The consultation exercise resulted in the following return:

At the end of the consultation 956 responses had been received and these can be summarised as follows:

Those in favour of the proposal 604 = 63%

Those not in favour of the proposal 352 = 37%

The results can be further split down into the area in which the respondent lives and this gives the following:

Area No. in

Favour No. not in

Favour Birkdale / Ainsdale 146 202 Rest of Southport 194 101 Formby 47 23 Rest of Sefton 38 2 Outside Sefton 179 24 Total 604 352

2.2 Members will note that the split of responses from Birkdale / Ainsdale, rest of

Southport and outside Sefton has changed since the report was made to Area Committee. This has been a result of further analysis of the returns, which has indicated that the addresses given where not always totally accurate, eg some addresses given as Southport have been found to be in Birkdale and some given as Southport or Birkdale have been found to be outside the Borough Boundary. This does not affect the overall totals.

2.3 A number of respondents also made comments on their returns and these

are also detailed in the attached report as Annex C. 3.0 AREA COMMITTEE RESOLUTIONS 3.1 The Southport Area Committee at its meeting of the 6th October resolved

that:

“The Cabinet Member – Technical Services be recommended to not proceed with the proposal.”

3.2 A copy of the minutes of the meeting will be made available to the Cabinet

Member and Spokespersons before the meeting. 4.0 PETITIONS 4.1 At the time of writing the report to the Area Committee one petition had been

received which was headed:

“We object to any plans to create a 3m wide cycle highway across the Sefton Coast SSSI, one of the most highly designated coastlines in the UK and a site of considerable international importance. We believe there are more suitable options for a cycle path, which avoid the destruction of the SSSI areas, maintain the amenity value of the Dunes for the interest of the diverse users current and future. The proposed scheme through the Dunes is not sustainable, is not an effective use of money, will add to the annual maintenance budget of the Council over many years. In addition, we are opposed to any other plan that would impact on the natural beauty of the landscape or wildlife that inhabits the Ainsdale and Birkdale Nature Reserve.”

The petition contains 678 signatures, mainly from residents of Southport but also some from outside Sefton.

4.2 Since the report to Area Committee was written a further petition has been received headed the same as the petition indicated in 4.1 and containing over 500 signatures. It is understood that the number of signatures on this petition will increase before the date of the Cabinet Member meeting.

5.0 CONCLUSION 5.1 The many benefits of the scheme have been set out in the Area Committee

report. However, the scale of local concerns raised, the petitions and the decision of the Area Committee is recognised.

Andy Wallis Director of Planning & Economic Development

ANNEX A Meeting: Southport Area Committee Date of Meeting: 6 October 2010 Title of Report: Southport Cycle Town, Proposed Cycle Track – Birkdale

to Ainsdale Report of: Andy Wallis Director of Planning & Development

This report contains Yes No

CONFIDENTIAL Information/

√

Contact Officer: Dave Marrin 0151 934 4295 Dave McAleavy 0151 934 2961

EXEMPT information by virtue of 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 inform members of the current position with the scheme and to seek a resolution to the Cabinet Member – Technical Services. Recommendation(s) It is recommended that Members note the report It is further recommended that the Area Committee give its view on the proposal to the Cabinet Member – Technical Services.

Corporate Objective Monitoring Corporate Objective Positive

Impact Neutral Impact

Negative 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

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE

2010/ 2011 £

2011/ 2012 £

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

1.0 PURPOSE OF REPORT 1.1 Members will recall previous reports to this Area Committee regarding this

matter. 1.2 At the meeting of the Area Committee held on the 26th May 2010, Members

resolved that:

“(1) the report updating on the current position regarding the proposed Birkdale to Ainsdale cycle track be noted; (2) bearing in mind the intention to undertake a far more extensive consultation exercise, a Special Meeting to consider the proposal be arranged if it is considered necessary to do so; and (3) it be noted that Councillor Byrom dissented to the decision in (2)”

1.3 The consultation exercise has now been completed and this report outlines the details of the proposal together with the response received to the consultation.

1.4 The report will indicate that there are many benefits to this scheme, but the

scale of local resident concerns raised is recognised. Cabinet Member – Technical Services has requested that the Area Committee give guidance on whether or not to proceed with the scheme.

2.0 ACCESS TO THE DUNES 2.1 The Sefton Coast Partnership, of which the Council is a key partner, has a

number of strategies and plans to guide management and policy. These documents collectively form the Sefton Coast Integrated Coastal Zone Management Plan.

2.2 Two key documents are the Access Strategy and the Communications,

Interpretation and Product Delivery Plan which are closely linked. Together the two strategies assist the Council and partner organisations to plan and prioritise practical projects and investment on the Sefton Coast.

2.3 The overall aim of the Sefton Coast Access Strategy is:

“to enhance opportunities for recreation and other access on the Sefton Coast, through sustainable provision, promotion and management of attractive, safe and welcoming paths and other walking, cycling and/or riding routes for the benefit of residents and visitors of all ages and abilities, and to plan and manage access in ways which contribute to the sustainable management of the Coast’s landscapes, wildlife, coastal defences and land uses”.

2.4 Objectives in the Access Strategy include the development of a network of local paths and other routes to, and along the coast, including routes for cycling, riding and/or all abilities use, insofar as feasible and appropriate. The strategy also identified the need to remove barriers to coastal access by less able and disabled people, where practical, and to provide amenities at popular destinations. Although there have been some questions relating to the suitability of this route for some groups of potential users there is no doubt that the proposal will substantially improve physical to this Local Nature reserve allowing others a choice that is not currently available on what is a vast area of open space in the Southport area.

2.5 The Leisure and Tourism Department identified the Birkdale route in the early

stages of the development of the Heritage Lottery Fund Sefton Coast Landscape Partnership Scheme programme in 2007, but, this could not be included as a final scheme in the proposals due to no match funding being available at the time. The timing of the Cycle Town project and the Landscape Partnership Scheme submission deadline did not allow for the Birkdale route improvements to again be included, however, the Birkdale route is seen as a key element of the Councils proposals in respect of access improvements on the Ainsdale and Birkdale Sand hills Local Nature Reserve and indeed the coast as a whole and could now complement other Landscape Partnership Scheme project’s on this Local Nature Reserve; including two informal trails to include on site interpretation, improvements at the Sands Lake to develop a sensory trail and lastly a very similar all-abilities route to the Birkdale Hills proposal, providing safe access under the Coastal Road adjacent to the railway - the latter a project proposed by the Ainsdale Civic Society. Members of this Area Committee recently considered and agreed the proposal to establish a similar all-abilities route along Marshside Road, linking Marshside to its coastal heritage. A project supported by the North Meols Civic Society.

3.0 BACKGROUND TO CURRENT SCHEME 3.1 The proposal has been brought forward as part of the Cycle Town Scheme

and is to be funded through the Cycle Town work programme. However, the proposal delivers a number of benefits other than cycling.

3.2 For some time concerns have been expressed by cyclists regarding the

existing cycletrack, which runs alongside the Coastal Road to Ainsdale (Pontins Roundabout). The track was built some years ago and is part of the Trans-Pennine Trail (TPT). For the majority of its length it is only some 1.5 metres wide, which creates problems when cyclist pass each other or cyclists pass pedestrians. The track is also perceived as not being particularly pleasant to use due to the close proximity of a large volume of high-speed traffic (speed limit on this section of the road being 50mph).

3.3 There has long been an aspiration to create a more pleasant track along this route, however, funding has not been available. In October 2009, Officers of the Council were approached by Cycling England (CE) with a suggestion to develop the route and were informed that an additional Capital Grant may be available to enable the works to be completed. The initial discussions focused on a proposal to move the route a few metres into the Dunes, adjacent to the Coastal Road, to follow the line of the original TPT footpath and to use a cellular paving material for the route. Funding of £250,000 was subsequently confirmed by CE.

3.4 The proposal was then discussed with colleagues in Coast & Countryside.

They indicated that they could not support the proposal as a parallel route along the coastal Road offered no real improvements in respect of the proximity to the highway and no additional benefits in respect access to the Ainsdale and Birkdale Sandhills Local Nature Reserve. However, an alternative route was suggested which had previously been considered as one of three proposed all-abilities routes on the northern coast as part of the Heritage Lottery Fund Sefton Coast Landscape Partnership Scheme. As indicated in 2.5 above, it was not progressed in the first stage of the lottery application as match funding was not available.

3.5 The Head of Coast and Countryside was very enthusiastic about the new

proposal which is shown on the attached plan as Annex A, as it provides excellent all abilities access into the heart of this extensive Local Nature Reserve of 700 acres and the Sefton Coast SSSI, as well as a new link to Hillside Station. Something he wished to encourage as it is very difficult to promote disabled access anywhere on the dune coast due to the nature of the landscape. Discussions were also held at this time with representatives of Natural England (NE) who expressed their support for the proposal. They were also involved in a site meeting as part of early stages of developing the project.

3.6 The proposal was reported to the Area Committee at its meeting of the 6th

January 2010 where Members approved the use of existing footpath on sections B-D and E-F for cycling. Members also noted the report.

3.7 It was noted in the report that the section of route D-E may need planning

permission and that clarification was being sought on this. It was subsequently confirmed that planning permission would be required.

3.8 The proposals were also reported to the meeting of the Cabinet Member –

Technical Services of the 13th January and the meeting of the Cabinet of the 14th January for inclusion in the Capital programme.

3.9 A planning application was submitted in February 2010 and construction was

started on the sections of the route (B-C, F-G) which did not need planning permission and which could “stand alone” if the application were unsuccessful.

3.10 The planning application was due to be heard by the Planning Committee on the 7th April 2010. However, a number of objections, including petitions had been raised to the proposal and a number of questions had also been raised at the Area Committee, in particular allegations that the there had been inadequate consultation on the proposal.

3.11 Subsequent to the meeting of the Area Committee and following consultation

with the Cabinet Members – Technical Services, it was decided that it would be prudent to withdraw the planning application. With the intention to undertake a far more extensive consultation process in June / July before submitting a further planning application for the route.

3.12 This consultation has now been completed. 4.0 DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL 4.1 As indicated in 3.9 above, part of the route from points A-C and F-G have

already been constructed. This leaves approximately £125,000 available to complete the remaining part of the route over the Dunes.

4.2 The route through the Dunes starts at point D which is a gateway adjacent to

the Royal Birkdale Club House and which allows access from Birkdale Common into the SSSI. An exisiting permissive footpath then runs through the Dunes varying in width from over 4 metres at the northern end to under 1 metre at the south western end at a waymarker sign at point E. The path then heads south along the line of the Coastal Road but set back a few metres from the road to a point where it rejoins the existing cycle track at point F.

4.3 The length from point D to point E is the subject of this report and the

proposed planning application. 4.4 The surface of the path would be stabilised by the use of a cellular paving

material. Initial discussions with CE referred to a produce called Netpave and this name has continued to be used as a generic term throughout discussions on the project. However, there are a number of suppliers of similar materials on the market and officers attempted to make contact with these suppliers to discuss the best material to use on this route. It was concluded that the most appropriate product to use would be Adpave 25 and following the receipt of quotations for the material meetings were held on site with the manufacturer to ensure that the material was suitable for this type of use.

4.5 Photographs will be made available to Members at the meeting to show this

type of material in use on similar sites.

4.6 Members should note that recently, officers have been contacted by other manufactures of similar products and are currently reviewing these products to see if they are suitable for consideration.

4.7 Officers were also aware of the need to appoint a contractor to install the

material on-site in a manner which was sympathetic to the area. Consequently, it is proposed that these works be allocated to one of the Coast and Countryside preferred contractors using a method of works and machinery which would give minimum disturbance to the area surrounding the path. The majority of the works would be confined to within the 3m width of the path. However, at a small number of locations it would be necessary to either store materials and / or allow for machinery to turn. At these isolated points a maximum width of 10m would be affected and although there has been concern about the effect on the nature reserve it is anticipated that these areas of disturbance will be beneficial to wildlife and create habitat for rare insects such as the Northern Dune Tiger Beetle and Vernal mining bee and the Sand Lizard and possibly the Natterjack Toad. It is worth noting that an eminent botanist brought to the Councils attention that the disturbance to the edge of the route already completed on the Coastal Road resulted in a considerable bloom of wild plants including a notable plant included in the Merseyside Biodiversity Action Plan. It is well known that disturbance to over-fixed dune systems can be beneficial to wildlife and the proposed route is unlikely to have a detrimental effect on the SSSI.

4.8 Once installed any low level maintenance would be carried out by the Coast

& Countryside Service through its Biodiversity and Access Team – Members may be aware that the team maintain the rural rights of way network, including the manufacture of stiles, small bridges and signs. Experience from other areas of the Country where this type of material has been used on similar paths indicates that little maintenance is required.

4.9 In order to justify the works and to ensure compliance with Habitat

Regulations an Appropriate Assessment (AA) has been carried out by an independent consultant on behalf of Sefton Council. This AA would be used to support the Planning Application and in particular to enable Natural England to take a view on the proposal. The AA concludes that the route could be constructed. The report concludes: “Therefore, as is explored in detail in the preceding sections, it is considered that this basis for an AA has demonstrated that all significant adverse effects on the Sefton Coast SAC and the Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site and the features for which they are designated are adequately mitigated by the proposed routeing and building approaches.”

4.10 At the request of one of the protestors against the scheme an environmental consultant contacted the Council’s consultant who prepared the AA. The Councils consultant then requested he make comment on the assessment (effectively a “peer review”). Both are members of the Institute of Ecology

and Environmental Management and Chartered Environmentalist’s. This second and more importantly, independent consultant, agreed with the conclusions reached in the Council’s AA.

5.0 CONSULTATION 5.1 In line with discussions with the Cabinet Member – Technical Services a

further consultation has recently been carried out. Unfortunately, timescales did not allow this consultation to be considered by the Public Engagement and Consultation Panel. A copy of the information sheet and consultation response is attached as Annex B for Members information

5.2 The consultation was initially due to run from Monday 18th July until Friday 6th

August. Site notices were posted, the item was published on the Internet and press coverage was received to inform people of the consultations. Plans were exhibited at the Ainsdale Discovery Centre and a drop in session to further inform members of the public was arranged in Birkdale for the evening of Thursday 22nd July

5.3 By the 6th August just under 500 responses had been received. 5.4 At the request of local Councillors the consultations was extended until

Friday 27th August and a further public meeting was arranged in Ainsdale for the evening of Monday 23rd August. At this meeting officers of the Council made presentations as did representatives of the objectors. A question and answer session was then held.

5.4 At the end of the consultation 956 responses had been received and these

can be summarised as follows: Those in favour of the proposal 604 = 63%

Those not in favour of the proposal 352 = 37%

The results can be further split down into the area in which the respondent lives and this gives the following:

Area No. in Favour No.not in Favour

Birkdale / Ainsdale 128 173 Rest of Southport 235 133 Formby 47 23 Rest of Sefton 38 2 Outside Sefton 156 21 Total 604 352

5.5 Since the end of the consultation period further responses have been

received. They have been excluded from the above totals. 5.6 A number of respondents also made multiple responses. In these cases, only

one response has been counted for each respondent. 5.7 A number of respondents also made comments on the form. The full list of

comments made has been summarised in Annex C. However, where more than 10 people have raised a similar point then a response if given below. These responses have only been given to comments raised against the proposals.

5.8 Comments raised by those in favour of the scheme, number of people raising

the comment is in brackets:

1. Opportunity for all to access the Dunes (59)

2. Good idea / great (53)

3. Will promote cycling for all (44)

4. Will provide safe cycling (35)

5. Will allow enjoyment of the area / wildlife (35)

6. Improve health in all age groups (30)

7. Promote walking (15)

8. Good for local economy (12)

9. Links to other cycle tracks / networks (12)

10. Will be an asset to the area (10)

5.9 Comments raised by those not in favour of the scheme, number of people raising the comment is in brackets:

1. Will cause damage to the environment (192) Response - This has been fully covered in the Appropriate Assessment which has been produced to support this proposal. The AA concludes that the construction and use of the route will not have a detrimental impact on the environment. 2. Other routes are available (Coast Road) (82) Response - The original proposal made by Cycling England was to develop a route away from the Coast Road. This proposal provides the best option to improve access into the Dunes for all (a key aim of Coast & Countryside) 3. Waste of Money at time of cutbacks (51) Response - The funds are available now from Cycling England. It is unlikely they will be in place beyond 31.3.11. The funds cannot be used for anything other than this project 4. Will destroy Wildlife (38) Response – see response to 1 above 5. Future maintenance issues (33) Response - Experience from elsewhere in the country where this type of material has been used indicate that once laid the surface requires minimal maintenance. Maintenance of the path will be picked up by Coast & Countryside through their Ranger service 6. Will lead to increase in anti social behaviour (22) Response - There is nothing to suggest that the provision of an improved path will lead to an increase in anti-social behaviour. It could be argued that increased use of the existing path and surrounding area could lead to improved security for users

7. Route too wide at 3m (17) Response - This an accepted width for a multi user path 8. People with Disabilities will not use the path (17) Response - Initial discussions with Sefton Access Forum and Southport Access for Everyone have indicated support for the scheme with a suggestion that it will increase the opportunity for access to the area with is currently not possible for all but the most able bodied person. During the consultation on the Landscape Partnership Scheme a number of community engagement meetings [Unlocking the Landscape] took place and the need for improved cycling, walking and disabled access facilities was a common factor discussed. 9. Against installation of Sheep pens (15) Response - This is not a part of this proposal but part of the wider management of the dune system and is already in place on this Local Nature Reserve. 10. Potential conflict between users (14) Response - Elsewhere where footpaths have been widened to extend their use conflict between users has not been a problem. There are other informal walking routes on this Local Nature Reserve. 11. Leave area for walker only (13) Response - Increase in access to the dune area is a key aim for Coast and Countryside and the Sefton Coast Partnership. This proposal will meet with that aim and the route will still be available for walkers 12. Keep area for Dog walkers Only (12) Response – see response to 11 above 13. Area will be left like a rubbish tip / litter (11) Response - Whilst there is no suggestion that the increased use of the area will lead to increased littering. Coast and Countryside will continue to cleanse the area and are already considering a request for more bins along the route. 14. Inappropriate material (plastic matting) (11) Response - The material proposed has been used in similar environments elsewhere in the country and once laid and bedded in provides the best

compromise for providing a firm useable surface, whilst minimising the environmental impact

5.10 In addition to the above a petition has been received headed;

“We object to any plans to create a 3m wide cycle highway across the Sefton Coast SSSI, one of the most highly designated coastlines in the UK and a site of considerable international importance. We believe there are more suitable options for a cycle path, which avoid the destruction of the SSSI areas, maintain the amenity value of the Dunes for the interest of the diverse users current and future. The proposed scheme through the Dunes is not sustainable, is not an effective use of money, will add to the annual maintenance budget of the Council over many years. In addition, we are opposed to any other plan that would impact on the natural beauty of the landscape or wildlife that inhabits the Ainsdale and Birkdale Nature Reserve.” The petition contained 678 signatures and will be presented to the Cabinet Member – Technical Services at his meeting of the 20th October 2010.

6.0 SUMMARY

6.1 The route now proposed achieves many aims including, improving access into the dune for all, including the less able bodied and providing a safe and pleasant leisure cycle route between Birkdale and Ainsdale. The route will improve physical access to the Local Nature Reserve and open up opportunities for many more to access the area, in conjunction with interpretation, education and a number publications included in the nineteen projects that form the Sefton Coast Landscape Partnership Scheme it will also assist in improving intellectual access.

6.2 The route proposed is the only viable option. The route along the high tide

line would be subject to flooding during spring tides and the route is through one of the main strongholds for the Natterjack Toad on the coast as well as running along the wildlife rich ‘Green Beach’. The route along the original TPT footpath would still leave cyclists relatively close to the Coastal Road and offers no real additional benefits for the wider group of users as mention earlier in the report.

6.3 The area through which the route passes is a unit of the SSSI that is in

“Unfavourable Declining Condition” and runs along an existing path that merits some habitat improvement. Remedial works to improve the SSSI and Local Nature Reserve have been taking place for many years and although habitat works are carried out by the Coast and Countryside Service annually across the coast, when funds are available and usually through external

grants, larger projects are carried out – in the case of this Local Nature Reserve, notably in the mid-90’s and 2003 through the Species Recovery Programme and Wildlife Enhancement Scheme respectively. In this “the International Year of Biodiversity” the Sefton Coast Partnership through the Landscape Partnership Scheme has attracted the largest ever grant to carry out habitat restoration work and to engage the local community in thirty years of coastal partnership. The scrub removal work planned for the Local Nature Reserve will increase the ability to roam over the site and help reduce any potential conflict between users should there be any.

6.4 The Head of Coast and Countryside has met with nature conservationists on site including the Merseyside Reptile and Amhiphibian Group and Dr Phil Smith (who gave a presentation to Members at the last meeting of the Area Committee). He has walked the route with Natural England Conservation Officers and the project has been reported to the Working Group and Nature Conservation Task Group of the Sefton Coast Partnership, groups that includes conservation agencies and NGO’s. All support the project. The AA which was well recieved as comphrehensive shows that the construction and use of the path will not have a detrimental impact on the habitat of the area and much of the works will be compatible with the habitat works mentioned above.

6.5 The improvement of the cycle route between Birkdale and Ainsdale has been

a long term aspiration for the Council and the offer of funding from Cycling England has allowed this aspiration to be reached. This is a vast area of open space that only the most able person can access and in providing this improvement the Council is delivering on existing policy and has taken into account its responsibilities in respect of disability and equalities legislation.

6.6 The widening of the existing path would not provide an improved

environment for cyclists as it would still result in cyclists using a path immediately adjacent to fast moving, noisy traffic. If the suggestion had been made to use the available funds to widen the existing path then the funds would have been withdrawn.

7.0 CONCLUSIONS 7.1 Cabinet Member – Technical Services has to resolve whether or not to

proceed with the Planning Application for this proposal. 7.2 The many benefits of the scheme have been set out in the report, but the

scale of local concerns raised is recognised. Hence the views of the Area Committee will inform the Cabinet Member- Technical Services in deciding a way forward.

ANNEX A

ANNEX B

ANNEX B

ANNEX C

Comment Written Internet Sefton

Coastal

Forum

Ainsdale

Discovery

Centre

Improves health amongst all age groups 10 14 2 4

Safe cycling (traffic free route) 14 19 2 1

Enjoyment of this unique environment 11 19 2 1

Funding good value 2 3

Encourage visitors to Sefton 5 4 1

Good for the local economy 10 2 1

Opportunity for all to access the dunes,

Wheelchair users, pushchairs and people

with mobility problems

23 24 6 6

Opportunity to observe wild life 2

Promotes and increases cycling for all

age groups

4 11 1 2

Encourages family rides/walking 9 11 2 4

Promotes sustainable transport 3 4

Promotes walking 7 8 1

Good idea, great etc (short responses) 39 8 3 3

Encourages children to walk and cycle 4 3

Encourages visitors to hire cycles 1

Environmentally friendly area 1

Asset to the area 1 1 3 5

Access to this area on cycles will

promote awareness amongst children to

value their environment

1

The more people around the area makes

it safer

2

Shared use encourages responsibility and

respect

2 1

Links other cycle paths/tracks/network 5 6 1

Need more paths for Cyclists/Elderly 1 1

Need to go a long way before Cycle

Town

3

Surface will be an improvement 5 1

Welcome addition to cycle storage at

Station

1

Appalled by behaviour of objectors 1 3

Existing path intimidating/dangerous 6 1 1

Those in favour of the

Proposal

Impact less than that caused by dogs 4

Will improve habitats 2

Council has duty to maintain highway 1

Good but proposed surface unsuitable 1 1 1

Encourage people to walk more 2

Encourage TPT volunteers to support

and keep the path in good order (clean

litter/sand from the path)

1

as a dog owner I support this proposal 2

Constructed path will reduce

damage/erosion to the dunes

1 3

Install seating to enhance the experience

of the area (help people with mobility

problems)

1

In favour if access controls do not

restrict access for people on e.g. bikes

with tagalongs handcrank cycles

2

A moral duty to open up the countryside

DDA

1

ANNEX C

Comment Written Internet Sefton

Coastal

Forum

Ainsdale

Discovery

Centre

Cyclists will not use the path

1. 5

People with disabilities will not use

the path

6 9 2

Cyclists will not keep to the path

4. 2 1

Other route available near by (coast

rd)

51 26 5

Fear of personal safety (possibility

of attack) and theft

1 3 2

Damage to the environment

(including flora and fauna etc)

85 73 8 26

Conflict between users

9 2 3

keep area for dog walkers only

9 2 1

People who commute to work by

bike will not use the path due to

sand

1

1

Will not increase the number or

encourage people to cycle

1.

Area will be left like a rubbish

tip/litter

3 4 2 2

The path will encourage off road

motor cyclists

3 2 1

Future maintenance issues (costs)

21 9 3

At a time of cutbacks it will 27 19 5

Those Against the proposal

amount to a waste of money

Route/path will 3m wide (like a

highway)

10 4 3

Increase in ASB

16 3 2 1

Path will be covered by sand and

will be unusable

4 3

Destroy wildlife

24 12 2

Leave the area for walkers only

5 3 3 2

Installation of sheep pens/cattle 10 2 3

Only comment on form (register

my strongest possible opposition to

the scheme)

2 3

Consultation flawed mainly due to

being mislead by the council

officers e.g. no environment impact

assessment

3 4

Council in partnership with Pontins

2 2

Inappropriate materials plastic

matting

3

6 1 1

Cars and golf buggies (for hire)

will use the path mostly at night

1

Danger to dog walkers/walkers

from speeding cyclists

1 2

Danger to the public from golf

balls from golf course hitting

cyclists (possibly killing one)

1

Chairman of Sefton Coast Watch

Claims 5000 signatures collected

from local residents

No benefit to the local economy 2

Upgrade existing cycle paths and

signage

2

Why are SMBC obsessed with

promoting more cycling

1

ANNEX D

HRGN1 indicates that Key Step 8 of an Appropriate Assessment is that the competent

authority:

“should conclude whether the proposal, as modified by conditions or restrictions, would

adversely affect the integrity of the site”.

Further, it also indicates that:

“The competent authority should reassess the conclusions in the light of any such

modifications, conditions or restrictions that may be agreed or imposed”.

CONCLUSIONS OF THIS APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT

This basis for an AA has demonstrated that:

use of the existing permissive path as the alignment for the new surfaced cycle route will

avoid any adverse impacts on key habitats and species;

use of a propriety material such as Netpave 25 to create a surfaced route through that part

of the Sefton Coast SSSI / SAC, Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site and Ainsdale and

Birkdale Sandhills LNR through which it passes provides a mechanism for installing a

surfaced track through this sensitive site without compromising the features for which the

European / international site is designated, and where creating a surfaced path would not

otherwise be possible;

further, the planned appointment of a specialist contractor who will use tested and

approved low-key construction approaches, and who will be assisted and supervised by

the Sefton Council Coast and Countryside Service site management personnel also reduces

the potential for adverse impacts, whilst it also provides opportunities for habitat

enhancement works; and,

the use of a propriety material such as Netpave 25 will allow cyclists and also all abilities

users to access the core of the sand-dune habitats in this part of the the Sefton Coast SSSI /

SAC, Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site and Ainsdale and Birkdale Sandhills LNR which

otherwise they wouldn’t experience as cyclists and less-able bodied users confined to

wheelchairs, etc.; finally,

the use of a propriety material such as Netpave 25 will allow easy low-key maintenance

to take place without compromising the features for which the European site is designated,

and would also provide for easy removal of the cycle route should this ever be required.

Therefore, as is explored in detail in the preceding sections, it is considered that this

basis for an AA has demonstrated that all significant adverse effects on the Sefton Coast

SAC and the Ribble and Alt Estuaries Ramsar site and the features for which they are

designated are adequately mitigated by the proposed routeing and building approaches.

Finally, it is also believed that this document provides the necessary detail which will allow

the three tests relating to European protected species to be satisfied, namely:

That the development is 'in the interests of public health and public safety, or for other

imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic

nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment';

That there is 'no satisfactory alternative'; and,

That the derogation (i.e. any permission/licence granted) is 'not detrimental to the

maintenance of the populations of the species concerned at a favourable

conservation status in their natural range'.