Agenda item

Deep Lane Cycle Crossing Consultation

Report of the Executive Director, Place

Decision:

6.1

The Executive Director, Place submitted a report describing the proposed changes to improve the perception of safety for users of the Blackburn Valley Cycle Route when crossing Deep Lane. It also set out a response to an objection to the scheme.

 

 

6.2

RESOLVED: That:-

 

 

 

(a)

the scheme, as described in the report, be approved;

 

 

 

 

(b)

works to improve drainage in the area be undertaken by Amey as part of the detailed design process; and

 

 

 

 

(b)

the objectors be informed accordingly.

 

 

 

5.3

Reasons for Decision

 

 

5.3.1

Officers believe the objections have been addressed and the reasons for the recommendations outweigh the objections received. The works described in the report will contribute to an improvement in safety on Deep Lane.

 

 

5.4

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

 

 

5.4.1

A signing only scheme was considered but it was decided that it would not have sufficient effect on driver speed and would not have any effect on visibility.

 

 

5.5

Any Interest Declared or Dispensation Granted

 

 

 

None

 

 

5.6

Reason for Exemption if Public/Press Excluded During Consideration

 

 

 

None

 

 

5.7

Respective Director Responsible for Implementation

 

 

 

Simon Green, Executive Director, Place

 

 

5.8

Relevant Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee If Decision Called In

 

 

 

Economic and Environmental Wellbeing

 

Minutes:

5.1

The Executive Director, Place submitted a report describing the proposed changes to improve the perception of safety for users of the Blackburn Valley Cycle Route when crossing Deep Lane. It also set out a response to an objection to the scheme.

 

 

5.2

Neil Stadden and Louise Marley, two local residents, attended the meeting to make representations to the Cabinet Member. Mr Stadden commented that they had recently purchased Station House and planned to run a motor trade business from the property.

 

 

5.3

Ms. Marley added that the yard at the property would be used as a car sales area and access was required. In the future there were plans to open an ice cream/café cart next to the property which they hoped would enhance the cycle route and encourage people to come to the area and this would require access. She also had concerns about drainage in the area and the effect of the proposals in a flood risk area.

 

 

5.4

Simon Botterill, Team Manager, Traffic Management, commented that the scheme had been developed prior to Mr Stadden and Ms. Marley purchasing the property referred to. He acknowledged the need for customer parking but added that businesses should not rely on the use of on street parking and provide customer parking. However, there would be two spaces available outside Station House for parking.

 

 

5.5

Mr Botterill further commented that there would be more than adequate room for a vehicle with a trailer to access the site. Officers did not want to encourage vehicles to park in the area on a large scale as this could present problems for pedestrians and other road users.

 

 

5.6

Councillor Leigh Bramall, Cabinet Member for Business, Skills and Development, commented that he supported the idea of an ice cream/café cart in the area. He supported the scheme but requested that drainage was looked at as part of the detailed design.

 

 

5.7

RESOLVED: That:-

 

 

 

(a)

the scheme, as described in the report, be approved;

 

 

 

 

(b)

works to improve drainage in the area be undertaken by Amey as part of the detailed design process; and

 

 

 

 

(b)

the objectors be informed accordingly.

 

 

 

5.8

Reasons for Decision

 

 

5.8.1

Officers believe the objections have been addressed and the reasons for the recommendations outweigh the objections received. The works described in the report will contribute to an improvement in safety on Deep Lane.

 

 

5.9

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

 

 

5.9.1

A signing only scheme was considered but it was decided that it would not have sufficient effect on driver speed and would not have any effect on visibility.

 

Supporting documents: