Agenda item

This item is to:? 

?

(a) Receive any new petitions:?to receive any new petitions. The lead petitioner?is?entitled?to briefly introduce their petition?by providing a statement in writing, and a response to any petitions received will then be organised for a future?meeting; 
 

(b) Consider reports on petitions previously received:? 

(i) Response to Petition for Dogs on Leads at Newbiggin-by-the-Sea Promenade. 

(ii) Response to Petition for Speed Calming Measure along South Newsham Road (B1523)  

(c) Receive any updates on petitions for which a report was previously?? considered:?any updates will be verbally reported at the meeting.

(a) Members were informed of a new petition titled; “Make Hirst Playing Fields a no dog area”. It was opened on 21^st January 2022 and closed on 21^st February. It had received 278 signatures and would therefore be brought to a future Local Area Council meeting. 

(b)(i)DOGS SHOULD BE KEPT ON LEADS ON NEWBIGGIN-BY-THE-SEA     PROMENADE 

Members were read an extract from the lead petitioner which outlined their reasons for creating the petition. Her comments were as follows:- 

With mental wellbeing at a low and with many individuals benefiting from fresh air and daily exercise, the promenade of Newbiggin by the sea is a popular place to use. Unfortunately, due to the amount of unleashed, out of control dogs this prevents this from happening and it is being avoided by some. 

Having lived in Newbiggin by the sea all my life, a dog owner and someone who uses the promenade on a daily basis I have noticed an increase of out of control dogs. I have personally been verbally attacked on more than one occasion from owners whom I have asked politely to recall their dogs if they have viciously approached myself and my leashed dog. I not only feel intimidated when I am approached – the dog and said owner but nervous and uneasy of what outcome the situation may result in, i.e. an altercation, dog fight or vet bill. This can turn into a very stressful experience when in fact going for a walk on the promenade should be an enjoyable one. 

I feel strongly that locals and visitors alike should feel comfortable and safe whilst using the promenade. It is the biggest attraction of the village and used all year round. Users should not feel anxious or be worried about being approached or in the vicinity of aggressive dogs. 

Although I am a dog owner and appreciate they need exercise, a pedestrianised area is not the place. Dogs can and should be walked on a leash to make the area fully accessible for all users, that being other dog walkers, children, pushchairs, wheelchairs and those with poor mobility without fear of being approached by out of control dogs. These dogs are often causing nuisances, chasing balls the owners throw for them or running around in groups causing potential trip hazards. If the owners can be encouraged to do so elsewhere this would make the promenade a more user-friendly walkway. I have witnessed owners separated from their unleashed dogs, not knowing where they actually are and certainly not noticing them fouling, therefore unaware to pick their faeces up. This in itself is a very big problem. If all dogs were leashed whist walking the promenade I feel confident this fouling problem would decrease, the average owner would surely feel compelled to pick it up rather than plead ignorance/innocent and walk on by. 

I look forward to the findings from the Enforcement Officers who will be patrolling during 2022, I hope that they will be in regular attendance and attentive to the situation to provide full and frank reports. 

I urge you to consider the wider community make a prudent decision to ask for dogs on leads to become mandatory to ensure a safe experience for all. This could be achieved by deploying Enforcement Officers and erecting signage and issue fines and using social media to inform users. 

S. Hall, Senior Animal Welfare and Enforcement Officer, attended to answer questions from members. The following comments were made:- 

• Members believed that enforcement should not just be notices and there should be active enforcement with fines.  
• Members were assured that enforcement officers were present in the area but it was highlighted that it was difficult to catch people in the act. Officers had visited sites in plain clothing but it was still a difficult task. 
• Members were assured that there was a zero-tolerance policy to dog fouling. Members of the public would be issued with a fixed penalty notice if caught. 
• Members suggested that data relating to fixed penalty notices should be published in newspapers to show that enforcement was happening. 
• Officers confirmed that the was a condition in areas where dogs must be kept on a lead for the length of the lead. This was 1.5 metres. 

RESOLVED members supported the recommendations in the report.

(b)(ii) SPEED CALMING MEASURES ALONG SOUTH NEWSHAM ROAD (B1523) 

The lead petitioner, Stuart Ferguson, addressed the committee and spoke around the reasons for starting the petition. His comments included:- 

• The road is a death trap and there had been several serious accidents over the years. Concerns were originally raised back in 2011 and nothing had been implemented. 
• Officers, Police and Ian Levvy MP had visited the area and were shocked at the speed and volume of traffic. After the visit there were positive ideas from Officers however nothing had been done since the visit.  
• The road cannot cope with the volume of traffic at the time and further developments within the area were only going to add to the traffic problem. 

• There was a playpark next to the road and there was safety concerns with Children walking to school alongside the road. There had recently been a serious incident involving a 16-year-old child which resulted in the child being hospitalised. 
• It was asked when the road survey would take place, whether the police had been requested again and what proposals were there for traffic calming measures in the area. 

N. Snowdon, Principal Programme Officer (Highways Improvement), introduced the report to committee and welcomed questions from members. The following response was given to member’s questions:- 

• Members wanted to highlight the environment of the road and how that exacerbated the situation. There was a pathway directly on the road, there were no crossings along the stretch of road. There is a small roundabout that was supposed to be a traffic calming measure however due to the size it was ineffective.  
• Members asked if there were statistics from the Police visit as there had been 3 recorded incidents recently and a number of speed enforcement fines were handed out during a recent visit. 
• Proposals for the road were being finalised and were expected to be ready in the near future. Possible proposals included signage, lines and temporary speed cushions. 
• Officers were still waiting for details from the police regarding the recent incident. Once information was shared they would take action if it was deemed necessary. 
• Officers had contacted the Neighbourhood Police but the speed camera van had not been to the area yet. Members expressed their support of working closely with the Police and felt it was imperative to Officers work. 

• The speed survey had not been carried out yet as there were traffic lights along the road which would have skewed the data. Once the temporary traffic lights were removed the survey would be carried out. It was acknowledged that a lot may have changed since the last survey that was carried out 3 years ago. Officers highlighted the importance of the speed survey to help prioritise the scheme through the Local Transport Plan. 
• Members hoped that the Blyth Relief Road would also alleviate the situation. 
• It was suggested that maps may have been beneficial in the report. 
• A date could not be confirmed on when the work would commence on the road. The Local Plan was in the final stages of completion but it was suggested that there may be work undertaken through the Urban Road Safety Allocation. 
• It was confirmed that there was a speed monitoring sign in situ at the time however it was not confirmed if it had the software to download the speed data. Members confirmed that new speed surveillance equipment had been ordered for the area and a lot of new equipment had the capability to capture the speed data. It was confirmed that Parish and Town Councils do send Officers speed data from other areas. 

RESOLVED members supported the recommendations in the report.