Minutes of Area Panel 5 January 2006

BROOMHILL, CENTRAL AND NETHER EDGE AREA PANEL


Meeting held 5th January, 2006, at Broomhill Methodist Church, Fulwood Road


PRESENT:		Councillors Ali Qadar (Chair), Jillian Creasy, Jean Cromar, Shaffaq Mohammed and Pat White.

		Also in attendance:-

		Councillor Alan Whitehouse

		Dave Whitfield	)	Area Co-ordinator

		Pat McGrath	)	University of Sheffield
		Carrie Warr	)

		Gary Finney	-	Bovis Lend Lease

		Paul Fell	-	Transport Planning, Development Services

		Janice Maskort	)	Libraries, Archives and Information
		Ann Staniland	)	Service
		Linda Greenwood	)

		Dave Hempshall	-	Premises and Assets Management

		Inspector Craig Patchett	-	South Yorkshire Police

		John Turner	-	Committee Secretariat

		There were approximately 35 local residents and representatives from local community groups in attendance.

……….

1.	APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE FROM MEMBERS OF THE PANEL
	Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mohammad Azim, Andrew Sangar, Paul Scriven and Andrew White.

2.	UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD STUDENT RESIDENCES STRATEGY – UPDATE
	Pat McGrath, Carrie Warr and Gary Finney reported on the progress with regard to the University’s disposal strategy and the work in connection with the Student Village, including details of the phasing of the construction works and how the University intended to liaise with the local community during the period of the works.
	Gary Finney referred to a plan of the site, which indicated the various phases of development, and stated that works in connection with the protection and removal of trees on the site were due to commence in the next few weeks. The archaeological investigations on the site were continuing, the ecological surveys had almost been completed and the site was shortly to be secured by the erection of mesh screening to enable the progress of the works to be viewed. The construction traffic would predominantly be directed along Fulwood Road and Ecclesall Road and the main entrance for such traffic would be on Endcliffe Vale Road. Regular surveys would be undertaken during the construction works to monitor noise and any effects of dust, and measures would be taken, including the restriction of the use of certain types of machinery, to ensure that such levels were kept to a minimum. Also, every effort would be made to keep the level of building material to a minimum, and any surplus materials would be segregated for recycling purposes. With regard to health and safety issues, representatives from Bovis Lend Lease and the University were meeting regularly with the Police to discuss various issues, including security arrangements regarding access to the construction site.
	Pat McGrath reported on the University’s proposals with regard to communicating and liaising with the local community during the construction works, indicating that a Construction Interface Group had been established, which comprised representatives of Broomhill Action and Neighbourhood Group (BANG), Riverdale and Endcliffe Action Group (REACT), the Broomhill Forum, the University’s Union of Students, local schools and the City Council. The Group had been meeting regularly and the University and Bovis Lend Lease had received some very useful comments. Other communication initiatives included the production of a weekly newsletter containing information on the progress of the construction works, the provision of information on the University’s website and the circulation of information via e-mail to the representatives on the Interface Group and the wider community. Reference was also made to an information card which had been produced, and which contained a dedicated e-mail address, a construction telephone hotline, the website address and a postal address which residents could use in order to find out about the construction process. Ms. McGrath stated that she would welcome the views of local residents in connection with identifying suitable locations for notice boards in the area on which information in connection with the construction process could be displayed.
	Carrie Warr reported on the disposals element of the Residences Strategy, indicating that 32 properties had now been sold, subject to a restrictive covenant limiting the use for residential purposes, offers had been accepted on 16 properties, 12 were being advertised for sale and a further 70 properties were to be released on the market with effect from Summer 2006. The application for planning permission in respect of development on the Riverdale site was set to be considered by the City Centre, South and East Planning and Highways Area Board in the near future, the proposals in connection with development on the Tapton Hall site were still being considered by Planning Officers and plans were being made in connection with the sale of the remaining sites, which would all also be subject to restrictive covenants limiting the use for residential purposes. The University was also continuing to talk to the owners of a number of sites in the City Centre in connection with potential agreements for further student accommodation.
	The following questions were asked and responses given:-

	Q. Had the original application for planning permission in respect of the development on the Riverdale site been withdrawn, and a new application submitted?

	R. The University would contact the resident raising this question direct and provide her with the information.

	Q. What was the progress in respect of the development at Tapton Hall?

	R. The developer had submitted an application for planning permission in respect of the development of the site, details of which were still being considered by the Planning Authority.

	Q. Whilst local residents welcomed the University’s actions in terms of imposing restrictive covenants in connection with the prospective sale of properties as part of the Tapton Hall development, why was it now the case that, despite the University’s assurances that a large proportion of the properties would be sold for family accommodation, the majority of the units were single or two bedroomed properties?

	R. The aims of the restrictive covenants were predominantly to change the balance of the nature of the accommodation from student to residential.

	Q. Could arrangements be made for a representative of Fairclough Homes (the developer responsible for the Tapton Hall development) to attend either a future meeting of this Area Panel or a separate public meeting to address the concerns of local residents?

	R. This could be arranged.

	Q. What was the progress with regard to the traffic capacity assessment undertaken in connection with the Tapton Hall development, which had been considered, by a number of local residents, to be seriously flawed?

	R. The University would respond direct to the resident raising this issue.

	Q. Was the University prepared to take legal action in order to enforce the restrictive covenants placed on the sale of the properties?

	R. Yes.

	Q. Would the restrictive covenants be effective if the properties were resold in the future?

	R. Yes.

	Q. Why had it been the case that very few local residents were aware of the significant changes made to the application in respect of the Riverdale development? Whilst there was a notice fixed to a lamp-post in the area, very few residents noticed this and it appeared that only those residents who wrote to the City Council, expressing their views, were informed of the changes.

	R. The City Council would not normally write to inform all residents of the changes, only those who had initially written to the Council. The alterations referred to related to a change to the application, and was not a new application.

	The Area Panel (a) noted the information now reported, together with the responses given to the questions; and
	(b) thanked Pat McGrath, Carrie Warr and Kevin Finney for the presentation now made.

3.	FUNDING OF TRANSPORT SCHEMES
	Paul Fell gave a presentation on the process regarding the funding of transport schemes in the City, including details of how much money was available, where the funding came from, decisions on how it was spent, how people could request transport schemes and how the requests were dealt with.
	He reported that the City Council had developed a Local Transport Plan, which covered a period of five years and contained guidance from the Government, and which set out how the Council should address its own and the Government’s priorities and targets in terms of transport planning. The Council allocated approximately £6m capital funding from the corporate budget towards transport schemes, and split this funding under a number of sub-headings, which included road safety work, school related schemes, public transport projects, cycling and walking, traffic management and other small schemes. In addition to this, each of the 12 Area Panels was allocated £10,000 towards the implementation of small highway schemes in their areas.
	The funding was allocated in accordance with the priorities and targets set out in the Council’s Local Transport Plan and anyone was entitled to contact the Council to request a scheme. On receipt of requests, they would be forwarded to the relevant officer depending on the nature of the proposed scheme and the officer would then consider whether the request was feasible or desirable. The person requesting the scheme would be informed whether it was to be assessed or refused, and provided with reasons why this decision had been made. Each request to be assessed would then be assigned to the relevant funding block and considered by a panel of officers, using the Council’s standard procedures. The assessment procedures included:-

	· Impact on the total number of accidents.

	· Impact on the number of accidents involving children.

	· Improve accessibility to or within an area identified as a high priority Child Safety Zone.

	· Contribute towards the implementation of an adopted School Travel Plan, or an approved workplace travel plan.

	· Contribute to improved accessibility for people with disabilities.

	· Contribute towards Housing Market Renewal schemes, Area Development Frameworks and/or other regeneration proposals.

	· Contribute towards an improvement in air quality.

	· Impact on the control of inappropriate traffic speeds.

	· Improve conditions for walking.

	· Improve conditions for cycling.

	· Improve conditions for public transport operations.

	Following the assessment of the above, each scheme was then given a score which ranged from significantly positive (+2) to significantly negative (-2). The schemes were then listed in order and progressed as and when funding became available, with the people requesting the schemes being advised of the results.
	The following questions were asked and responses given:-

	Q. Was there any progress in connection with the proposals to install a pedestrian crossing at the bottom of Crookes?

	R. This scheme was still on the waiting list. It had originally been part of the Broomhill Traffic Management Scheme, but had not been progressed due to the potential high costs of the scheme. As well as the high costs, its location, in terms of the implementation of road safety improvements, was considered to be very difficult on the basis that any improvements would necessitate banning turns and could potentially create tailbacks.

	Q. Had there ever been any local input into the Council’s targets and performance indicators in terms of traffic management improvements?

	R. Whilst the targets and performance indicators are set based on Government guidance, they are agreed by Councillors. Planning officers would also take a series of local indicators into consideration when drawing up the targets.

	Q. Do the private schools in the City have a responsibility for establishing school travel plans?

	R. It was the aim to get all schools in the City involved in establishing School Travel Plans. A number of private schools were already involved in this initiative.

	Q. It appeared from the statistics provided as part of the presentation that not enough consideration, in terms of funding, was given to the needs of pedestrians – why was this the case?

	R. If members of the public were not happy with the manner of how the funding had been split up in terms of the different categories of schemes, they should forward their comments to the Director of Development Services, their local Councillor, the Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport and the Leader of the City Council.

	Q. Does the Council have any figures relating to what extent traffic in the City had increased since the increase in public transport fares?

	R. Whilst there were no figures to hand, the Planning Officer indicated that he would respond to the resident direct. The Council has no input into decisions regarding fare increases, but was looking at the possibility of introducing Quality Contracts, which would include franchising bus services of which it could have an input the operational arrangements of certain elements of these services. The Council would continue to lobby the Government in connection with the reduction of public transport fares. Members of the public were obviously also entitled to make representations, through their local MP, on this issue.

	Q. Could any improvements be made, or measures taken to improve the safety of the junction of Newbould Lane and Clarkehouse Road as there appeared to be an increase in traffic offences at the junction? One of the main offences of which there had been an increase was drivers jumping the red lights, thereby endangering pedestrians.

	R. The Council was aware of an increase in the numbers of drivers jumping red traffic lights across the City, and due to a reduction in the numbers of traffic police, detection rates were often very low. A number of cameras had been installed at those junctions where there had been a history of accidents, but to date, there had been no reported accidents at this particular junction. The Council was also limited in terms of its ability to alter the timing of the traffic lights through guidance from the Government. Whilst there were no security cameras monitoring this junction, there were a number of traffic cameras in and around the Broomhill area, monitoring traffic flow.

	Q. As part of the encouragement by the Government for Councils to develop innovative transport schemes as part of their Local Transport Plans, would the Council be submitting a bid for Innovative Funding?

	R. The Council had expressed an interest in bidding for such funding, but the funding was targeted specifically for those authorities aiming to introduce congestion charges.

	Q. On the basis that large numbers of students walked past or crossed the Newbould Lane/Clarkehouse Road junction, would it be possible to request the University to consider providing funding towards improving the junction?

	R. One of the planning conditions of the Student Village development included the developers entering into a Section 278 Agreement with the City Council with regard to funding road safety improvements as a result of the potential impact of the development on road safety. The University would look at the possibility of including this junction in any proposals.

	Q. What does the Council do with the information and pictures received from the cameras as part of the traffic monitoring system?

	R. Officers spend many hours monitoring the cameras and proposals, in terms of all aspects of traffic management, are devised subject to available funding. There are also several congestion detectors on the ground which assist officers in making decisions regarding the timing of traffic lights. It was accepted that, in the days of increased traffic on the roads, there will always be traffic queues, but the Council had to look at the best ways of managing traffic flow in the City. It was pointed out that, on balance, more time was spent monitoring traffic flow in Broomhill and the surrounding area than other areas of the City.

	Q. Would it be possible to install a police detection camera at the Clarkehouse Road/Newbould Lane junction in the light of the number of drivers jumping the red lights?

	R. There were very strict criteria with regard to the installation of detection cameras at road junctions, one such criterion referring to the number of accidents. Based on the fact that there had been no fatalities and very few accidents at this junction, it was unlikely that such cameras would be installed. In the light of the comments made at this meeting, the Police representative stated that he would make a request for officers to monitor the Clarkehouse Road/ Newbould Lane junction in the short-term, which would hopefully make drivers think more carefully, particularly those drivers using the junction on a regular basis.

	The Area Panel (a) noted the information now reported, together with the responses given to the questions asked; and
	(b) thanked Paul Fell for the presentation now made.

4.	BROOMHILL LIBRARY – UPDATE
	Janice Maskort reported on the problems regarding Broomhill Library, relating specifically to the main access and on the difficulties facing mothers and children in accessing the first floor of Broomhill Library, together with details of the works required to address the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act.
	Ms. Maskort reported that she had received several letters from residents of Broomhill, expressing their concerns with regard to problems accessing the library due to the location and nature of the building. Officers were well aware of the problems and had considered what action be taken in terms of structural alterations, to meet the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act. The main problem focused on the main access to the building, which proved very difficult for people with disabilities and mothers with pushchairs or prams. There was a two metre difference in height from pavement level to the main door to the library, and due to the regulations regarding gradient, the access ramp required would need to be 30 metres long and would cost approximately £70,000. In addition to this, the access doors would need to be widened, which would require refurbishment of the lobby. There would also be a need to remove the original stone mullions and carry out alterations to the counter. The approximate costs of altering the doorway would amount to £6,000.
	Reference was made to the problems of access to the first floor of the building, where the children’s section was located, and Ms. Maskort reported that the only solution to this problem would be the installation of a lift. This would be possible, but would require further alterations to the building and would cost over £100,000. There would also be a requirement under the Disability Discrimination Act to provide disabled toilets, which would require further modification to the building. The total cost of all the works required would be between £180,000 and £220,000.
	After considering the various options, officers had decided that due to the costs and potential difficulties in connection with the required construction and refurbishment works, which would prove even more difficult on the basis that the premises were in a Conservation Area, the most preferable option would be relocate the library to alternative premises in Broomhill. Due to the size of the area and the fact that it had been considered that the facility should remain in the main Broomhill Centre, there was little in terms of alternative suitable premises, and although the Fables building on Ashdell Road looked promising, upon investigation, it became clear that extensive refurbishment, both internal and external, would be required, making a relocation financially non-viable.
	The following questions were asked and responses given:-

	Q. The view of the Broomhill Forum is that the Fables building would be the most suitable alternative location for the library – could the Library Service look at forming a partnership with other Council Services, or the private sector, in terms of dual use of the building?

	R. This approach had been undertaken as part of other initiatives in the City and officers would investigate this as a possible alternative. In fact, the Library Service preferred to work in partnership whenever possible.

	Q. Was there any possibility of using Section 106 planning gain money from the Student Village development towards the cost of the works?

	R. This would not be possible as it would not meet the criteria.

	Q. How wide an area was the Council looking in terms of the possible relocation of the library?

	R. It would not be suitable to relocate the library anywhere other than within the main Broomhill Centre. The facility needed to be within walking distance for residents of Broomhill, particularly on the basis that there was very little car parking for users.

	Q. Could a lift be constructed at the rear of the building which would minimise the impact of the works on the building?

	R. This option had been considered, but there were doubts as to whether, due to the nature of the works, planning approval would be granted. It had also been considered that the costs would be too high.

	The following comments were also received:-

	· The view of residents was that it would be very difficult to find suitable, alternative premises for the library other than the Fables building on Ashdell Road.

	· On the grounds that there were issues regarding difficulties facing mothers and their children accessing the children’s section of the library on the first floor, a request should be made to the Children and Young People’s Directorate to provide an element of the funding required as part of any proposed relocation.

	The Area Panel (a) noted the information now reported, together with the comments now made and responses given to the questions asked; and
	(b) in the light of the problems with regard to access to the library building, and the potential costs in adapting the building to meet the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act, together with potential problems with the premises being in a Conservation Area, the City Librarian be requested to look at the possibility of locating to the Fables building on Ashdell Road, either in partnership with one or more other Council Services, one of the external agencies or the private sector.

5.	BROOMHILL AND ENDCLIFFE ROADSHOW
	The Area Panel received the notes on the proceedings of the Broomhill and Endcliffe Roadshow which had been held at the Broomhill Methodist Church on 4th October,2005, together with a list of action points which had been produced from the notes. The Area Co-ordinator stated that this had been the first of four planned Area Panel Roadshows during the year which were to be held within the different neighbourhoods of the Panel’s area and which gave local residents the opportunity of discussing issues of local interest with Area Panel link officers and representatives from external agencies on a one-to-one basis. He added that the event had been very well attended and had proved a very useful forum for local residents to voice their concerns or seek further information on various issues of interest in their neighbourhood. He concluded by stating that the action points would be included as targets in next year’s Area Action Plan.
	Adrian Alker, Chair of the Broomhill Forum, expressed his thanks, on behalf of the Forum, for the hard work undertaken by the Area Co-ordinator, the Area Panel Link Officers, the representatives from the external agencies and other officers involved in the planning and organisation of the Roadshow.
	The Panel (a) noted the notes of the Roadshow held on 4th October, 2005, together with the list of action points; and
	(b) thanked the Area Co-ordinator, the Area Panel Link Officers, the representatives from the external agencies and other Council staff involved in the planning and organisation of the Roadshow.

6.	AREA CO-ORDINATOR’S REPORT
	The Panel received a report of the Area Co-ordinator containing details of developments in the area, which included (a) the proposed action to the taken in connection with illegal signage on properties in the area and (b) comments on the recent Walkabout held in Broomhill.
	Specific reference was made to the problems regarding illegal signage, which mainly involved landlords fixing signs to their properties advertising them for rent. The Council had received a large number of complaints from residents in the area, particularly those living in the Eccles