Broomhill, Central and Nether Edge Area Panel Minutes 7th September 2006

BROOMHILL, CENTRAL AND NETHER EDGE AREA PANEL


Meeting held 7th September, 2006, at the Broomhall Centre, Broomspring Lane


PRESENT:		Councillors Ali Qadar (Chair), Jillian Creasy, Jean Cromar, Bernard Little, Janice Sidebottom, Andrew White and Alan Whitehouse.

		Also in attendance:-

		Councillor Andrew Sangar	-	Fulwood Ward

		Councillor Shaffaq Mohammed	-	Broomhill Ward

		Dave Whitfield	-	Area Co-ordinator

		Bakhtiar Rashid	-	Area Action Officer

		Ben Benest	)
		Ric Bingham	)	Development Services

		Jillian Missen	-	Parks and Countryside

		Richard Yates	)
		Doug Kerr	)	University of Sheffield

		Marie May	-	Sheffield Hallam University

		Insp. Caroline Rollitt	)
		Sgt. Mick Allott	)	South Yorkshire Police

		Caroline Jennings	-	Safer Neighbourhood Team

		Joanna Rutter	-	Sheffield South West Primary Care Trust

		John Turner	-	Committee Secretariat

		There were approximately 30 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 Paul Scriven and Pat White.



2.	PLANS OF THE POLICE AND THE UNIVERSITIES FOR THE NEW STUDENT TERM
	The South Yorkshire Police and representatives from the University of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam University reported on their plans for the return of students to the City for the new term.

	South Yorkshire Police
	Inspector Caroline Rollitt reported that, in preparation for the students returning to the City, the Police would be operating extra patrols in the area from 15th September to 1st October, 2006, between the hours of 8.00 p.m. and 3.00 a.m. They will be working closely with the Security Teams at both the University of Sheffield and Sheffield Hallam University and similar operations will be undertaken by all the Safer Neighbourhood Teams in the Broomhill, Sharrow and City Centre areas. The extra Police presence in the area was not only to be used to crack down on anti-social or criminal behaviour by students, but also to deal with the expected increase in crime against students, including street attacks and burglaries.
	The following questions were asked and responses given:-

	Q. On the basis that the Universities did not provide a 24-hour call-out service, would residents be expected to contact the Police if they witnessed any incidents involving students?

	R. Yes, residents should contact the relevant Safer Neighbourhood Team. Although the officers in the Team would only be able to respond to matters of a criminal nature, they would refer any other calls regarding matters such as noise nuisance and other minor disturbances, to the relevant agencies. If residents are aware that students are involved, they could either contact the Universities, as the Police were working closely with their Security Teams, or also ring the newly-introduced Police contact number, 101. If residents deemed the matter an emergency, they should ring 999, but if the matter related to a lower level crime or incident, they should ring 101, and the call operators would decide who the matter needed to be referred to.

	Q. Where can residents obtain the contact telephone numbers for the Universities’ Security Teams and the Safer Neighbourhood Teams and was there any publicity in terms of these contact numbers?

	R. All residents in the area will shortly be receiving an information leaflet which will contain all the relevant contact telephone numbers for their local Safer Neighbourhood Teams. The Police would welcome any suggestions from residents as to where they would consider it useful that these telephone numbers were displayed.

	Q. As a result of particular problems in the past, had the Police any plans to target the Niall Street/Newbould Lane/Watson Road/Beech Hill Road area, known locally as the Moor Oaks triangle?

	R. The Police will be conducting a similar operation as last year in this particular locality.

	Q. What were the Police’s plans in terms of illegal fly-posting which residents considered to be a blight on the area, and which was always more prevalent at the beginning of a new student term? Residents had witnessed people putting posters up, which included advertising club nights and drinks promotions, and had also witnessed a number of incidents where the people putting the posters up had become aggressive towards those residents who had objected to their actions. Would the police be putting in extra resources to monitor this?

	R. The Police were not aware of any such incidents, but would talk to relevant Council officers, including the City Centre Ambassadors. If the Police received any reports of disturbances involving people putting the posters up and local residents, they would obviously respond and investigate these incidents.

	In connection with the issue regarding illegal fly-posting, the Area Co-ordinator reported that he would be contacting Street Force, reminding them that the students would shortly be returning to the City, and of the likely increase in illegal fly-posting in the Panel’s area. He added that new legislation which had been introduced gives the Council additional powers, making it easier to take enforcement action against the perpetrators. However, for this to be effective, the Council needs to agree to put extra resources into enforcement.

	University of Sheffield
	Richard Yates, Security Manager, reported that the University of Sheffield was expecting approximately 5,500 students in the City next week and outlined the plans to deal with the influx. In terms of accommodation, he reported that following the demolition of Sorby House and other halls of residence, as part of the Residences Strategy, arrangements had been made, under a partnership agreement, to house students in private accommodation at the rear of Edward Street flats, areas surrounding Devonshire Green and at The Forge, at the bottom of London Road.
	All new students will be invited to attend an induction meeting, which would include a talk by South Yorkshire Police, reminding them of their responsibilities in terms of behaviour whilst living in the City, as well as providing information and advice in terms of their being potential victims of crime. He stated that the University’s Security Team, who provide a 24-hour telephone contact service, would respond to all calls, depending on the nature of the incident reported, by either a visit or referring the incident to the relevant agency. He concluded by stating that due to the improvements made in terms of security issues, together with the increased liaison with the Police, the University had seen a reduction in the number of reported incidents over the last few years.
	A local resident suggested that as part of the induction meeting for the new students and any similar meetings held for Year 2, 3 and 4 students, a request could be made for the students to either remove posters and/or report incidents where they witnessed people putting posters up in the area. Mr. Yates stated that he would pass this request on to the Student Union.

	Sheffield Hallam University
	Marie May, Development Manager, reported that Sheffield Hallam University would similarly be expecting approximately 5,500 students as part of the Freshers Week which commenced on 25th September, 2006. The University would be working closely with its colleagues at the University of Sheffield, and would be arranging an induction for new students, which would include a talk by the Police on all aspects of crime and crime prevention. The University had a Control Centre which was staffed for 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Officers at the Centre would however only respond to incidents by a visit if the incident had occurred on one of the University’s sites. All other incidents would be referred to the Police.
	In terms of accommodation, Ms. May reported that the University had over 4,000 bed spaces in purpose built accommodation and that over the years, there had been a reduction in the numbers of students living in private rented accommodation, in residential areas. There were now only three halls of residence in the Endcliffe area, with the majority of the student accommodation being situated in or around the City Centre.
	The following questions were asked and responses given:-

	Q. Could Universities review the wording of the leaflets distributed to students living in private rented accommodation, relating to the use of the blue and black wheelie bins as the existing information was not very clear?

	R. Both the Universities were due to meet with representatives of Veolia and the City Council’s Waste Management Service to discuss all the various aspects regarding waste collection from private rented properties, and would look at reviewing the wording on the leaflets distributed to students. They were also looking at the possibility of introducing a text service to students’ mobile phones, which would include information regarding the collection of waste from their properties.

	Q. Could any revised information regarding waste collection be sent to second, third and fourth year students?

	R. This could be arranged.

	Q. Could the Universities, as part of the induction meetings for new students and any additional meetings for second, third and fourth year students, remind students of their responsibilities in terms of noise nuisance? It was accepted that there were little or no Council resources to monitor incidents of noise nuisance, but could the Council, with the assistance of local residents, monitor those areas where there were known problems, so that they could direct what little resources they had to these areas?

	R. A meeting had been held between Council officers and the Universities to discuss various issues regarding student behaviour, and the issue of noise nuisance had been raised. The Council did not have any resources to monitor incidents of noise nuisance during the night and it was requested at the meeting that the Council give further consideration to providing some form of resource to deal with complaints of this nature. The Area Co-ordinator would follow this up and report back on any developments to a future Area Panel meeting.

	Q. The Universities distribute leaflets advertising student accommodation which refer to certain properties being in “student” areas. Would it be possible for the residents of these areas to have an input in the wording of such literature?

	R. It was believed that the wording of such literature was to be reviewed.

	RESOLVED: That (a) the information reported by Inspector Caroline Rollitt, Richard Yates and Marie May, together with the responses to the questions, be noted;
	(b) Inspector Rollitt, Mr. Yates and Ms. May be thanked for the presentations now made and for responding to the questions; and
	(c) the Cabinet be requested to give consideration for this Panel’s area to be designated as a pilot area in terms of the provision of resources, including enforcement action, following the introduction of the new legislation to deal with illegal fly-posting.

3.	BROOMHALL LOCAL CENTRE PROJECT
	Ben Benest gave a presentation on the progress of the Broo, mhall Local Centre Project following the last presentation made to the Area Panel meeting on 3rd November, 2005.
	Mr. Benest reported that the Project was divided into two phases, with Phase 1 involving the development on the land between Upper Hanover Street and Hanover Way. Meetings had been held with the two landowners involved, and who had both agreed that the area be developed as part of one overall scheme. City Estates, one of the landowners, had hired a firm of architects to draw up a scheme which included the construction of a number of apartments. The Council’s Planners had provided guidance and advice on what the Council would like to see in terms of development on the site, which included a request that the apartments should be for general residential use and not specifically for students. Following this advice, City Estates were due to submit a revised scheme and following a period of public consultation, a planning application for the development would be submitted to the Council. It was planned that a report would be submitted to the Cabinet on 11th October 2006, seeking approval for the Council to earmark the capital receipts from the disposal of the Phase 1 site, for advancing the Project. It was proposed that this funding would be used specifically for filling in the subway on Hanover Way, which was an integral part of the scheme, and which would enable the progression of the other elements of the scheme.
	Approval in principle had been received for the allocation of approximately £150,000 from the Local Transport Plan to be used towards the construction of surface pedestrian crossing on Hanover Way. The capital receipt would also be available to construct a car park to serve St. Silas Church on the site of the ramp and stairs of the old subway on the Broomhall side of the subway under Hanover Way. This would then provide the alternative parking area for the YMCA and free up some of the land required for Phase 2 of the Project, which would comprise new shops, flats and a public square.
	Following a query by a local resident in connection with the change of the name of the Project, Mr. Benest stated that when the scheme had first been devised, it had been envisaged that it would comprise a multi-use centre, hence the name Broomhall Cosmopolitan Project. The Project has since progressed in a slightly different direction, and was now deemed to be a neighbourhood centre, hence the name change to the Broomhall Local Centre Project.
	The Area Panel (a) noted the information now reported; and
	(b) thanked Ben Benest for the presentation now made.

4.	“LIVING AND GROWING IN BROOMHALL”
	Lindsey Taylor, Broomhall Forum, reported on the environmental project “Living and Growing in Broomhall”.
	Ms. Taylor reported that the Broomhall Forum, had recently been successful in a bid for Neighbourhood Renewal Funding towards the undertaking of an environmental project, in partnership with the Heeley Development Trust, in the Broomhall area. The main aim of the project was to develop green spaces in the area and to encourage residents to get involved in developing the spaces and also encouraging them to take better pride in their area, which would in turn increase community cohesion.
	The Forum had used the funding to employ an Environmental Development Officer, and would shortly be appointing a trainee, who would work with local residents and look towards the sustainable neighbourhood management of the green spaces. It was hoped that the various environmental groups in the area could work together as part of the project and representatives from the different groups had met and identified a plan, which had consequently resulted in a project proposal for NRF funding being submitted.
	The proposals in terms of the project would be taken forward by the Broomhall Environment Group, which comprised representatives of all the different environmental groups in the area, and which would continue to meet on a regular basis in order to progress the Project.
	Ms. Taylor concluded by stating that it was the intention to enter the area in next year’s Sheffield in Bloom and Britain in Bloom competitions.
	Further to a query regarding the purpose of entering into a partnership with the Heeley Development Trust, Ms. Taylor stated that this decision had been taken on the basis that the Broomhall Forum had not got sufficient resources and expertise to initially produce the project proposal and to deliver the project. Forming the partnership would also given the Forum access to the necessary tools and equipment required, and also would provide them with a vehicle.
	The Area Panel (a) noted the information now reported; and (b) placed on record its congratulations to the Broomhall Forum for their successful NRF funding for the “Living in and Growing In Broomhall” project.

5.	REGENERATION OF THE PORTER BROOK IN THE CITY CENTRE
	Ric Bingham reported on the proposals to regenerate the Porter Brook and areas surrounding the river within the City Centre.
	Mr. Bingham reported that he had been commissioned by the City Council’s City Development Division to draw up proposals to change the environment of the Porter Brook, in the Cultural Industries Quarter area of the City Centre, in order to improve the area and make it more attractive for local residents, and also to encourage developers to invest in the area. He stated that the Porter Brook provided a unique opportunity to contribute to the creation of an attractive riverside walkway, linking newly created open spaces, and at the same time revitalise the route of the River in the City Centre. He stated that development pressures were such in the Cultural Industries Quarter that if the opportunity was not taken now, there may not be another occasion when intervention and guidance could have an effective outcome.
	The City Council had commissioned a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment which would provide the baseline information for designing flood defences and new built development on the Porter Brook, and this work was due for completion shortly. This would be vital to inform designs to de-culvert the Brook, re-naturalise the riverbanks and encourage bio-diversity. The intention of the plans was to ensure that future developments along the Porter Brook were permeable to enable access and views to the Brook there was the potential for new developments along the edge of the Brook to maximise the amount of active frontage along the riverside and this would give opportunities, publicly accessible viewing points or walkway access, and would ensure maximum onto the Brook to ensure it became an attractive asset to the City Centre.
	Mr. Bingham stated that an integral part of the proposals involved looking at the ecological aspects and there were plans to create a mini wildlife corridor.
	In terms of funding, Mr. Bingham reported that Section 106 funds, which had been designated for open space in the Cultural Industries Quarter, would be used in the first instance to fund the project, and there was a possibility that additional funding could be contributed by Sheffield One. Work would also be carried out to identify further sources of funding for improvements to the ecology, interpretation and public realm in the Cultural Industries Quarter. It was hoped that a draft plan be completed by the end of October, 2006, then the views of the Environment Agency would be sought.
	The following questions were asked and responses given:-

	Q. Would it be possible, as part of the proposals, to open more of the river up, such as near the former Manpower Services building?

	R. A decision had been taken to limit the design to the Cultural Industries Quarter.

	Q. Could steps be taken to include some form of policy guidance in the Sheffield Development Framework, requiring developers, as part of planning applications, to make every effort to open up as much of the river courses in the City as possible?

	R. The officers working on this scheme will aim to be as ambitious as possible. Hopefully, Planners will have powers to instruct developers along these lines.

	Q. Were there any plans to re-route the Porter Brook as part of the proposed scheme?

	R. There was not sufficient open space to make this possible as most of the surrounding area was densely developed and in some areas, landowners had firm plans to develop the land. However, consideration could be given in the future to reintroduce meanders at at least two possible locations along the river course, which in turn, could encourage wildlife.

	Q. Even if it was not possible to open up more of the river, steps should be taken to link the open stretches where possible to extend a walkway. A non-waterway path would be better than nothing at all. Would this be possible?

	R. There will be an opportunity to put signs at locations where it would be unable to de-culvert the river. Officers will look to extend the brief of the present proposals by requesting the clients to look at the possibility of putting signs at various locations in order to extend the walkway.

	Q. Had the Council received any advice or guidance from the Environment Agency, in connection with the proposed scheme, in terms of potential for increased flooding in the light of climate changes? This advice could include a need to leave larger areas free of development on the banks of the river and could be used as guidance when determining future planning applications on the banks of the river. The Environment Agency has forecast a 20% increase in flood levels so this guidance could be used as part of the planning process in terms of future planning applications.

	Q. Why is it that developers appear to have so much power when submitting applications for planning permission?

	R. This is not the case. The balance of power is split between the Council and the developer, and when individual applications for planning permission were determined, there was a need to balance the needs and wishes of both parties. Such developers were subject to the same planning controls as any other landowners. There would probably be more restrictions on developers wishing to develop land in the Cultural Industries Quarter.

	The following comments were also received:-

	· Funding had been identified to upgrade the walkway around the River Sheaf following the Charlotte Court development, but the scheme had not gone ahead on the basis that it was not feasible. This had caused a lot of discontent amongst local residents.

	· Some Members of this Area Panel were also members of the Planning Policy Advisory Group, which feeds comments into the Sheffield Development Framework, therefore would raise the issues made at this meeting to a future meeting of that Group.

	RESOLVED: That (a) the information now reported, together with the responses given to the questions, be noted;
	(b) Ric Bingham be thanked for the presentation now made; and
	(c) a request be made to the Head of Planning to include some form of policy guidance in the Sheffield Development Framework, requiring developers, as part of planning applications, to make every effort to open up as much of the river courses in the City as possible.

6.	MINUTES OF LAST MEETING
	The minutes of the meeting of the Area Panel held on 6th July, 2006, were approved as a correct record, and arising therefrom, a local resident queried the progress of the Sharrowvale Parking Scheme and also asked when the report containing feedback on the “Your Council, Your Say” initiative would become public.
	The Area Co-ordinator reported that due to the number of comments received as part of the consultation on the Sharrowvale Parking Scheme, there may be delays in its implementation. He added that there had been over 5,000 responses following the “Your Council, Your Say” initiative, and that he would make arrangements for the report on the feedback to be submitted to a future meeting of this Area Panel as soon as possible.

7.	AREA CO-ORDINATOR’S REPORT
	The Panel received and noted a report of the Area Co-ordinator containing (a) responses to questions that had not been asked at previous meetings of the Panel and (b) details of developments in the area, which included (i) the identification of a number of issues following a recent Walkabout in the Highfields area and (ii) the sponsoring, by the University of Sheffield of five litter bins, two near to Weston Park and three at the centre of Broomhill.

8.	PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
	There were no questions asked or petitions submitted by members of the public.

9.	DATE OF NEXT MEETING/EVENT
	It was noted that (a) an Area Panel Roadshow would be held on Tuesday 3rd October, 2006 from 4.00 p.m. to 7.00 p.m. at St. Peter’s Church, Woodstock Road and (b) the next meeting of the Area Panel would be held on Thursday, 2nd November, 2006 from 6.30 p.m. to 8.30 p.m. at Broomhill Methodist Church, Fulwood Road.

How useful is this page?

[ Comment On This Page? ]

Browsealoud |