Sharrow Nether Edge Broomhill Area Panel Minutes

SHARROW/NETHER EDGE/BROOMHILL AREA PANEL


Meeting held 8th January, 2004, at Sharrow Community Centre

	PRESENT:	Councillors Andrew White (Chair), Jean Cromar, Basheer Khan and Mohammad Nazir.

		Also in attendance:-
		Dave Whitfield	-	Area Co-ordinator

		Alison Wood	-	Housing Services

		Adrian Robinson	-	South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service

		Ellaine Muscroft	-	Sheffield South West Primary Care Trust

		Ruth Ben-Tovim	-	Encounters

		John Turner	-	Committee Secretariat

There were approximately 25 members of the public and representatives from local community groups in attendance.

............

1.	APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE FROM MEMBERS OF THE PANEL
	Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Ali Qadar, Paul Scriven, Janice Sidebottom, Patricia White and Alan Whitehouse.

2.	AREA CO-ORDINATOR’S REPORT
	The Area Co-ordinator submitted a report containing (a) responses to questions which had not been answered at previous meetings of the Panel, (b) details of developments in the area and (c) a summary of planning applications received in respect of development in the area.
	Further to the contents of the report, the Area Co-ordinator reported that (i) the results of the Traffic Impact Assessment Study which had been undertaken in the area surrounding the development on the former Nether Edge Hospital site had been formally logged with Development Services and (ii) a small amount of funding had been allocated from the Area Panel’s budget towards the City-wide launch of the "Message in a Bottle" scheme on 13th January, 2004.
	Councillor Jean Cromar reported further on a number of issues relating to the responses to outstanding questions, indicating that (A) the application for planning permission in respect of the development of six flats on a central area of land within the proposed Broomhall Cosmopolitan Scheme had been withdrawn and (B) the Steering Group which had been established to discuss all issues relating to fly-posting was meeting on a regular basis, and that further to the recent prosecution of a local club, cases in respect of three further clubs had been deferred and would be considered in the near future, with officers being asked to pursue taking all possible courses of action against local clubs with regard to illegal fly-posting, including proceedings under the Highways Act and issuing fixed penalty notices.
	The Panel noted the contents of the report now submitted, together the comments now made.

3.	PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
	Junction of Summerfield Street and Ecclesall Road
	A member of the public questioned whether any proposals had been drafted in respect of the implementation of pedestrian crossing facilities at the junction of Summerfield Street and Ecclesall Road, and if so, when were they likely to be submitted to the Area Panel to enable local residents to comment on them.
	The Area Co-ordinator stated that an officer from Development Services had said at a previous meeting of the Panel that the works on the crossing would commence some time this year. When the proposals were tabled, the Panel, taking into consideration the views of local residents, would be able to comment once the relevant Traffic Regulation Orders were advertised.

	Land on Montague Street and Pembroke Street
	A member of the public questioned the proposals with regard to the future use of part of the area of land between Montague Street and Pembroke Street, which he understood was to be developed as a car park. He also questioned the rationale behind this development on the basis that he believed, through attending meetings of the Area Panel, the Council had a commitment to retaining small open green spaces in the Sharrow area.
	The Area Co-ordinator stated that he would provide a formal response to this question at the next meeting of the Panel.

4.	MINUTES OF LAST MEETING
	The minutes of the meeting of the Area Panel held on 6th November, 2003, were approved as a correct record, and arising therefrom, Councillor Jean Cromar reported on the progress of a number of issues, and it was noted that (a) one objection had been received to the Traffic Regulation Orders advertised in respect of the proposed implementation of parking restrictions on parts of Cemetery Road, and that the Orders were to be implemented shortly, (b) Traffic Regulation Orders were to be advertised in respect of proposed parking restrictions on Cherry Street, and (c) there had been delays in respect of the highway improvements to be undertaken in the area surrounding the development on the former Wards Brewery site, and that the works, which were to be funded by the developers, were to commence in March, 2004.

5.	SOUTH YORKSHIRE FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE - INTEGRATED RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN
	Adrian Robinson, Divisional Officer, South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service, gave a presentation on the proposals contained in the South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Service's Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP).
	Mr. Robinson reported that the IRMP had been drafted in preparation for the withdrawal of the National Standards with regard to fire fighting and in the light of the Government White Paper, which placed a statutory duty on the Fire and Rescue Service to attend life-threatening accidents that were not fire-related. The proposed IRMP for South Yorkshire would allow the Service the flexibility to allocate resources locally and provide proportionate and reasonable responses to emergencies, which would provide a better use of resources and an improved service to the local community. Mr. Robinson referred to the existing National Standards Risk Profile, which divided the South Yorkshire region into four categories of fire risk, and to the proposed new Risk Profile required as part of the IRMP, which showed that resources were not allocated in accordance with those areas of higher risk.
	Reference was made to the proposed response to fire-related incidents under the IRMP, together with the flexible cover to be provided in respect of the four categories of fire risk. Mr. Robinson also referred to the number of incidents dealt with by the Service between January, 1999, and December, 2002, which totalled 104,733, and made specific reference to the fact that out of the total number of calls received, a large percentage were false alarms, which had been caused either by mistake or maliciously, and want on to outline the proposals contained within the Plan for responding to false alarms and challenging malicious callers. Further statistics showed details of the level of life-threatening road traffic accidents for the same period, and Mr. Robinson reported on how the Service intended to respond to such incidents under the Plan.
	Mr. Robinson made specific reference to the proposed closure of the Ringinglow Fire Station and the consequent transfer of the fire appliance to Edlington, Doncaster, stating that the Service was presently consulting on the proposed closure.
	The following questions were asked and responses given:-

	Q. If a decision is taken to close Ringinglow Fire Station, will there be sufficient cover for the South West area of Sheffield?

	R. The proposals to close Ringinglow Fire Station had been based on statistics collected by the Fire and Rescue Service over a number of years, which showed that the areas immediately surrounding Ringinglow were considered very low risk and that there had been low activity in the area over the last few years. The area surrounding Ringinglow was considered to be well covered by the stations at Lowedges, Rivelin and the City Centre, and appliances from these stations would be able to respond to incidents in the South West area of Sheffield within the time limits governed by the National Standards.

	Q. There must be an increased risk to patients and staff based on the upper floors at the Hallamshire Hospital - how did the Fire and Rescue Service deal with fires in such areas?

	R. There were very few fires in hospitals in general on the basis that they were staffed 24 hours a day and contained high quality detection equipment. However, when there was a fire, staff and patients were placed in areas of relative safety as, in the case of seriously ill patients, problems could be made worse by removing them from the building, and fire fighters would tackle the fire.

	Q. How many times was Ringinglow Fire Station used during the period December, 1999, and January, 2002?

	R. Officers at Ringinglow had to respond to approximately 800 calls a year during this period, although a large majority of these calls related to incidents where Ringinglow was requested to be on stand-by in the City Centre, if required.

	Q. Under the IRMP, how does the Fire and Rescue Service intend to deal with calls received from people living in the low risk areas of South Yorkshire, in the light of the fact that most of the Service's resources would be used to target high and very high risk areas?

	R. The Service accepts that there will be longer response times in respect of appliances reaching the low risk areas, but under the IRMP, there was a requirement to focus its resources into those areas of high and very high risk. The low risk areas had been so designated on the grounds that there were very few dwellings in those areas, therefore there was less of a risk to human life.

	Q. Was the object of the IRMP to save money?

	R. Any financial savings made following the introduction of the new arrangements under IRMP would be redirected to those areas of higher risk.

	Q. If a decision was made to close Ringinglow Fire Station, what will happen to the capital receipt following the sale of the land?

	R. As referred to above, the money would be allocated to those areas of higher risk, or could possibly be used to fund some form of community fire safety initiative.

	Q. Were there any appliances operating from Ringinglow Fire Station at the present time?

	R. There was one appliance operating from Ringinglow.

	Q. In the light of the proposed decision to close Ringinglow Fire Station, had the Fire and Rescue Service given consideration to the potential risk of fires on the large areas of farmland surrounding the station?

	R. The Service was aware of such risks, but there had been an over-provision of resources in the Ringinglow area over the years, and it had been decided that resources should be redirected to those areas of higher risk. The Service would still be able to respond to calls in respect of fires on farmland, although the response times were likely to be longer. The majority of fires on the farmland did not pose danger to human life, therefore such areas were not deemed high risk.

	Q. In the light of the fact that the majority of the Service’s resources were to be targeted in preventing fires in homes, had there been any adverse reaction to the proposals contained in the IRMP from business owners?

	R. Yes.

	Q. Was there a legal time limit for responding to calls?

	R. There were no legal time limits as such, but there were National Standards with regard to response times. The Standards indicated that the aim was to send two appliances within five minutes and one appliance within eight minutes to Category A risk fires, one appliance within five minutes and two appliances within 10 minutes to Category B risk fires, one appliance within 10 minutes to Category C risk fires and one appliance within 20 minutes to Category D risk fires.

	Q. Would appliances from fire stations attend fires in different Counties, if required?

	R. Yes, a number of Fire and Rescue Services had local agreements whereby if a fire occurred within a County, and the nearest station within that County was further away than a station in the adjoining County, or the appliances were out on another call, appliances would "cross borders" to deal with such fires.

	Q. As part of the IRMP, was Ringinglow Fire Station the only station proposed to be closed?

	R. Yes.

	Q. Had the Fire and Rescue Service any contingency plans if the suggested changes set out in the IRMP did not work?

	R. There were no detailed contingency plans as such at this stage, but the Service would always have the ability to relocate appliances and staff at different fire stations across the region, such as to those areas of greater need.

	Q. Had the proposal to close Ringinglow Fire Station been made due to the potentially high capital receipt as a result of the high land value?

	R. The Service was well aware of the land values in the South West area of the City, but the proposal to close the station had not been based on this.

	RESOLVED: That (a) the information reported, together with the comments now made, be noted; and
	(b) the thanks of the Panel be conveyed to Adrian Robinson for the presentation now made.

6.	ENCOUNTERS AT LANSDOWNE ROAD
	Ruth Ben-Tovim gave a presentation on a participatory arts project “Encounters”, which she and her colleague, Trish O'Shea, had undertaken with residents of the Lansdowne Estate and the Sharrow community. Ms. Ben-Tovim reported that Yorkshire ArtSpace, in collaboration with the Sharrow Forum, had commissioned herself and Ms. O'Shea, who were both professional artists, to work on the project, and they had taken over a disused shop in Sharrow during July and August, 2003, and through various creative activities, had enabled Yorkshire Art Space to develop its work with communities and to engage and involve new audiences.
	The artists used film, photography, performance, visual art and text to deliver activities that enabled local people and residents of the Lansdowne Estate to share their ideas, thoughts, feelings, memories and stories about aspects of every day life. The result was a participatory and collective art-work, inspired by the experiences of the local community and the objects and memories that they brought to the shop. There were approximately 350 people of different ages and cultures who had visited the shop and taken part in the various activities.
	As part of their work, the artists were also funded to deliver an action research project, which would pilot ways to develop the audiences for art in Sharrow, in particular from the Lansdowne Estate, pilot effective methods for reaching and involving local people in creative thinking and activity, explore barriers to involvement, make proposals for how to deliver participatory arts activities in the area in the future and to raise the agenda of arts and regeneration in the area. It was hoped that other cultural, statutory and voluntary groups/agencies would find the information set out in the report now submitted a useful tool for future work, and that it would feed directly into the way services and initiatives were delivered in the Lansdowne area.
	Ms. Ben-Tovim reported that they had spent a substantial amount of time walking round the Lansdowne Estate, meeting and talking to people, and had built up a picture of some of the issues and feelings from within the Estate. The action research project had been conducted from within a disused shop on Sharrow Lane, which was easily accessible, visible and open to passers by. The shop did not sell anything, but had become a space for people to leave objects, thoughts and ideas, a space for dialogue and conversation where visitors shared feelings and views about where they lived and as the artists' creative work progressed, became a viewing place for people to see the development of the creative ideas and their completion. The shop had also become part of the local environment for a period of time, a space in which to work and plan and to meet with people.
	The report contained a number of comments extracted from the visitors book, a number of examples of residents stories about the Sharrow area, stories in respect of the journeys people had taken prior to setting up residency in Sharrow, pictures of objects found on the Lansdowne Estate which had been photographed insitue and taken into the shop for display, a number of residents' stories about love and play and residents' comments on what they found special about the people who lived on the Estate and its environment.
	Specific reference was made to the overview of the findings of the research project and the recommendations arising therefrom. The findings of the research project had indicated that Encounters, had been successful in reaching a wide range of diverse groups and individuals, bridging gaps between ages and cultures, and using creative efforts to start a process of dialogue and exchange between them, the participation in creative activities had been effective in creating a sense of confidence and ownership amongst participants, in addition to building trust and a sense of community, over an eight-week period, approximately 350 people had become involved with Encounters, by either visiting the shop on Sharrow Lane or by taking part in temporary site specific work on the Lansdowne Estate and there had been very positive feedback and support for this type of project.
	As a result of the success of the project, Encounters were now involved in developing participatory strands within several other local projects, including the St. Peter’s Project, the Sharrow Project, the Sharrow Festival and the proposed arts project at the former Abbeydale Cinema.
	The following questions were asked and responses given:-

	Q. When would consultation on the St. Peter's Project commence?

	R. In the next three or four weeks and was due to last for six months.

	Q. Were there any plans to expand the project to areas surrounding the Lansdowne Estate?

	R. The artists were in the process of applying for funding, which would enable them to open a shop in the area from May, 2004, which would be open to all residents.

	Q. How had families been informed about the project?

	R. Leaflets were delivered to households on the Lansdowne Estate and left at schools in the area.

	RESOLVED: That (a) the information now reported, together with the comments now made, be noted; and
	(b) the thanks of the Panel be conveyed to Ruth Ben-Tovim for the presentation now made.

7.	OUTSTANDING REPORTS
	The Panel noted that there were no outstanding reports required for submission to future meetings.

8.	DATE AND VENUE OF NEXT MEETING
	It was noted that the next meeting of the Area Panel would be held on Thursday, 5th February, 2004, from 7.00 p.m. to 9.00 p.m., at the Salvation Army Citadel, Psalter Lane.

	(NOTE: Item 7 on the agenda - Sharrow Project - Update, was withdrawn from consideration by the Panel).

How useful is this page?

[ Comment On This Page? ]

Browsealoud |