Minutes of Burngreave Area Panel 28 July2005

BURNGREAVE AREA PANEL


Special Meeting held 28th July, 2005, at Shiloh Church

PRESENT:		Councillors Jackie Drayton (Chair), Ibrar Hussain and Steve Jones.

		Also in attendance:-

		Councillor Chris Weldon	-	Cabinet Member for Neighbourhood Regeneration

		David Shepherd	-	Lead Manager

		Rob Slow ) Hannah York ) Hannah Gibbins ) CarolineStiff )	-	Neighbourhoods Directorate

		Maria Duffy	-	Development Services

		John Turner	-	Committee Secretariat

		There were approximately 30 local residents, traders and business owners in attendance.

…………….

1.	APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE FROM MEMBERS OF THE PANEL
	No apologies for absence were received from Members of the Panel.

2.	MASTERPLANNING IN BURNGREAVE
	The Chair welcomed the residents, traders and business owners to the meeting, providing a brief explanation on the format of the meeting.
	David Shepherd reported on the present position with regard to the Masterplanning process, indicating that the Cabinet, at its meeting held on 25th May, 2005, had agreed the final version of the Burngreave and Fir Vale Masterplan.
	Mr. Shepherd reported that the main change to the proposals in respect of Spital Hill involved the removal of the supermarket from the plans, and the proposals now referred to setting out an area of search for the supermarket. The other main proposals in Burngreave involved the redevelopment areas in terms of demolition and new housing in the Catherine Street and Woodside areas and, dependent on the decision regarding the supermarket, on the site of the Ellesmere Elderly Persons’ Unit. The Cabinet had requested officers to look at Ellesmere as one of the areas of search with regard to the siting of the supermarket.
	Mr. Shepherd referred to the decision of 25th May, 2005, and stated that as an additional recommendation, the Cabinet had approved the establishment of a number of Community Project Groups in order to help steer the implementation of the plans, and for the Burngreave area, it had been proposed that two Community Project Groups be established, one for the Spital Hill area and one for the Catherine Street, Woodside and possibly the Ellesmere areas. With regard to the housing redevelopment areas, it was reported that there were proposals to demolish a number of properties on Catherine Street and neighbouring streets, together with the Housing Association flats in the area, and construct 52 new properties on the site. Redevelopment proposals in respect of Woodside, which included the construction of approximately 350 new properties, had also been agreed, and there was now a need to discuss with local residents what type of properties, in terms of design, they would like to see on the site.
	He stated that the main purpose of this meeting was to discuss the proposed terms of reference and remit of the two Community Project Groups, details of which were available at the meeting. He concluded by stating that, in addition to looking at how the detailed plans in terms of the housing redevelopment and the proposals in respect of the shops and businesses in the area could be implemented, residents would also be required to put forward their views and opinions on how the open spaces in the area could be developed.
	Councillor Chris Weldon emphasised the importance of the Community Project Groups, making reference to how similar groups in other areas of the City had been successful in influencing redevelopment proposals. He stated that it was important that local residents, traders and business owners had the opportunity to comment on the details of the proposals set out in the Masterplan, and that whilst the Groups would have no decision-making powers, they could make recommendations, through the Area Panel, to the Cabinet.
	The Chair stated that anyone was entitled to nominate themselves as a member of one of the Community Project Groups, but consideration would need to be given to ensure that the Groups were representative of the whole area. The Chairs and Deputy Chairs of the Groups would be invited, on regular occasions, to report back on the Groups' findings to the Area Panel.
	The following questions were asked and responses given:-

	Q. What were the timescales with regard to meetings of the Community Project Groups?

	R. The timescales would differ for each Group in that in respect of Spital Hill, it was planned that a decision upon the supermarket would be made by the Cabinet in Autumn 2005. In connection with the housing projects, the timescales would be dependent on a number of issues, such as the sale of land at Woodside and whether or not a decision was made to site the supermarket on the site of the Ellesmere Elderly Persons’ Unit. With regard to Catherine Street, the timescales would be much longer as there was a need to work with residents in connection with the demolition of properties and the decant arrangements. The Groups would be expected to meet until such time all residents, traders and business owners were happy, or a general consensus had been reached, in terms of the detailed proposals.

	Q. What powers would the Community Project Groups have in terms of decision-making as some residents would not wish to give up their time to attend the meetings if the Groups had no influence? The Masterplanning process so far had generally involved the Council putting forward a number of proposals and whilst residents, traders and business owners had been given an opportunity to comment on the proposals, their views had not really been taken into consideration. There should be more emphasis on the people who lived or worked in the areas affected being able to influence the plans.

	R. The Groups would be able to make recommendations, which could be endorsed by the Area Panel, and then referred to the Cabinet, which was the decision-making body. It was suggested now that the broad proposals in respect of the Masterplan had been agreed, residents, traders and business owners should now concentrate on commenting on the details of the plans prior to implementation.

	Q. Who had produced the documents containing the proposed terms of reference and remit of the Community Project Groups and who will determine who and how many people will become members of each of the Groups?

	R. The documents had been produced by Council officers as a guide for further discussion. It was intended that the proposed terms of reference and remit of the Groups could be agreed in principle at this meeting, with any other amendments being made in the future if deemed necessary. Anyone who puts their name down would become a member of one of the Groups, but further work would be required to ensure that the Groups were fully representative of all people in the areas, therefore there may be a need to add or remove certain people from the Groups. The Council wanted as many local residents, traders and business owners as possible to participate in the process.

	At this stage of the meeting, the participants formed two groups to discuss the proposed terms of reference and remit of the Spital Hill and Burngreave New Housing Community Project Groups, and to discuss any other issues in connection with the Project Group process. The outcome of the discussions was as follows:-

	Burngreave New Housing Group

	· It was acknowledged that the Group would work to implement the proposals what had been agreed by the Cabinet.

	· The Group would be expected to look at the proposals in respect of the whole area, whilst reviewing the different development sites individually.

	· It was important that people who were directly affected by the proposals had an opportunity to comment in the Group meetings.

	· There was a need for the Group to discuss issues regarding affordable housing, as well as the type, design and environmental sustainability of the new properties.

	· It was important that the Council ensured the best value for the sites which would hopefully enable the best quality housing possible to be constructed.

	· The Group needed to have an input into the developers' proposals.

	· Consideration needed to be given to the percentage of tenure types in the different areas, including the possibility of keep small parts of land for alternative housing, such as self-build or eco-housing.

	· The Group would need to discuss the costings of the schemes.

	· The Group would also need to discuss the future of wavy top properties.

	· The Group would need to discuss problems with access and privacy of homes in connection with Catherine Street Park, together with issues regarding the type of people who would be attracted to the Park.

	· The Council needed to look at gaining wider community support for the proposed development schemes.

	· It was suggested that the first meeting of the Group should be held in late September, 2005.

	Spital Hill Project Group

	· A decision was required in respect of the location for the new supermarket before the Group could commence looking at the implementation of the plans. If an application for planning permission was submitted for a larger supermarket on the Hartwell site, the Group would not be able to commence its work until the feasibility study into whether a further supermarket would be viable in the area had been undertaken.

	· Traders and business owners in the area needed details with regard to timescales in respect of proposed developments as a number were having to make important decisions regarding their shops or businesses, and were becoming frustrated that no-one could provide any details with regard to timescales. A number of traders and business people from outside the area were interested in investing in Spital Hill, but could not make any decisions due to the lack of information in respect of the proposed developments.

	· Having a medium sized supermarket on the Hartwell site would not be a suitable option - the supermarket must be either small or large.

	· There had been no confirmation with regard to the numbers of people in favour of a supermarket in the area.

	· The Burngreave Business Forum needed to be represented on the Group, together with local residents.

	· It was suggested that the first meeting of the Group should be held in September 2005 to discuss the results of the feasibility study into the supermarkets.

	· Meetings of the Group should be held at 6.00 p.m., Monday to Thursday, with a more regular format for the meetings to be decided at the first meeting.

	· Residents, traders and business owners want to see positive regeneration, incorporating the ethnic diversity of the area. It was important that any changes to the housing, shops or businesses were undertaken sympathetically in order to retain the character of the area.

	· Investment was required in order to prevent the further decline of Burngreave, particularly the Spital Hill area.

	· Some residents would like to see the new supermarket at the centre of Spital Hill.

	· There was a need for recycling facilities in the area.

	The Chair concluded the meeting by thanking all the residents, traders and business owners for attending the meeting, as well as the Council officers for their input.

How useful is this page?

[ Comment On This Page? ]

Browsealoud |