Burngreave Area Panel Minutes 26th July 2005

BURNGREAVE AREA PANEL


Special Meeting held 26th July, 2005, at Fir Vale School

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

		Sam Sykes Wendy Foster Rob Slow Hannah York Hannah Gibbins Anna Hawkins	-	Neighbourhoods Directorate

		Shanza Hussain	-	Development Services

		John Turner	-	Committee Secretariat

		There were approximately 80 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 FIR VALE
	The Chair reported that this special meeting of the Panel had been arranged to update local residents on the position regarding the Masterplanning in Fir Vale, and to seek comments from residents on the proposed terms of reference and remit of the Community Project Groups to be established in order to progress the Masterplanning in Fir Vale.
	David Shepherd reported on the present position regarding the Masterplanning in Fir Vale, indicating that the Cabinet, at its meeting held on 25th May, 2005, had approved the Burngreave and Fir Vale Masterplan, and had agreed that a number of Community Project Groups be established to help steer the implementation of the plans in Burngreave and Fir Vale, and to develop a community plan for Page Hall.
	Mr. Shepherd reported that it had been proposed that three Project Groups be established, one representing the residents of Skinnerthorpe Road, Bagley Road, Barnsley Road and Owler Lane, one representing the residents of Earl Marshall Road and one representing the residents in the Page Hall area. Details of the proposed terms of reference and remits of the three Project Groups were available for inspection by residents at the meeting. Mr. Shepherd emphasised the fact that the proposals in the Masterplan had now been agreed and that the Project Groups would recommend on how the Project would be taken forward and what exactly, in terms of regeneration and redevelopment, would take place in Fir Vale. He stated that it was important that the plans were implemented based on the needs and views of local residents.
	Mr. Shepherd made specific reference to the proposals in the Skinnerthorpe Road area, which included the demolition of a number of properties, indicating that new, quality homes would be built in the area, together with the provision of good quality open spaces. He stated that whilst the Masterplan approved by the Cabinet was an overall framework, the Project Groups would be responsible for influencing the detail of the plans.
	It was proposed that the Project Groups would be chaired by Members of the Area Panel and Councillors Chris Weldon and Peter Rippon, Cabinet Member and Cabinet Adviser for Neighbourhood Regeneration, respectively.
	The Chair made reference to the difficulties which had been faced by the Council and local residents with regard to the Masterplanning process, but stated that if the Council was successful in its bid for Housing Market Renewal funding, this would make a huge difference in terms of regeneration in Fir Vale.
	She stated that the Project Groups would report to the Area Panel and the Panel would receive regular reports on the progress of the Groups. All local residents were entitled to attend meetings of the Area Panel to ask questions on, or put forward their views with regard to the Masterplanning exercise. She stated that the Groups would report their findings and preferred options to the Area Panel, which would help the Panel to devise a set of options for the area, which would then be submitted to the Cabinet for approval.
	The following questions were asked and responses given:-

	Q. What is the point of asking residents for their views on the Masterplan if the plan has already been agreed? The Council has obviously not listened to the views of those residents of Skinnerthorpe Road as several residents do not want their houses demolished.

	R. The proposals in respect of the demolition of properties on Skinnerthorpe Road and Bagley Road had been agreed on the basis that this had been considered, based on the views of local residents, to be the best option in the long-term. It was important, however, that local residents, through the Project Groups, put forward their views on the future regeneration proposals for that area. The Groups would be influential on the basis that they would be chaired by an elected Member and would report to the Area Panel, which had been responsible for making several important decisions with regard to the overall regeneration of Fir Vale.

	Q. It has now been two months since the Cabinet's decision to approve the Masterplan. Have the Council applied for any funding yet?

	R. The Council has submitted a bid for £65m Housing Market Renewal funding for the period 2006-2008. The Council has already received Housing Market Renewal funding amounting to £40m, some of which had been allocated towards regeneration projects in Fir Vale. It was hoped that a decision on the bid would be received from the Government in Autumn 2005.

	Q. It was totally unacceptable that the Project Group for the Skinnerthorpe Road and Bagley Road area was being asked to look at possible regeneration proposals following the decision to demolish a number of properties in that area, whist the Group for Page Hall were being asked to produce a new regeneration plan for that area. It was believed that following the level of objection from residents in the Skinnerthorpe Road and Bagley Road area, that the planned large-scale demolition would not take place. Why was this the case?

	R. The Council had made clear the reasons for agreeing demolition and rebuild on Skinnerthorpe Road and Bagley Road in the Cainet report on 25th May, 2005. The residents of all properties highlighted for demolition now have a unique opportunity to work with the Council, through the Project Groups, to ensure the regeneration proposals deliver an outcome that is acceptable for them and the wider community. The decisions made by the Cabinet are the starting point for the Project Groups, and that suggested, it was not helpful to the majority of the community affected by the proposals to continue revisiting these decisions.

	Q. At the Cabinet meeting on 25th May, 2005, a local resident asked a number of questions of Councillor Chris Weldon relating to the scope and influence of the Project Groups and Councillor Weldon indicated that this had not yet been decided. What would happen, therefore, if one of the Project Groups devised a proposal which conflicted with the Masterplan which had been agreed by the Cabinet?

	R. The Council, through the Area Panel, will consider all recommendations made by the Project Groups. The Groups themselves will have time to consider the implications and realism of their recommendations before submitting them to the Area Panel for further consideration. A similar process had been used to good effect in the Owlerton/Southey area. Local residents there had found the Project Groups very useful and their recommendations had directly influenced the implementation of regeneration programmes. The Shirecliffe Project Group had required higher design standards than those proposed by a developer for new housing on development sites.

	A local resident also commented that the residents had been promised that this meeting would take the format of a community conference and indicated that, in his opinion, this was not the case as the meeting was being led by Council officers.
	Councillor Weldon responded by suggesting that, in his opinion, this comment was the view of the resident alone, and did not reflect the wide-ranging discussion already held within this meeting.
	At this stage of the meeting, the residents, traders and business owners split into three separate groups, based on which Project Groups they were to be represented by, in order to discuss the proposed terms of reference and remits of the Groups. The outcome of the discussions was as follows:-

	Skinnerthorpe Road/Bagley Road/Barnsley Road/Owler Lane Shops/Upwell Street Shops

	· Suggested topics for discussion in the Group included alternative ideas for the area, property valuations and options and taking neighbourhood/community issues into account.

	· The Group would like the individual views of residents taken into account in the form of one to one meetings, as well as continuing co-operation with the community.

	· The residents did not want the existing community to be split up.

	· The Group should be provided with detailed information on exactly how the valuations for the properties were undertaken.

	· Comparisons should be made with other similar areas in the United Kingdom, such as in areas near to major hospitals.

	· Residents would like to consider the full regeneration options for Fir Vale, as with Page Hall.

	· Consideration should be given to partial demolition.

	· Those residents whose properties are to be demolished should be offered like for like in terms of the new properties they are offered.

	Earl Marshal Road

	· Several residents did not receive notification of this meeting. A number of residents were also unaware of the meetings held during the later stages of the Masterplanning process, and only discovered the information from the Burngreave Messenger. All residents, traders and business owners needed to be kept informed of any progress made in connection with the Masterplanning process, particularly the work of the Groups. It appeared to some residents that the Council do not seem interested in their views now the decision to demolish some properties had been made.

	· Some residents were interested in moving into the newly built houses and queried the process for this.

	· Residents viewed crime as a major problem in the area and considered it important that the existing crime problems were resolved so that when residents moved into the newly built properties, they felt safe and secure.

	· The Group needed to have a wider remit than discussing issues regarding rehousing in that it should be able to influence the redevelopment proposals.

	· Residents required a detailed list of all the rehousing options and information on the rehousing priorities that people were entitled to.

	· Residents whose properties were to be demolished needed to be assured that they would be moving to a similar or better property. Some residents were concerned about being offered smaller properties in undesirable areas.

	· The proposals must involve detailed consultation with all residents concerned and sufficient time should be taken to listen to all residents’ views and opinions.

	· The Group should meet every six to eight weeks, at 6.00 p.m., on Mondays to Thursdays, with the first meeting being arranged in early September, 2005.

	· All residents should be invited to meetings of the Group, with letters being distributed to each flat and posters being placed on the entrance doors to each block of flats. The invitations should be printed in all the relevant community languages.

	Page Hall

	· Most residents agreed that meetings of the Group should be held in the evening.

	· It was agreed that the Group should not only consider housing issues, but should also discuss other issues relevant to the area such as litter, dog fouling, traffic, lighting, anti-social behaviour, private landlords’ responsibilities for maintaining their properties and other wider environmental issues that impacted on the area. If these other issues were not considered, residents felt that new housing would not have a major impact on the area.

	· Issues requiring immediate attention, such as anti-social behaviour, should be referred to and discussed by the Group at the earliest possible opportunity.

	· Following the development works, the Council should still be responsible for monitoring the area closely, such as through regular monitoring by Neighbourhood Wardens and effective policing, to ensure that the area is kept clean and safe.

	· Whilst all residents had been given a copy of the proposed terms of reference and remits for the Groups, not everyone had been given the opportunity to read them.

	· More information was required on selective demolition, such as how and who would decide on which properties were to be demolished and would owner/occupiers be given a higher priority in terms of whether or not their properties would be demolished.

	· Consideration needs to be given to the design of the play areas, in terms of safety, in the light of the problems of drug dealing in the area.

	· Residents questioned how the areas to be redeveloped had been decided, and specifically queried why Bolsover Road had not been included.

	· Residents queried what those tenants whose properties were to be demolished would be offered in terms of a relocation package and whether they would be able to afford the newly built properties. Residents also queried what benefits there were to shared ownership, particularly for those who had either paid off their mortgages or had very nearly paid them off. Residents were also concerned at the prospect of being forced to take out higher mortgages on the basis that the newly built properties were likely to be worth more.

	· Some residents believed that although there were a number of concerns with regard to the Masterplanning process, particularly in connection with a number of detailed issues discussed as part of the Group sessions, once the implementation of the plans commenced and residents began to see progress being made, they would become much more receptive to the proposals.

	· Consideration should be given to implementing more traffic-calming measures or pedestrianising some of the residential streets to make it safer for everyone.

	· The proposals should include the provision of more open spaces where children and young people can meet up, without being in danger of causing a nuisance.

	· There should be more and/or better/diverse shops in the area, and consideration should be given to having a regular market on Page Hall Road.

	· There should be a park for locals within a safe walking distance.

	· Residents would like to see a comprehensive refurbishment of all the housing and grants should be made available for homeowners to aid the regeneration process.

	Councillor Chris Weldon responded to a number of the residents' concerns, indicating that the Council had a great opportunity to bring in substantial changes to Fir Vale, whilst at the same time, wanting residents to be able to stay in the area and retain the community spirit that existed in Fir Vale. He stated that the Council did not expect any residents to move home twice, indicating that there were a number of properties available in Fir Vale where residents could be decanted. In response to the concerns regarding the financial implications for residents, particularly those residents whose properties were to be demolished as part of the proposals, he reiterated the commitment made at the Cabinet meeting on 25th May, 2005, that no resident would be financially disadvantaged whichever option they chose. In connection with this issue, Councillor Weldon made a further commitment that arrangements would be made for residents to hold one to one meetings with Council officers to discuss their individual financial circumstances. In response to a further query regarding the payment of rent, he stated that if any residents were forced to move out of their properties, and were not paying rent in respect of the property, he would be looking for a solution that ensured residents would not be expected to pay rent in respect of the property they were moving to. If, however, any residents were paying rent in respect of their properties, they may be expected to pay rent in respect of the property they were moving to.
	The following questions were asked and comments made, and responses given:-

	Q. Would residents be assured that they would not be relocated to an undesirable area whilst the redevelopment works were taking place? Residents also need to be assured that when they move back to the area, they have gained something after all the problems and upheaval they have had to put up with.

	R. All residents will be given the option to purchase a new property in the area or move if they so desire. These issues would be discussed in the one to one meetings with Council officers.

	Q. Would residents, under the Council's Right to Buy Scheme, have the right to purchase their property after two years if they move into a Council property.

	R. If residents choose to move into Council property, they will have the right to buy their property after two years of occupancy. Also, those residents who already have the right to buy, such as existing tenants with two or more years occupancy, will take their Right to Buy status with them if they moved into another property.

	C. The Council officers responsible for facilitating at least one of the three Project Groups had not been capable of facilitating this particular session adequately on the basis that some residents had not even been asked for their views. There had been no proper discussion with regard to the remit of the Project Groups and the effectiveness and influence of the Groups was questioned by some residents. Specific reference was made to the fact that Councillor Chris Weldon had indicated that any objections that residents had to the Masterplan could be reported back to the Cabinet, through the Area Panel, whereas residents already had the right to make representations direct to the Cabinet.

	R. The Council wants to work with local residents and in the light of the fact that each residents’ circumstances were different, it was important that arrangements were made to hold one to one meetings and progress the plans following such meetings. Residents still had the opportunity to comment on the detail of the plans, and the Council would listen to these views, and if it was found that some elements of the Masterplan were not going to work, consideration would be given to changes being made.

	Councillor Steve Jones conveyed his thanks to the residents for attending the meeting and stated that consideration would need to be given to all the issues raised at the meeting. He stated that it was important that there was an element of trust between the Council and residents, traders and business owners and that this would be beneficial during the Community Project Group process in developing the detailed plans. Councillor Jones stated that the Council would make every effort to work with residents, traders and business owners as part of the Masterplanning process.
	The Chair concluded by thanking the residents, traders and business owners for attending the meeting, together with the Council officers for facilitating the group sessions.

How useful is this page?

[ Comment On This Page? ]

Browsealoud |