Minutes for North Area Panel

	NORTH AREA PANEL


	Meeting held 18th February, 2004 at Deepcar Village Hall, Deepcar

			PRESENT:		Councillors David Baker (Chair), Vic Bowden, Martin Brelsford and Martin Davis.

			Representatives of Panel Partners:-
			Julie Smith			-	North Sheffield PCT
			Ayesha Heaton			-	West Sheffield PCT
			Ruth Saffrey

			City Council Officers:-
			John Charlton			-	North Area Lead Manager
			Graham Broadhurst			-	Street Force
			Paul Gordon			-	Planning Link Officer
			Anne Blantern			-	North Area Co-ordinator
			Matthew Rush			-	North Area Support Officer
			Sarah Thomson			-	Committee Secretariat

			18 members of the public attended the meeting.

		……………

1.		COUNCILLOR MAUREEN BRELSFORD
		The Chair referred in sympathetic terms to the recent death of Councillor Maureen Brelsford and stated that Councillor Brelsford would be sadly missed by her colleagues and friends.

2.		APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
		An apology for absence was received from Councillor Graham Oxley.

3.		MINUTES
		The Panel received and approved the minutes of the meeting held on 21st January, 2004, as a true record with the substitution of the title of the Representatives of Panel Partners of Sheffield West Primary Care Trust to North Sheffield Primary Care Trust and arising therefrom:-

		Police Patrolling
		A local resident referred to the next Panel meeting on 17th March, 2004, and commented on the main agenda item which was to be Community Safety. The resident commented that PC Booth had returned to patrol Chapeltown and added that residents were now satisfied that appropriate action had been taken.
		The Chair stated that the Area Co-ordinator would arrange a meeting with the Police in order to discuss patrolling arrangements in Chapeltown and also added that the Area Panel would invite Chief Superintendent Donnelly to the 17th March Panel meeting.

		Parking on Pack Horse Lane
		The Chair reported that Councillor Kathleen Chadwick had arranged a meeting with the Headmaster of St. Mary’s School to discuss the outcome of the car parking issues considered at the North and West Planning and Highways Area Board meeting held on 20th January, 2004.

		Burncross Road
		It was anticipated that the scheme proposals for Burncross Road would be included in the financial period 2004/2006.
		A local resident expressed concerns with regard to the Burncross Road scheme and requested clarification as to which scheme was to be delayed as he referred to another scheme request for a pedestrian crossing which he believed was to be located near to the Greenhead Restaurant and the Post Office.
		The Chair stated that he would clarify which scheme had been delayed and would report directly to the questioner and would also provide an update at a future Area Panel meeting.

		Thorncliffe Lane
		A local resident enquired as to the progress of the closure of Thorncliffe Lane.
		The Chair reported that Thorncliffe Lane linked to Newton Chambers Estate which was a private access road.
		The questioner enquired as to whether the road had been in use over 40 years, and if so, could the road be categorised as a public right of way.
		The Chair stated that he would be happy to clarify the situation if the Panel wished to provide him with the facts of the matter raised. He added that he would forward the information to the appropriate department to seek an opinion on this matter.
		Councillor Martin Davis enquired as to whether there were any laws where a private road, which was used by members of the public could be reclaimed over a period of time.
		John Charlton stated that he felt it would be best to seek legal approval, and added that residents should provide evidence in writing, which could be considered. He added that he would investigate the concerns now raised and report back to the 17th March, 2004, Panel meeting at Loxley Primary School.
		A local resident reported that the original question had been submitted by a Parish Councillor who had made enquiries regarding the closure of Thorncliffe Lane and had commented that in the event of the throughway being closed residents on the newly developed estates would need to find alternative access to the motorway via High Green and Chapeltown. The resident stated that he felt that the status of the road needed to be identified in order to determine what further action was required. He also added that ARUP consultants had carried out a traffic consultation survey, Chapeltown and also needed to consider the problems now raised with regard to the throughway.

		Beechwood Road
		A local resident referred to a report provided by Andy Bennett, Development Services, at the previous meeting in relation to funding which was available for improved car parking on Beechwood Road, Chapeltown, and enquired as to what progress had been made.
		Councillor Martin Davis reported that the scheme had progressed to the top of the list for the work to be undertaken and bus and emergency services had been rerouted to accommodate the impending changes.
		The Chair stated that he would liaise with Andy Bennett to establish what progress had been made and report back to a future meeting of the Panel.

		Local Transport Plan Scheme Requests
		A local resident enquired as to whether the Panel’s disappointment with regard to the City Council’s failure to obtain funding had formally been registered.
		In response the Chair stated that all minutes were included in the Council Summons and were circulated to all Members of the City Council. He added that at the Council meeting Members received and recorded the proceedings of the Council meeting and approved the accuracy of the Council Summons.
		The questioner felt that the Chair should raise the disappointment of the Panel publicly at the next Council meeting in order for the Panel’s concerns to be noted.
		The Chair stated that he would express the Panels concerned now raised at the next Council meeting on 3rd March 2004.

4.		PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
		Petition
		The Panel noted the terms of a petition containing approximately 80 signatures from Chapeltown residents proposing that a one-way system be installed on Arundel Road and Sussex Road and calling on the Area Panel to help them to find the money required for these improvements

		Public Questions
		The following questions were raised by members of the public and responses were provided as follows: -

		Q.		A local resident enquired as to whether there had been any progress with regard the erection of flats at Burncross Road and whether a site visit had taken place.

		R.		The Chair reported that an officer had visited the site but had requested additional information. He reported that additional information had been requested from the Developers, in relation to the levels, tree surveys and density, the results of which would be discussed with the Developers in order to amend any alterations prior to submitting to the North and West Planning and Highways Area Board on 23rd March, 2004.

		Q.		The questioner enquired whether the Panel could have confirmation of the date of the Planning and Highways Area Board meeting which would consider the application.

		R.		In response the Chair stated that dependent on whether any significant alterations were required further consultation may be needed with residents and therefore the meeting date may change.

				The Panel agreed that once Members were aware of the recommendations made by officers, residents would be informed of any proposed planning changes.

				Trevor Bagshaw, commented on the processes of the Planning and Highways Boards through his past experience as a City Councillor and reported that one week before each Planning Board the papers were available to members of the public.

				The Chair reported that members of the public were welcome to attend the planning meeting and comment on planning applications submitted by informing a City Council Officer prior to the start of the meeting.

				NOTE: Councillor Martin Davis declared an interest in this item and left the meeting during consideration of the item.

		Q.		Did the City Council own the Sports Centre at Mortomley Green, and if so, which department would be responsible for the maintenance?

		R.		The Chair stated that he would investigate the matter raised and report back to a future meeting of the Panel.

		Q.		A local resident referred to an article, which had been placed in the Sheffield Star in relation to attendance at Area Panel meetings and whether they would continue to meet.

		R.		The Chair reported that there were no proposals to abandon Area Panels and he believed that they would continue to evolve over future years.

		Q.		A local resident reported that in his opinion the Area Panels worked well and commented that people were more inclined to attend a Panel meeting if they were interested in the issues to be discussed.

		R.		John Charlton reported that the article was not related to any specific Area Panel but was a general comment on attendance City wide.

				Councillor Martin Davis reported that the North area was very widely spread and in his opinion he felt that attendance for the North Area Panel meetings were very well attended.

		Q.		A local resident enquired with regard to the progression of safe access for pedestrians across the railway line in Oughtibridge adjacent to Station Lane as he had not yet received a response in relation to a letter which had been forwarded to the City Council by Mr Trevor Bagshaw.

		R.		The Chair stated that he had not yet responded to Mr Bagshaw but had forwarded the letter, which he had received from Mr Bagshaw in addition to his own comments to the Highways Service to investigate. He reported that he had received a response from Alex Kyle, Highways Management Services, wh, o had stated that the comments received were sufficient to justify the scheme request being reassessed although he considered that a footbridge would be too expensive and a footpath would not be considered for a rural road. The Chair added that he would formally respond to Mr Bagshaw and outline Mr Kyle’s response.

		Q.		Mr Bagshaw felt that the response provided was very disappointing.

		R.		The Chair stated that the Panel could continue to write to the Highways Service in order to pursue the issue raised.

		Q.		A local resident referred to land at Grenoside which he stated was a brown field site which had regrown and commented that with the Unitary Development Plan under review, a colleague of Mr Paul Gordon, Planning Link Officer had attempted to redesignate the land to housing land. He further added that if the land was reassigned it would be necessary to incorporate footways and a bridge and enquired whether a clause was required to be implemented which indicated that the reassignment of land must take on board footways and footpaths within the redevelopment site.

		R.		Councillor Martin Davis sought clarification as to whether the questioner wished for the land to be designated as a Green field site or housing land. Councillor Davis felt that in his opinion it would be beneficial to redesignate the site as a green open space.

				The Chair reported that in view of the comments now made, he would pursue the issue with the Head of Highways in order to request that should any further planning applications be submitted for the land formerly occupied by Steetley brick works that the issue of footpaths and footways be taken into consideration.

		Q.		Would it be better for the overall infrastructure of the area be examined?

		R.		The Chair reported that the Planning Law was specific to what members of the public could object to and added that objections must be relevant to individual planning applications.

		Q.		Could a grant be applied for?

		R.		Councillor Martin Davis reported that if the Highways Officer considered the access for the development insufficient then a grant application could be considered.



5.		DEVELOPMENTS IN LOCAL NHS SERVICES
		Ruth Saffrey and Ayesha Heaton, Sheffield West Primary Care Trust (PCT) provided a brief presentation on developments in local NHS services including information on the new Polyclinic building, the new Medical Centre in Deepcar and Patient and Public Involvement.

		Polyclinic
		Ayesha Heaton reported on the new ‘Polyclinic’ building which was being developed on Middlewood Road. She added that ‘Polyclinic’ was a new title for a community clinic, which would accommodate a number of different health services including some outpatient services, specialist health services, groups and health classes.
		Ms Heaton stated that during 2000, the Secretary of State for Health had published the NHS Plan which described a number of objectives which the NHS were required to achieve over the next 5 to 10 years. One of the key requirements was that the NHS must offer patients more choice about when and where they were treated. She added that by building a new clinic to provide services, which could only usually be accessed by visiting a hospital, people would have greater choice about where they would like to attend.
		Ms Heaton reported on access to the Polyclinic and stated that public transport links were good with the Middlewood Supertram stop and bus stop situated only a five minute walk away.
		She added that service’s would be provided by a range of NHS professionals including hospital staff, therapists, General Practitioners and nurses with specialist interests.
		In relation to who could use the Polyclinic, Ms Heaton reported that the Polyclinic was primarily being built for people living in the West of Sheffield, although people from further afield may also wish to access a particular service.
		Ms Heaton reported that the Developer was due to commence building in Spring 2004, and anticipated that the building would take one year to complete. She added that the Polyclinic would be three storeys high and include the main reception and consultation rooms on the ground floor, small operating theatres and a treatment room on the first floor and a number of meeting rooms and spaces for groups on the third floor.

		Following the presentation the following questions were asked and responses given:-

		Q.		Would there be provision for Accident and Emergency Services?

		R.		Ms Heaton responded that the clinic would mainly be for pre-booked appointments.

		Q.		Would there be x-ray facilities at the clinic?

		R.		Ms Heaton reported that there may be some smaller x-ray facilities available which could include ultra sound and other smaller equipment and would depend on what services were utilising the clinic

		Q.		Would there be a lift situated within the building?

		R.		Ms Heaton reported that there would be a lift in the building.

		Q.		Councillor Martin Davis enquired as to whether the PCT had discussed transport links with providers as patients often needed to access Health Services quickly.

		R.		In response Ms Heaton reported that patients would be able to choose an appointment time and commented that the Polyclinic would not reduce the existing services provided in Hospitals but would provide more patient choice.

		Q.		Existing patients may find a change in venue disturbing if they were receiving treatment in a specific hospital, would patients still be able to continue to receive treatment at a venue of their choice?

		R.		Ms Heaton reported that patients would still be entitled to a choice of where they received their treatment.

		Q.		Would there be sufficient car parking at the Polyclinic to accommodate staff and patients and where would access into the clinic be located?

		R.		Ms Heaton stated that there would be access from Middlewood Road and pedestrian access only from the housing estate at the rear of the clinic. In relation to car parking spaces she believed that there would be 80/90, car parking spaces available.

		Q.		Would the Polyclinic not have been better located in Deepcar or Oughtibridge?

		R.		Ms Heaton reported that the PCT felt that the Middlewood Road site would be easily accessible for the whole of West Sheffield.

		Q.		A local resident reported on discussions which had taken place at a previous Panel meeting with regard to the loss of respite care and added that the PCT appeared to be spending money on new services but commented that in his opinion it would be more beneficial to invest the monies available into retaining and improving existing services. He added that the PCT had previously promised to reinstate respite care services but now reported that they were to review respite services in Sheffield.

		R.		Ruth Saffrey noted the concerns now raised and stated that she would report back to a future meeting of the Panel.

		Q.		Councillor Vic Bowden enquired whether the Polyclinic would have services for speech and language therapy or ante natal care?

		R.		Ms Heaton stated that she would note the issues raised.

		Q.		Councillor Martin Davis welcomed the initiatives and new facilities and enquired whether new staff were to be employed at the clinic or whether existing resources would be exhausted from other Sheffield Hospitals which he commented would result in no benefits to patients as he anticipated that Doctors would not be available on request as they would be deployed elsewhere throughout the City?

		R.		In response, Ms Heaton stated that resources would depend on the speciality of staff and the needs of the services, which were to be provided at the clinic. She added that GP’s were to receive extra training to become ‘GPs with a special interest’ so that they could deliver some services such as dermatology.

		Q.