Minutes of South East Area Panel 21 September 2004
SOUTH EAST AREA PANEL | ||
| ||
Meeting held 21st September 2004 | ||
| ||
| ||
| PRESENT: | Councillors Chris Rosling-Josephs (Chair), David Barker, Marjorie Barker, Bryan Lodge, Helen Mirfin-Boukouris, Mike Peat, Ian Saunders and Sam Wall |
|
| Also in attendance: Councillor Martin Lawton, Steve Lonnia and Phil Cutts (Licensing Officers), PC Rob Wilson (South Yorkshire Police), Andrea White (South Sheffield Regeneration Team), Dianne Hurst (Area Co-ordinator), Hannan Isherwood (South East Area Support Officer) and 23 members of the public. |
|
|
|
............ | ||
| ||
1. | APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE | |
| Apologies for absence were received from the Lord Mayor (Councillor Mike Pye) and Councillors Mick Rooney and Ray Satur and the Lead Officer, Ken Matthews. | |
|
| |
2. | PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS | |
| Owlthorpe Surgery | |
| Sue Stones, Vice Chair of the South East Sheffield Primary Care Trust Patient and Public Environment Forum, reported that she had been surveying General Practitioners in the area and had been surprised to find, when she visited the Owlthorpe Surgery, that the access issues had still not been resolved. As a consequence she had met on site with Councillor Helen Mirfin-Boukouris (who had taken up the issue on behalf of the community), Maureen Stoneman (South East Primary Care Trust), Dianne Hurst (Area Co-ordinator) and Anthony Rylands (Access Officer, Sheffield City Council). | |
| The Area Co-ordinator outlined the changes in Planning Regulations that had led to the proposed housing development not taking place around the surgery and stated that the reason the footpath had not been completed was because of the need to cross the brook, either by the construction of a substantial bridge or a graduated path. The works had been given a low priority in the Local Transport Plan and the Area Co-ordinator was investigating ways to accelerate the process. With regard to the road links, there had been some enabling work carried out on the Supertram tracks but work on the overhead power lines still needed to be carried out. | |
| RESOLVED: That (a) this Panel supports the need for the access (including disability access) to the Owlthorpe Surgery to be improved as soon as possible; and | |
| (b) the Area Co-ordinator be requested to continue to liaise with Sue Stones and the relevant Officers of the City Council, including Anthony Rylands, Access Officer, and report progress to a future meeting of the Area Panel. | |
|
| |
| Area of Land at Birley | |
| Ray Greaves, Birley Moor Forum, reported community concerns about a piece of land situated close to Birley Lane, Fox Lane, Birley Community College and Birley Primary School which had been the subject of correspondence and meetings over a long period. He stated that this had culminated in an agreement that funding would be made available to employ consultants to prepare a Master Plan for the site and he asked when the Plan would be made available at a Panel meeting in order to give members of the community an opportunity to comment. | |
| The Area Co-ordinator responded that the Officer who was leading this work had been seriously ill for some time but was now undergoing a phased return to work. The Officer had requested a copy of the Master Plan from the consultants and it was envisaged that this would be made available to Members of the Area Panel shortly, following which it would be made available for community consultation. | |
| The Area Panel noted this information. | |
|
| |
| Ramp at Cross Street, Woodhouse | |
| In response to a request from a member of the public, it was noted that the Area Co-ordinator would examine the ramp now reported at Cross Street, Woodhouse. | |
|
| |
| Adaptations to Taps | |
| It was noted that the Adaptations Service in the Social Services Directorate would be pleased to assist with help/advice in relation to home adaptations for people with a disability. | |
|
| |
| Westfield School Re-build | |
| It was noted that there had been some design difficulties in relation to the new Westfield School but the projected opening date remained at September 2006. | |
|
| |
| Cars Parking in Front of Dropped Kerbs | |
| The Area Co-ordinator requested members of the public to report to her any difficulties that were being experienced because of cars parking in front of dropped kerbs. | |
|
| |
| Birley Spa Bath House | |
| In response to a question from a member of the public, the Area Co-ordinator stated that negotiations were taking place to transfer the ownership of the Birley Spa Bath House from the Neighbourhoods Directorate to the Directorate of Development, Environment and Leisure. | |
| The Area Panel noted this information. | |
|
| |
| Section 106 Monies | |
| In response to a question about the criteria in relation to the spending of Section 106 monies, the Area Co-ordinator stated that she would make a further copy available to the Beighton Village Development Trust. | |
|
| |
3. | MINUTES | |
| The minutes of the meeting of the Area Panel held on 20th July 2004 were approved as a correct record. | |
|
| |
4. | MATTERS ARISING | |
| Anti-Social Behaviour on the Scowerdons Estate | |
| The Area Co-ordinator reported that a response to the petition had been received from Sheffield Homes who had stated that, at the present time, there were four cases of anti-social behaviour being investigated on the Estate and there had recently been a number of Acceptable Behaviour Contracts issued on youths in the area, which were monitored by Sheffield Homes Officers and the Police and which could lead to action being taken on the alleged perpetrators’ tenures. The response had acknowledged the concerns of the community, but had stressed the need for them to work with Officers from Sheffield Homes in an endeavour to address anti-social behaviour problems. | |
| The Area Co-ordinator stated that she had spoken to Officers of the South Yorkshire Police about the concerns of the community on the Scowerdons Estate and had given them a copy of the petition. Arising from that, they had stated that they would be keeping a close eye on the Estate and had requested that any incidents should be reported to them so that they could build up a picture of what was happening. The Community Development Worker added that there would be a further Police initiative before Christmas and leaflets giving direct contact numbers would be distributed to the community. | |
| Members of the people expressed concern about nuisance tenants being moved to other neighbourhoods and suggested that a database should be maintained of such people. | |
| In response, the Chair (Councillor Chris Rosling-Josephs) stated that Officers would try and assist communities in that regard, but he spoke of the legal implications under the Data Protection Act of maintaining a database on the lines suggested. He added that members of the community should speak to their local Councillors about nuisance neighbour problems. | |
| The Area Panel noted this information. | |
|
| |
| Fishing in the Shire Brook Valley | |
| The Area Co-ordinator reported that a press release had been issued and leaflets distributed stated that fishing in the Shire Brook Valley was now prohibited. In addition, signs had been erected on site and Officers from Parks, Woodlands and Countryside were informing regular anglers about the change. | |
| A member of the public stated that there were contradictory signs in the Valley and fishing was still taking place. She also asked about the Health and Safety issues that had resulted in the decision to prohibit fishing. | |
| Scott Porter, Ranger Service, stated that a child had been injured when his fishing rod had caught an overhead power line and, as a consequence, Officers from the Health and Safety Executive and the Department of Trade and Industry had examined the entire path network and had concluded that whichever access to the site was used, there were overhead power lines. As a result, the decision had been taken to enforce the prohibition of fishing in the Shire Brook Valley. Scott Porter added that this was not a change of policy, because fishing in the Valley had always been prohibited. In regard to the contradictory signs, these had been installed by the Electricity Company but had now been removed. | |
| A member of the public responded that there was a belief, among some sections of the community, that all the “live” power cables had been laid underground and she suggested that a further press release should be issued explaining that this was not the case. | |
| Scott Porter stated that Officers from the Ranger Service did their best to monitor the Valley and inform people of alternative fishing venues. He added that a further press release on the lines now suggested would be issued. | |
| The Area Panel noted this information. | |
|
| |
| Public Toilets, Market Square, Woodhouse | |
| In response to a question from a member of the public about the demolition of the public toilets at Market Square, Woodhouse, the Area Co-ordinator stated that Woodhouse Forum had raised this issue on a number of occasions at their meetings which were held on the third Thursday in every month in St. James’ Church Hall, Woodhouse. Street Force would prepare a paper on the proposals and this would be considered at an Area Panel meeting. | |
| The Area Panel noted this information. | |
|
| |
| Empty Shops, Market Square, Woodhouse | |
| In response to a question about empty and shuttered shops in Market Square, Woodhouse, the Area Co-ordinator stated that the owners of the properties had been identified and the buildings had been referred to the Council’s Derelict Buildings Team. | |
| The Area Panel noted this information. | |
|
| |
| Crime and Community Safety | |
| P.C. Rob Wilson, South Yorkshire Police, addressed the Panel and outlined details of a scheme that had been operating in the North of the City where Police Officers had been using mountain bikes in an endeavour to deal with crime and anti-social behaviour. This had proved to be beneficial and he was keen to deploy a similar system in the South East in the Beighton, Woodhouse and Sothall areas. He stated that he had used a bike in Woodhouse and had caught a prolific thief who had since been imprisoned for a period of 3 years for 26 offences. However, the bike had not been modified and was unsuitable for the type of work that was required. | |
| PC Wilson stated that the reason for his attendance at the meeting of the Area Panel was to enquire whether it would be possible for the Panel to fund a new purpose-built mountain bike at a cost of £800. PC Wilson added that the bike would also be a useful tool in establishing community links and forging connections with young people. | |
| Councillor Marjorie Barker stated that, whilst the ideals of the scheme were to be applauded, the Area Panel had numerous calls on its small budget and she considered that the bike should be funded by the South Yorkshire Police. | |
| Members of the public commented that the Tenants’ and Residents’ Association could be approached for funding, whilst others stated that they were in favour of seeing more Police on the streets. | |
| RESOLVED: That the issue be examined in more detail by the Area Panel in the light of the comments now received. | |
|
| |
| (NOTE: Councillor Chris Rosling-Josephs declared that he was employed by South Yorkshire Police and took no part in the discussions relating to the above.) | |
|
| |
| Young People | |
| The Panel received and noted a paper circulated by the Area Co-ordinator which reviewed the activities undertaken by Sheffield Futures and Activity Sheffield during the summer in the South East area. | |
|
| |
| Supporting People | |
| A member of the public asked how much of the additional £1m reported in the “Star” that was being allocated towards street cleaning would be spent in the South East area. The Chair (Councillor Chris Rosling-Josephs) responded that this was part of a four year plan for the City and the money was in addition to what was already being spent. The work would radiate out from the City centre and th, e South East area would receive the benefit of the additional monies in years 3/4. | |
| The Area Panel noted this information. | |
|
| |
| South East Primary Care Trust | |
| Maureen Stoneman provided copies of the Annual Report of the South East Primary Care Trust and stated that Board meetings of the Trust were held on the first Tuesday of every month at 2.00 p.m. In addition, there was a meeting at the Arbourthorne Community Centre on the 11th October 2004 between 12 noon and 2.00 p.m. to which everyone was welcome to attend. | |
| The Area Panel noted this information. | |
|
| |
5. | CHANGES IN THE LICENSING LAWS | |
| Steve Lonnia and Phil Cutts, Licensing Officers, reported on changes that were being introduced to the Licensing laws under the provisions of the Licensing Act 2003. | |
| Steve Lonnia stated that the 2003 Act replaced the Licensing Act 1964, Schedule 1of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1982, the Cinemas Act 1985, the Theatres Act 1968, the Private Places of Entertainment (Licensing) Act 1967 and the Late Night Refreshment Houses Act 1969. It aimed to simplify existing legislation and set out a new approach to licensing the sale and supply of alcohol, the provision of regulated entertainment and late night refreshment. The Act was based around four core objectives, these being the prevention of crime and disorder, public safety, the prevention of public nuisance and the protection of children from harm. | |
| Steve Lonnia stated that during February to November 2005, the existing licensed premises would be required to apply to the Local Authority to transfer their licenses to the new system. | |
| Steve Lonnia and Phil Cutts responded as follows to questions raised by members of the public:- | |
|
| |
| · It was not considered that many establishments would want to open for 24 hours. | |
| · Members of the public could object to any variation to existing licences. | |
| · The new legislation would give more power to local residents and if problems were experienced during the term of a licence, residents could ask for a review. | |
| · Many premises might opt for a permanent rather than an occasional public entertainment licence in the future. | |
| · The Government, not the Local Authority, would set licence fees and these had not yet been announced. | |
| · In the future, local authorities would deal with all aspects of licensing, including liquor licensing. | |
| · The Fire and Rescue Service would deal with the licensing of fireworks. | |
|
| |
| RESOLVED: That (a) the information now reported be noted; and | |
| (b) Steve Lonnia and Phil Cutts be thanked for attending the meeting and responding to questions. | |
|
| |
6. | SCOWERDONS, WEAKLANDS AND NEWSTEAD ESTATES – REGENERATION PROPOSALS | |
| Andrea White, South Sheffield Regeneration Team, gave a presentation on the progress of the regeneration proposals relating to the Scowerdons, Weaklands and Newstead Estates and made the following points:- | |
|
| |
| · The ring fencing of the surrounding estates had come into force in January 2004 in readiness for the decanting operation and residents were bidding for properties and moving out. | |
| · The first phase of each of the three estates had been declared in January. | |
| · Sheffield Homes had given a commitment to give residents at least two months’ notice prior to their declaration. | |
| · The phasing would be driven by the rehousing process and some estates would move faster than others. | |
| · Desk top geological surveys had indicated that the ground conditions were satisfactory but if there were any changes, residents would be consulted. | |
| · Residents of the 5M houses on the Scowerdons Estate had indicated that they wished to be included in the regeneration scheme and this had been agreed by the Cabinet in August 2004. | |
| · 5M homes on the Weaklands Estate would not be part of the scheme because the residents had voted for an Arms Length Management Organisation (ALMO). | |
| · A commitment had been given that as properties became vacant, they would be fully secured and screened and as soon as a block became empty, it would be demolished subject to site surveys, etc. | |
| · The area would be cleared and landscaped pending its redevelopment. | |
| · Consultations had been held in the summer on the Master Plan proposals and these had been positively received by residents on the Estates. | |
| · Two residents from the 5M houses on the Scowerdons Estate had been included in the Steering Group. | |
| · Newsletters were produced at least every twelve weeks. | |
| · Visits had been undertaken to other regeneration sites and the feedback had been positive. | |
| · An agreement had been negotiated with the Education Service to ensure that residents who had to move temporarily off the Estate would retain their catchment area status based on their previous address so that they would not be disadvanted. | |
| · The Regeneration Team was based at the Blades Enterprise Centre and would be pleased to assist/advise residents. | |
| · The concerns of residents about rubbish dumping on the estates had been reported to the Steering Group. The Area Co-ordinator stated that it would not be possible to include the estates on the “Bring Out Your Rubbish” Days but she would speak to the Estates Management Team so that a rolling programme of rubbish collection could be provided. | |
| · Councillor Bryan Lodge added that there had been a commitment from Sheffield Homes that they would not let rubbish accumulate and residents were requested to report any such incidents. | |
| · In response to concerns expressed by a member of the public that fly tipping was taking place on land surrounding the Scowerdons Estate, Andrea White stated that this issue was known to them and was being investigated. | |
|
| |
| RESOLVED: That (a) the information now reported be noted; and | |
| (b) Andrea White be thanked for her presentation and to responding to questions. | |
|
| |
7. | AREA PLAN | |
| The Area Co-ordinator circulated a copy of the Area Panel Objectives 2005/7 and stated that, following the endorsement of the three year proposals by this meeting, the draft document would be circulated to stakeholders and partners for comment. She added that the Area profile and background contextual information would be included in the Plan before its publication and presentation to the Panel in January 2005. | |
| RESOLVED: That the key priorities of the South East Area Plan 2005/07 now reported be endorsed. | |
|
| |
8. | SECTION 106 MONIES | |
| The Area Co-ordinator submitted the Section 106 quarterly monitoring report up to April 2004 which showed the Section 106 schemes within the South East area and the stage of their development. | |
| A member of the public referred to the length of time some of the schemes were taking to proceed to the programming stage and the Area Co-ordinator responded that, in some cases, this was because additional funding was being sought to add to the Section 106 monies. | |
| In response to further questions from the public, the Area Co-ordinator explained that Section 106 monies could only be spent in accordance with the terms of the planning obligation agreement and community Groups were routinely consulted on the allocation of Section 106 monies. | |
| RESOLVED: That (a) the report now submitted be noted: and | |
| (b) the Area Co-ordinator be requested to arrange for a Planning Officer to attend a future meeting to discuss the criteria in regard to Section 106 monies. | |
|
| |
9. | CHANGES IN THE PARLIAMENTARY BOUNDARY | |
| The Chair (Councillor Chris Rosling-Josephs) reported on consultations that were taking place on proposed changes to the Parliamentary Constituency boundaries on which comments had to be submitted by 16th October 2004. He stated that one of the proposals was to abolish the Attercliffe Constituency and create a South East Constituency and a Heeley Constituency. This would break the traditional links between Darnall, Woodhouse and Handsworth. Councillor Ian Saunders added that the proposal would link this area with the Gleadless Valley and took no account of the topography, community and historic links within the existing constituency. | |
| RESOLVED: That the information now reported be noted. | |
|
| |
10. | DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING | |
| The Area Panel noted that the next meeting would be held on Tuesday, 23rd November 2004 at 1.30 p.m. in Woodhouse. | |
