South East Area Panel Minutes 22nd March 2005

SOUTH EAST AREA PANEL

Meeting held 22nd March, 2005


	PRESENT:	Councillors Chris Rosling-Josephs (Chair), David Barker, Marjorie Barker, Ian Saunders and Sam Wall.

		Also in attendance:- Councillor Martin Lawton, Dianne Hurst (South East Area Panel Co-ordinator), Richard Palmer (Neighbourhoods), Keith Missen (Planning Division), Dave Ross (Committee Secretariat), Angela Prime (Street Force) and 21 members of the public

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

1.	APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
	Apologies for absence were received from The Lord Mayor (Councillor Mike Pye) and Councillors Bryan Lodge, Helen Mirfin-Boukouris and Mike Peat.

2.	SOUTH EAST SHEFFIELD - ROLL OF HONOUR
	Dianne Hurst (Area Co-ordinator) reported on the nominations received for the South East Sheffield Roll of Honour that recognised excellent work in the community. She explained that it was a rolling programme of awards for people who had improved the quality of life in the area. There was a simple form for nominations that could be sent to the Area Co-ordinator and they would be considered by Panel Members.
	The Panel (a) noted that Mrs. Henstock, Pete Wolstenholme, Alan Bailey and Stella Longden had been recognised by the South East Sheffield Roll of Honour and were to be presented with their awards by the Lord Mayor; and
	(b) invited further nominations for the Roll of Honour.

3.	COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT IN BRITAIN IN BLOOM
	Angela Prime (Street Force) gave a presentation on community involvement in "Britain in Bloom" and made the following points:-

	· There were four levels of competition - Lord Mayor's Awards, Yorkshire in Bloom, Britain in Bloom and Entente Florale.

	· The overall aim of the "In Bloom” movement was to improve the quality of life for local, urban and village communities.

	· At every level there were a number of categories and judging criteria.

	· Sheffield won the City Centre category in Yorkshire in Bloom 2002, the overall Large City category in Yorkshire in Bloom 2003 and was Yorkshire's entry in Britain in Bloom in 2004. It was also selected by the Royal Horticultural Society to represent Britain in Entente Florale in 2005.

	· There are 10 categories for the Lord Mayor's Awards and these are divided into businesses, communities, individual schools and a photography competition.

	· There are 12 categories for Yorkshire in Bloom ranging from small villages, neighbourhoods and business. The process involved establishing an In Bloom Community Forum, developing a route or project, securing resources, delivering the plan and support from Street Force and the Area Panel. The deadline for entries for the Yorkshire in Bloom Village and Urban Community categories had passed but there was an end of April deadline for the Neighbourhoods category. Street Force Officers could offer advice for anyone applying. Judging would take place in the spring and summer for the Village and Urban Community and in July for the Neighbourhoods’ category.

	· Any neighbourhoods or communities interested for this or next year should contact Street Force, Community Development (telephone no. 0114 273 4221) or email streetforce@sheffield.gov.uk marked for the attention of Community Development.

	· The Council has been supporting the ‘Plant a Million Bulbs’ each year for the last three years and this was being repeated this year.

	In response to questions from members of the public, Angela Prime indicated that:-

	v The Parks, Woodlands and Countryside Service was responsible for the parks in the city and Street Force had responsibility for the Streetscene. There was a weed spraying programme across the City.

	v It would be worth an y group starting with the Lord Mayor's Awards. There were also categories for schools in Yorkshire in Bloom.

	v Information in respect of next year's Yorkshire in Bloom would be received by late autumn 2005.

	v She would raise with Street Force the issue of grass cutting having taken place at Normanton Springs where bulbs had been planted.

	v The gardens around Council older persons’ flats were the responsibility of Sheffield Homes and Street Force worked with Sheffield Homes to ensure that they were kept in a tidy condition. Bulbs were available for planting.

	v Individuals can enter the Lord Mayor's Award.

	In response to a question relating to the Old School site, Dianne Hurst (Area Co-ordinator) indicated that planting at the site was being organised by the Hackenthorpe Village Action Group.
	The Panel (a) noted the information now reported and the comments now made; and
	(b) thanked Angela Prime for attending the meeting and answering questions.

4.	NEIGHBOURHOOD COMMISSIONS
	Richard Palmer, Neighbourhoods Directorate, submitted a report explaining that the Government's Decent Homes Standards had been brought in to bring homes up to a standard by 2010 that left them in a reasonable state of repair, including being weather tight, economical to keep warm and with reasonably modern facilities. The first phase had dealt with Council housing and Neighbourhood Commissions had been established comprising groups of local tenants, residents, Councillors, housing agencies and other interested parties to decide on the best option. The majority of the Commissions had decided upon Arms Length Management Organisations. All Council tenants in Area H had a vote on the recommended option as part of Phase 1.
	Phase 2 focused on private sector housing and the Government targets were aimed at reducing the number of vulnerable people living in non-decent housing, such as the elderly, retired or those on very low incomes or in receipt of benefits.
	The report summarised the work and the findings of the Phase 2 Neighbourhood Commission for Area H. The consultation had included three sessions at Crystal Peaks Sheffield Centre, Woodhouse Library and Frecheville Library and these were promoted through The Star newspaper, letters to members of Tenants' and Residents' Associations and other agencies/groups operating within that area, as well as posters being displayed in appropriate places. The main issues identified by both the Commission and through the Open Day held in January were housing specific (such as many people living in private sector housing were not aware of the help and support that was available for owners and tenants in the private sector) and environmental issues (including gardens that are left untidy and in an overgrown condition, often with rubbish dumped in them, fly tipping, anti-social behaviour, poor street lighting, problems with car parking and the poor condition of road surfaces in parts of the area).
	The report included a number of recommendations that had been developed in response to the issues raised through the Commission process and the Action Plan developed at the Area Forum Day. Richard Palmer indicated that the Area Panel would take account of all the issues raised as part of its Area Plan.
	In response to questions from members of the public, Richard Palmer indicated that:-

	v The consultation events in Area H for Phase 2 had not been well attended. Those invited included local Councillors, some Community Groups and Tenants' and Residents' Associations, organisations involved in private sector housing (such as Stay Put), Housing Associations and private landlords. He understood that the Health Service had not been involved.

	v There was a need to improve the flow of information and one of the recommendations arising from the Commission process was for the Private Sector Housing Team to promote the assistance and support available to those living and operating within the private sector, with specific reference to vulnerable people.

	v The Private Sector Housing Team had a key role in respect of grants for disabled people.

	v Sheffield Homes was addressing the issue of making houses more accessible for residents but there were limits in terms of the funding available for the improvements being done as part of the Decent Homes Standard.

	v There was a database of private landlords and a positive relationship had been developed with them. There had been an Open Day for private landlords that had been well attended.

	v A city-wide Stock Condition Survey was undertaken two/three years ago.

	v It may be worth continuing with the Housing Information caravan that had previously been used.

	v The Government funded the Anti-Social Behaviour Helpline that was available for all tenants and residents in the City.

	A member of the public raised concern at the problems with weeds, litter and the condition of the pavement outside Thornbridge flats and stated that Highways Officers were unwilling to visit the area with representatives of the Tenants' and Residents' Association.
	The Panel (a) noted the contents of the report now submitted and the comments now made; and
	(b) requested that officers from Highways Services attend a future meeting of this Panel to provide a response with regard to the issue now raised about conditions outside Thornbridge flats.

5.	SECTION 106 PLANNING OBLIGATION MONIES
	Keith Missen (Landscape Architect, Planning Division) gave a presentation on Planning Obligations and made the following points:-

	· A Planning Obligation was a Legal Agreement under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act and was often referred to as a Section 106 Agreement.

	· In most cases it was used when a new development would create the need for additional facilities or have a damaging effect on the local environment or local amenity. They usually related to an aspect of the development that cannot be secured by imposing a planning condition or by other statutory controls.

	· They can be used for a number of purposes but mainly in relation to open space, affordable housing and education provision and improvement to highways. Other purposes could range from securing an acceptable balance of uses in a mixed use development to reducing harm to a protected species of animal or plants.

	· Sheffield's Unitary Development Plan provided information about how Planning Obligations would be used in Sheffield.

	· A Planning Obligation must be so directly related to the development and to the use of the land after its completion that planning permission should not be granted without it. It cannot be used to solve an existing problem in the wider area and interpretation of what is acceptable is set out in the Supplementary Planning Guidance.

	· There is a formula that specifies the percentage of contribution that must be used for play facilities, sports facilities and informal open space and the Supplementary Planning Guidance states what distance from the development the facilities should be provided (this is called the catchment area).

	· There was a Protocol agreed by the Council's Area Panels' Advisory Committee in 2002 for use of Section 106 monies. Area Panels would develop a list of open space improvements based on information from local organisations and residents and Planning Officers would use the list when negotiating with developers to target funding. It was intended that this Protocol would be revised.

	· Officers in Planning and Parks, Woodlands and Countryside were in regular contact with Area Co-ordinators. Officers also attended Panel meetings to receive their priorities on spending and to give updates on progress.

	· Public consultation was usually carried out in conjunction with Area Co-ordinators/Panels.

	· Once an individual scheme design was underway, there was contact with Area Co-ordinators as required.

	In response to questions from members of the public, Keith Missen indicated that:-

	v The funding was not available as a grant but anyone with any suggestions that met one of the purposes outlined should contact the Area Co-ordinator.

	v Areas with little new housing development would have less Section 106 monies but Officers were exploring whether the monies could be spread more widely.

	v There had been no Section 106 funding for Beighton recently and the last scheme related to Norcroft Cottage.

	v Officers tried to be as flexible as possible, for example a new play area could possibly include litter bins, fences etc.

	In response to a question raised on the housing developm, ent at Owlthorpe, Keith Missen indicated that it had not been completed as the Government had changed the rules relating to green and brownfield sites and the developer was not able to build all the houses originally intended. It was hoped that the housing development would be built in the next few years. Officers were seeking other funding sources for the proposed kick pitch on that estate. Councillor Chris Rosling-Josephs added that this was also an issue for local Councillors and the Government's decision had led to a reduction in the infrastructure on that estate. Keith Missen added that it was likely that a new planning application would be submitted for the site. Councillor Ian Saunders indicated that work should start on the link road in May/June, 2005. He considered that the Owlthorpe Estate suffered due to the road not being connected. Officers and Councillors were pursuing the need for the road and housing development to be completed.
	The Area Co-ordinator indicated that she should be contacted with any priorities for Section 106 monies and the priority list was continually being reviewed with Councillors and discussed at Panel meetings. As development was now on brownfield sites and fewer sites were available, this meant that less Section 106 funding would be available in this area.
	A member of the public referred to parking problems on Owlthorpe Way near the surgery where there were up to 25 cars parked each day. This was due to residents in new housing developments parking and using Supertram. She considered that this was a potentially dangerous situation both for vehicles coming away from the surgery and for pedestrians. She asked whether derelict land on Moorthorpe Way could be used as a car park. The Chair of the Panel (Councillor Chris Rosling-Josephs) agreed to discuss this issue with the member of the public after the meeting.
	The Panel (a) noted the information now reported and that there would be regular updates on Section 106 Planning Obligation monies to future meetings of this Panel; and
	(b) thanked Keith Missen for attending the meeting and answering questions.

6.	FINANCIAL MONITORING - DISCRETIONARY BUDGET/ NEIGHBOURHOOD RENEWAL FUND LOCAL ACTION PLAN
	Dianne Hurst (Area Co-ordinator) submitted a report giving details of the Panel's discretionary budget of £10,000 per annum that was used to cover the cost of operation of Panel meetings and also run a small Community Chest and (b) allocation of the Panel's Neighbourhood Renewal Fund (NRF) of £161,000 that was spent within the principles of the agreed Local Action Plan. The report indicated that an underspend in the discretionary budget was reallocated to community activities to support environmental improvements and the Yorkshire in Bloom activity. Dianne Hurst also indicated that there would be a review of the Voice and Influence of Young People Project, and the Community Development Workers would be invited to a future meeting of the Panel. The report included the proposed Local Action Plan Priorities for 2005/06 and it was expected that the allocation would be fully spent.
	In response to questions from members of the public, Dianne Hurst indicated that to access the Panel's Small Discretionary Budget, a letter giving details of the proposed activity, cost etc. should be submitted and these would be considered by the Panel. The Community Development Worker was working with communities and seeking to obtain resources for the areas affected by the Scowerdons, Weaklands and Newstead redevelopment, for example a Well-Being Day had been organised with the Tenants' and Residents' Association for April, 2005. The request for activities for young people in that area would be considered but there was already work with young people on Scowerdons. There would be discussions with Sheffield Futures who are aware of the need for support for young people in the area.
	The Panel noted the contents of the report now submitted.

7.	MINUTES
	The minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 25th January, 2005, were approved as a correct record.

8.	MATTERS ARISING
	Thornbridge Lane
	A member of the public raised concern at parking on Thornbridge Lane and this was causing increased pollution and possible damage to the foundations of homes.
	The Area Co-ordinator reported that Kier had planning permission to park lorries at this location and she understood that this created no more pollution than when it was used as a depot. The Chair of the Panel (Councillor Chris Rosling-Josephs) asked that Kier be sympathetic to local people at that location.
	A member of the public stated that there were problems at that site between 4.00 p.m. to 4.30 p.m. and asked if it was possible to have a yellow line down one side of the road.
	The Panel requested the Area Co-ordinator to pursue this issue with Highways Officers.

	Fox Lane Recreation Ground
	A member of the public asked if the Fox Lane Recreation Ground could be developed as a community home as there was a lack of facilities in the Birley and Newstead areas.
	The Area Co-ordinator indicated that there had been no consultation yet on the Birley Open Space Masterplan but it was the view of local Councillors that the Fox Lane Recreation Ground remained as a recreation area. There had been no decision to make the site a wild flower area.

	Public Toilets on Station Road
	The Area Co-ordinator reported that the former public toilets on Station Road, Mosborough, had been sold to the Mosborough Miners' Welfare in 1995 and they had subsequently sold it to developers. They had written to the developers asking for details of their proposals for the site and would provide the Area Co-ordinator with any response. Any progress would be reported to the next meeting of the Panel.

	Woodhouse Retirement Village
	The Area Co-ordinator reported that the lease for the Retirement Village had been signed and there had been a ‘turf cutting’ ceremony on the 8th March, 2005. There would be a report on the Village the next time the Panel met in Woodhouse.

9.	PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND PETITIONS
	There were no petitions received from members of the public.

	Agenda Circulation
	A member of the public indicated that she was not receiving agendas for this meeting.
	The Area Co-ordinator agreed to pursue this issue but indicated that the circulation list for this meeting was being reviewed.

	Bulb Planting on Normanton Hill
	A member of the public indicated that Council lorries and vans had been parked in an area where bulbs had been planted on Normanton Hill but when this issue was raised with the Council the vehicles had been moved. She thanked the Council for a quick response.

	Public Questions and Petitions/Minutes
	In response to a question relating to the order of agenda items, the Chair of the Panel (Councillor Chris Rosling-Josephs) stated that it had been decided to move the minutes and public questions to the end of the agenda but he agreed that, in future, they would be taken at the start of the meeting.

	Dropped Kerbs and Pram Barriers
	A member of the public asked if there was funding available to address the lack of dropped kerbs and pram barriers in the Shirebrook Valley, particularly in the Weaklands Drive/Crescent area. This was a particular issue for disabled scooter users.
	The Area Co-ordinator indicated that this issue would be pursued as part of identifying suitable locations under the Safe Routes to School but the redevelopment taking place in the Weaklands must be considered when looking at the installation of dropped kerbs.

	Litter in Beighton
	A member of the public requested the provision of a Lengthsman in Beighton to address the litter problem and he indicated that 90% of the litter came from fast food outlets in Crystal Peaks.
	The Area Co-ordinator indicated that in the Beighton Environmental Group's Action Plan there had been a request for a Lengthsman to be employed. However, the area did not quality for a Lengthsman as it was not designated as a District Shopping Centre.
	Angela Prime-Leary indicated that there was no formal legislation to tackle the problem of litter from fast food outlets but there was a Code of Practice under which fast food outlets could sign voluntary agreements. It was likely to be a while before its effects where seen.
	The issue of insurance and safety for volunteers involved in litter picking was raised and a member of the public considered that community groups should not take those risks. Angela Prime-Leary indicated that insurance was available or the volunteers could be asked to sign disclaimers.

	Issues in Handsworth
	A member of the public thanked the Area Co-ordinator for her support, encouragement and advice. He referred to the Air Monitoring Programme in Handsworth that showed poor levels of air quality and he would provide the Area Co-ordinator with information relating to the Panel's area. He considered that traffic levels and pollution would be increased as a result of the Waverley Development. He also objected to the boundary changes that would join parts of Handsworth and Heeley. In respect of litter, he was seeking to involve traders in a voluntary partnership and sign up to the Graffiti Charter.

	Birley Spa Baths
	A member of the public asked for information on the future of the Birley Spa Baths.
	The Area Co-ordinator reported that it was a Grade II Listed Building and would remain. The Chair of the Panel (Councillor Chris Rosling-Josephs) indicated that there had been some vandalism and officers were checking who would be responsible for paying for that to be remedied.

	Bring Out Your Rubbish Days
	In response to a question on Bring Out Your Rubbish Days, the Area Co-ordinator indicated there would be three days in 2005/06 for the area and there was a need to consider when and where these would be held.

10.	DATE AND TIME OF NEXT MEETING
	It was noted that the next meeting of the Panel would be held on Tuesday, 24th May 2005, at 7.00 p.m. at a venue in Beighton.

How useful is this page?

[ Comment On This Page? ]

Browsealoud |