To receive Questions from the Public, in accordance with the Council’s Constitution.
Minutes:
There were two public question received.
1. Mr Antony Cahill, Failsworth East Ward, Oldham
“Many people living around Roman Road have asked about the volume of traffic especially during school times. Because of the single carriage way on Oldham Road there seem to be a high volume of traffic going both ways on Roman Road. It appears that traffic is coming off Oldham Road and onto Ashton Road at one end and from Albert Street at the other end. It is supposed to be a 20 m.p.h. speed limit but very little notice of this is being considered by lorry and van driver's rushing to and from work. Residents on Roman Road are complaining about the additional noise but the main concern must be for the schoolchildren of Stansfield Road school. Can there be anything done about this?”
It was reported that a traffic survey had been undertaken on Roman Road and when comparing the traffic volume figures to a survey undertaken in 2000 there had been very little change.
Roman Road was part of a 20 mph school safety zone which aimed to reduce the mean speed of traffic to around 20 mph, which the traffic survey suggested had been achieved. However, the 85th percentile speeds were higher than expected for a 20 mph zone and there were a small number of motorists who were driving at inappropriate speeds and the matter had been forwarded to the Police for attention.
The Greater Manchester injury accident database revealed that in the 3 years prior to the year 2000, 7 injury accidents were recorded along Roman Road, but in the last 3 years, 1 injury accident had been recorded; this would suggest the traffic calming measures had been successful in terms of accident reduction. In view of this, Roman Road fell below current intervention levels for the provision of additional traffic calming features.
As Mr Cahill was not in attendance a written response would be sent.
2. Mr Peter Davis, Bradshaw Avenue, Failsworth West Ward, Oldham
“At yesterday evening’s meeting of the Planning Committee, there were two items of the agenda concerning applications in Failsworth; one in each of the two wards.
The first item was in relation to compensation to be offered to businesses at the phoenix industrial estate in Failsworth East. Councillor Bates, Councillor for Failsworth West, chose to speak on this item and set out his opposition to planning permission for housing on the site – a matter that was not relevant as it had been decided more than 4 years ago. During his contribution he repeatedly referred to a business owner on the site who manufactures false teeth.
When plans for Failsworth West were considered, the construction of homes on the former Brookdale Pub site, Councillor Bates had left the meeting.
It is widely known that the business person Councillor Bates referred to during his contribution yesterday was the UKIP candidate in Failsworth East during last year’s local elections.
Does the District Executive feel that it was appropriate for Councillor Bates to use the Planning Committee to promote a former candidate from his own political party?
Can Councillor Bates explain why, as a Councillor for Failsworth West, he spoke on an application concerning a site in Failsworth East. Could he also explain why he then left the meeting when the application for planning in his own ward was considered – particularly when his contribution to the Phoenix Industrial Estate item was not even relevant?
As a resident on Bradshaw Avenue in Failsworth West I can say that I would expect my Councillors to be speaking on matters in their own ward and the Brookdale is a very important issue locally. It is sad that Councillor Bates doesn’t appear to appreciate that.”
Councillor Bates pointed out that as well as being a Ward Councillor, he was a Borough Councillor and as such had interest in borough wide issues. Councillor Bates provided an explanation on the points raised. Further to this the District Executive provided background information on the planning applications mentioned.