(15 minutes for public questions and 25 minutes for Councillor questions)
Minutes:
The Mayor advised the meeting that the next item on the agenda in Open Council was Public Question Time. The questions had been received from members of the public and would be taken in the order in which they had been received. Council was advised that if a questioner was not present, then the question would appear on the screens in the Council Chamber.
The following questions had been submitted:
1. Question received from Syed Maruf Ali via Facebook:
“Hi can you raise this at the full council meeting please. Who's responsible is it to maintain the Tudor Pitch in Coppice? The health and wellbeing of our community is never more important to get right. The levels of obesity are rising and we want to do something about it. Some of the residents have been at the heart of our community for a very long time and advocated providing facilities to local communities. The state of the Tudor Football Pitch is outdated and is need of repair. When it rains it causes health and safety hazard. We now need to address the outside areas and working with our Cllr's, Oldham Authority and St Thomas School to provide a 4G pitch. Our deserving community require first class facility in order to make a real difference. Coppice/Werneth has long been overlooked for such a facility and many people have to travel across the Ward in Hollins, Failsworth and other areas to access decent training venues or play matches because the pitch is not suitable. Tudor pitch is at the heart of the Coppice community. Werneth/Coppice has an extremely young age profile (30% aged 0-15), with a shrinking elderly population (down to 9% from 11.4% in 2001) Residents are passionate about providing facilities for all to use. For a long time now, the Coppice community have been overlooked in the provision of outdoor playing spaces, we are probably the only ward in Oldham that does not have an artificial 4G pitch and we need help of our Cllr's, MP's, Local Authority and St Thomas Primary School to change that. As you can appreciate, the funds needed for such a project run into the hundreds of thousands and, at a time when school budgets are becoming ever increasingly tighter, it is never more important to find partnership funding. we need to raise this money to demonstrate the community's support for the project and to make it the success it deserves to be. We therefore require all the stakeholders to arrange a meeting to find fundings and work with local community. As you will have read above, this facility would be the only one of its kind in the community and, as such, its importance cannot be underestimated. Coppice is deserving of high quality sports facilities that are easily accessible by all and therefore needs your support to make it a reality.”
Councillor Moores, Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing responded that St. Thomas School was responsible for the maintenance of the Tudor Street Pitch as it formed part of the school’s playing fields. The majority of wards in Oldham did not have 4G pitches as these tended to serve the wider district. However, the Council recognised the importance of such facilities in communities and welcomed involvement on how the Council could advise the school and the community as to how it could take the project forward. Potential funding streams would be looked as well as the strategic fit to maximised opportunity. Officers would be asked to contact Mr. Ali.
2. Question asked by Joe Wheeler:
“After many years of debate and delay the new School is currently still on the drawing board. What action will you take to bring an urgent end to these disheartening delays and give the children of Saddleworth a new secondary school that is of the 21st century?”
Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Education and Early Years responded how beneficial it was to hear from an ex-pupil and headboy about his experiences at the school. The current school was not fit for the 21st century and students should be in facilities fit for today. The issue had been ongoing for a long time. The majority of Saddleworth parents were for a new school and everything pointed to the Diggle Site as being the best site. Discussions had been ongoing with the Department for Education and the EFA to look at the outcome of the judicial review. Saddleworth needed a new school. A planning application was to be submitted in the near future and it was anticipated to go to Planning in early 2018. It was hoped to have some sort of resolution.
3. Question received from Andy Hunter-Rossall via email:
“Planning laws state that if a developer expects to make less than 20% profit on a development then they can ignore a council's regulations about the proportion of affordable homes. Since 2010, how many developments have complied with Oldham's affordable housing regulations, and how many have not? What proportion of the houses in the Bellway homes development at the Lancaster Club in Failsworth will be affordable? Are the council aware of policies in Islington, Greenwich, Lambeth and Bristol councils to force developers to publish viability assessments when developers claim they expect to make less than 20% profit? Would the council be in favour of a similar policy in Oldham?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives, responded that planning legislation did not prescribe that developers could ignore affordable housing provision if they made less than 20% profit of the development cost. A 20% profit was, in officers’ opinion, the top end of profit a developer could expect to be made in Oldham. The Council’s current affordable housing policy stated that 7.5% of total development sales value should go towards the delivery of affordable housing. This policy was likely to be changed in an amended Local Plan to ensure a percentage and types of affordable housing were provided to meet Oldham’s housing need. In the short time available, it was not able to provide information as to how many developments had complied with Oldham’s affordable housing regulations as this meant having to assess every housing application’s total development sales since 2010. However, as had been reported in the Council’s Annual Monitoring Report, since 2008/09, 897 affordable housing units had been delivered, out of 1,836 additional dwellings (2,870 built, 1,034 cleared) which was 48.85%. No affordable housing was provided in the Lancaster Club scheme because of viability issues in the development of the site. However, an overage clause had been included in the S106 agreement which ensured that, at the end of the development, a reconciliation would be carried out, based on actual values, and once the developer had recovered the original land purchase price, any profits over and above 20%, would be paid towards the requirement amount of affordable housing. Some Council’s in ‘hot’ housing market areas had a policy which forced developers to publish viability assessments. The council was considering these as the new Local Plan was being developed whilst also being mindful of the commercial sensitivity issues that such an approach raised.
4. Question asked by Jackie Stanton:
“There are 7 derelict housing sites in Derker, they are never maintained, they are covered in weeds that are over 6 feet tall and all add to the appearance of blight and neglect in the area. Residents understand that FCHO are about to submit a planning application to build 52 family homes on the derelict site on Acre Lane, this is to welcomed. The downside is FCHO have not carried out meaningful consultation with residents in the area, this is not only wrong but a missed opportunity. Would the relevant Cabinet Member, please request or instruct FCHO to carry out a thorough consultation exercise in regard to the application to ensure we get the best possible development.”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that the Council was not in a position to instruct a developer to do consultation. Where appropriate, the Council encouraged full local consultation by applicants on significant development schemes and would, therefore, be happy to request First Choice Homes Oldham consider undertaking further consultation with Derker residents on this particular proposal.
5. Question received from Shaun McGrath via email:
“With regard to the lack of any tenant representative on the board of First Choice Homes Oldham, I would be interested in what board member, Cllr Barbara Brownridge has to say in response to the following:
A former tenant board member has informed me that there was never any indication whatsoever that tenants would ever cease to remain on the board. In fact, from the discussions held during the transfer process, it was a mainstay that tenants, their rights and voice would always be heard and taken into account. Harry Burns, the ex-chair of the board, post and prior to the actual transfer, was explicit in his remarks that tenants would remain at the heart of FCHO and said as such publicly on numerous occasions and at a similar number of consultation events with tenants. I would like a written response to this question.”
Councillor Brownridge responded as follows:
“The stock transfer offer document committed First Choice Homes Oldham (FCHO) to have a main board of 5 tenants, 4 independents and 3 Councillors. This board was put in place in 2011 and remained in place for the 5 years duration of the offer document.
The HCA which regulates housing associations recently introduced more stringent regulations and governance standards following the failure of Cosmopolitan Housing Association. The new standards set out the expectation for the skills and experience of boards to ensure they can manage the associations as thriving businesses.
As a result, FCHO completed an independent review in consultation with existing known tenant groups as well as the Council and other partners. Tenants were advised of the changes and invited to comment and these comments were considered. Tenants were also notified of the changes once they had been implemented. The FCHO Board currently has one customer member in line with the recommendations agreed in the review.
Currently, the Customer Congress made up of selected customers is part of the formal governance structure which reports to the main board. Its Chair attends Board meetings as an observer.
Customers remain at the centre of the business and there is day-to-day customer and community engagement, participation and consultation.”
At this point in the meeting, the Mayor advised that the time limit for this item had expired.
The Mayor reminded Members that the Council had previously agreed that questions would be taken in an order which reflected the political balance of the Council. The following questions were submitted by Councillors on Ward or District Matters:
1. Question received from Councillor Ball:
“Oldham is plagued with empty canisters of nitrous oxide, what are we doing to stop these being used illegally by teenagers?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that officers from Community Safety Services had been working with colleagues from Greater Manchester Police and the Licensing Team who had visited a number of retail premises in the locality of areas where empty nitrous oxide canisters and reminded retailers of their legal responsibilities and secure voluntary engagement in the adoption of a Challenge 25 type approach. The response from retailers who had been found to be selling the canisters had been very positive. This work would be continued across the borough. In addition, Community Safety Services would also seek a specific term within any new Public Spaces Protection Orders being pursued in respect of parks and open spaces. The term would prohibit the possession of such canisters or any other new psychoactive substance within the defined areas. Details of any premises believed to be selling these items to young people in an irresponsible manner were to be reported to Greater Manchester Police on 101.
2. Councillor Fielding asked the following question:
“Due to conservative government cuts to TfGM, Failsworth West has seen some subsidised bus service?s reduced or removed completely, severing vital, regular links to hospitals and other important services for those without private transport.
At the GMCA meeting on Friday 30th June the combined authority voted to proceed with an investigation in how to use the powers afforded to it in the bus services bill to regulate bus services in Greater Manchester. Could I have reassurance from the relevant cabinet member that local ward members and residents will have the opportunity to influence any franchising arrangements if bus service regulation is ultimately pursued so that we can create a network that truly reflects the needs of local communities rather than just the needs of bus company shareholders?”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services, responded that the Bus Services Act 2017 granted the mayoral combined authority new options for the improvement to bus services for passengers and on 30th June, GMCA confirmed its intention to explore these options that included the option to franchise bus services which the new legislation afforded. No decision had yet been made and there was more work to be done on the development of the proposals. Any future changes to the way the bus market in Greater Manchester was managed would be subject to public consultation where passengers, residents, businesses and stakeholders would be asked to share their views on the proposals. When plans were at a stage suitable for consultation, TfGM would be encouraging all members to pass on the news of the consultation to encourage a good level of response which would inform future plans.
3. Councillor Dean asked the following question:
“Could the appropriate Cabinet member respond to an issue causing local residents concern in regard to the aborted development on Stephenson St /Ann Square Waterhead: the site has been left with a major evacuation, which includes drops of over 30 feet, this is a danger to local children as well as leaving an environment mess . This situation has been in place for over a year.”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that this was not a planning issue as there was no breach of planning control. The site had been secured and was not considered a danger to the public unless the site was broken into illegally.
4. Councillor Murphy asked the following question:
“Just behind the former Waggon and Horses pub in High Crompton, Shaw on a Council owned car park is a vehicle taking up a much needed parking space that is neither taxed, insured and MoT tested – this is something that you would have thought easy to solve - a vehicle that shouldn’t be on the road. On the Council website it reads “vehicles which appear to have been abandoned are dealt with by Greater Manchester Police in the first instance”, we have tried that and Police are unable to help and instead have directed Crompton ward members back to the Council who in turn direct members back to the Police. Would the Cabinet member for Environmental Services please provide assistance as we feel we are going round in circles?“
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that abandoned vehicles that were not on the public highway were dealt with by Environmental Health in the first instance. They carried out checks to try and trace the owner and, if needed, served legal notice.
5. Councillor Shuttleworth asked the following question:
“With the closure of the Collective Spirit Free School in Chadderton South may I request an answer to the following:
· have all the Oldham based students now been allocated places at other academies?
· is there any update as to whether or not the land that the government forced us to hand over will be returned to local authority control?”
Councillor Chadderton, Cabinet Member for Education and Early Years responded that a lot of time had been spent on moving a large number of students. Of the 196 students, 165 were from Oldham and 156 had now been allocated a place at other schools. Discussions were ongoing with the remaining students. A lot of work had been undertaken over the summer which included the adaptation of the UTC building. With regard to the land, which rightfully should come back to the Council, discussions were ongoing with the Government on the future of the site. When there was an answer, members would be updated.
6. Councillor Ali asked the following question:
“Residents of Chadderton North are concerned with the inadequate lighting and CCTV at the subway at broadway. The subway intersects at Eustace St leading to the park Gate Estate. There have been reports of anti social behaviour. Please can the relevant cabinet member provide an update on the lighting situation and if anything can be done to install/improve CCTV at the subway. “
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that the subway lighting was being upgraded by Highways England with the subway section completed and commissioned. Lighting on either side of the subway near the ramps and the steps was currently being installed by the Agency. CCTV cameras were located on each ramped access to the subway and the Council was exploring with Highways England available options to further improve the coverage.
7. Councillor Moores asked the following question:
“Foxdenton Park in Chadderton Central Ward is well used by the local community, at a recent meeting with residents the following issues were raised.
1. The level of water in the large pond is very low.
2. The water in the small pond appears to be contaminated.
Could the relevant Cabinet Member please tell us what steps are being taken to rectify the problems with the 2 ponds in the park?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that Environmental Services had noticed that the water levels were low in the main pond which was having a direct impact on the water quality in the lower pond. Officers were scheduled to meet with developers who had taken control of the land adjacent to the park to determine if there were any links to the development that may have caused the problem. Once discussions had taken place a response would be shared with members.
8. Councillor Harkness asked the following question:
“My constituents in Austerlands and Springhead are greatly concerned at the proposal to develop 265 houses at Ashbrook and Thornley Brook valleys with a road potentially going through from Springhead Post Office to Lees New Road. The numbers of properties proposed in the new application has nearly doubled. This will devastate the environment and wildlife, and will mean the loss of a vital greenspace in the area. I would like to ask the Cabinet Member if this is going to be a sign of things to come with the increasing demand for land for housing at all costs overriding any concern for the loss of our precious green belt; just because this Council chooses to remain within the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that as with any application submitted to the Planning Committee it would be considered on normal planning grounds whereby benefits of the application would be set against the provision of a new link road and the potential environmental issues that had been outlined. The Committee would then come to a view on whether the scheme was acceptable. All councils had a legislative duty to meet their assessed housing needs whether in the Greater Manchester Spatial Framework or not. Failure to do so could result in planning by appeal which would be the worst of all worlds. It was possible that unpopular decisions would have to be made to ensure the Council met those needs with appropriate quality of development with mature consultation with residents going forward that would allow the formation of a revised Local Plan.
9. Councillor Garry asked the following question:
“At present, the gates at Failsworth Lower park are open between dawn and dusk. Could it be considered closing the gates earlier to avoid the needless acts of vandalism which are taking place at the moment.”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives responded that parks were open due to local demands and it would be difficult to justify closing a park earlier without provoking a negative reaction. Alternative ways were needed to be found for anti-social behaviour to be addressed. Officers from Environmental Services and Community Safety would work together to address the situation.
10. Councillor Phythian asked the following question:
“Yesterday the Council announced a £2m investment in Royton Town Hall to preserve this wonderful building and update Royton's library service. Would the relevant Cabinet member join me in encouraging Royton residents to give their feedback on the proposals and in welcoming this significant investment in Royton?”
Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that there had been significant public and private investment in Royton over the past few years and the Council was keen to see this continue and the commitment to improve the Town Hall and Library buildings demonstrated this. It was hoped that this would attract further private investment across the wider District Centre. During the next stage of the process, members of the community who used the library and the Town Hall, as well as other building users, would be contacted for their needs to be captured and understand the priorities for a modern library and town hall space. A series of events and sessions would be held over the coming weeks and months. These would be advertised on social media and display boards. All residents were urged to be on the lookout for the consultation sessions and come along to have a say.
11. Councillor M. Bashforth asked the following question:
“We have some excellent parks in Royton South which have always been very well and regularly maintained. We understand that the government cuts are making this level of maintenance difficult now but are very keen to see they continue to be clean, tidy and safe. Can the cabinet member responsible assure us that regular and effective maintenance is taking place and that a schedule of that maintenance is issued to us so we can better deal with residents’ concerns as they arise?”
Councillor Brownridge, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Cooperatives gave assurances that parks would continue to be maintained which were an important part of the borough. With the cuts, how maintenance happened may have to be changed. A greenspace strategy was being developed. Officers would be happy to answer any questions.
12. Councillor Sheldon asked a question related to the water levels in reservoirs. Councillor Sheldon expressed his appreciation to the excellent job done by teams who cleared the debris. There was not much that could be done about the weather but future flooding could be controlled. Dovestone Reservoir was completely full and there were three further reservoirs higher up. The overflow went into the River Tame and nearby brooks. Councillor Sheldon asked if discussions could take place with United Utilities to request that water levels be maintained at less than 100% to reduce the situation where flooding occurs after heavy rain.
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that he was pleased to hear about the hard work by the teams. He would look into the points raised and what action could be taken.
13. Councillor McLaren asked the following question:
“Residents of Foxdenton Lane have raised the issue of large road vehicles accessing the Foxdenton/Broadway Green development from Broadway, rather than using Broadgate. There is already a weight restriction in place on Foxdenton Lane between Broadway and the entrance to the site, could the relevant Cabinet Member ?please advise us what if any additional strategies could be put in place to prevent vehicles accessing the development site via the junction of Broadway and Foxdenton Lane?”
Councillor F. Hussain, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services responded that owing for the need to be able to maintain HGV access to the Foxdenton Lane area for legitimate deliveries, there were no other Traffic Regulations available for the Highway Authority to implement along this road. However, the appropriate HV routes to and from the development site would be made clear to drivers with the introduction of Advanced Direction Signing on both the inbound and outbound routes.
14. Councillor Mushtaq asked the following question:
“We have a large number of residential care homes in
Alexandra Ward. What is happening to ensure that they all reach a
good or outstanding rating?”
Councillor Harrison, Cabinet Member for Social Care and Safeguarding responded that a number of approaches were used to support care homes which improved their quality, although ultimately this was the responsibility of each care home and its legal responsibility as a regulated care provider. However, as a commissioner of services, with a responsibility of market oversight, the Council undertook a range of activities that included:
· Local quality standard ratings which grade providers against a quality assessment framework;
· ‘Levels of harm’ data: care homes return monthly logs of low level concerns that were dealt with by the provider. These were analysed to identify trends or common themes by provider and across the sector to inform monitoring activity
· Quality Monitoring Visits: These were undertaken to ensure that contractual requirements were being met and that the quality of care was to the expected standard. The monitoring visits identified any areas of concern and provided support to the provider to improve their delivery of care and support.
· Care Quality Commission meetings: bi-monthly meetings were undertaken between the Council, NHS Commissioners and the CQC to ensure effective communication between the sector regulators and commissioners.
· Provider Forum: the monthly forums acted as a way of communicating collectively across the care sector and provided and opportunity to share good practice, inform of upcoming developments and opportunities and provided and received feedback on all aspects of care delivery and commissioning.
Work was ongoing with the CCG for the development of a joint approach to the risk assessment quality assurance approach which happening at a Greater Manchester level. It was important to note a lot of work was being done. Improvement in CQC ratings was also a major priority as well as a programme of work developed focused in the improvement of quality in the Oldham care home market.
15. Councillor S. Bashforth asked the following question:
“The new Royton Leisure centre has been a tremendous success and attracts people from all over the Borough. This has been a double edged sword especially at peak times when all available official parking spaces are taken causing frustration to visitors and residents alike. Adjacent the site there are currently pieces of land up for sale. Would the cabinet member responsible be willing to enter into discussion with OCLL with a view to allocating some of this land to help ease the current problems which will only get worse when the old Byron Street school site is developed?”
Councillor Stretton, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Economy and Enterprise responded that parking in support of the Royton Leisure Centre had been a long-standing issue and it was for this reason that, in developing the new Leisure Centre, the Council constructed a dedicated new car park which provided a total of 68 spaces. This had gone a long way to address the situation in the locality, although it was accepted that parking remained an issue, particularly at peak times. As a result, in agreeing to dispose of the former Byron Street School and former Police Station sites, the Council was keen to ensure that these potential much needed housing developments did not exacerbate the situation and it was for this reason that, as part of the marketing particulars advertising the opportunity, the Council had made it clear that any new dwellings would be expected to provide a minimum of two car parking spaces. In addition, there was a further requirement for any housing developer to surface the site of the former McQuillan Boilers on Cardigan Street which would remain in the ownership of the Council and would be left as a potential overspill parking for up to 20 cars if required. Of course, if OCLL had a specific requirement for this space, the Council would be happy to explore the option with them.
At this point in the meeting, the Mayor advised that the time limit for this item had expired.
RESOLVED that the questions and the responses provided by noted.