Search decisions

The Committee considered a report regarding objections received to proposed waiting restrictions at Sandy Lane, Dobcross. A report recommending the introduction of prohibition of waiting restrictions on Sandy Lane, Dobcross, was approved under delegated powers on 22 December 2023. The proposal was subsequently advertised, and thirteen objections were received along with one supporting letter.

Highway Regulation Committee on 18 July 2024 considered the objections and resolved that consideration be deferred to this meeting and asked officers to meet with Ward Members with a view to relaxing the length of the proposed

restrictions. A site meeting had now taken place and a revised proposal plan had been drafted which was supported by Ward Members. The amended proposal maintained the majority of on-street spaces whilst also protecting the two main pinch points where the main obstruction takes place over narrow sections of carriageway. The amended plan was attached at Appendix 2 to the report.

Options considered:

Option 1: Introduce the proposed restrictions as advertised

Option 2. Relax the proposal

Option 3. Do not introduce the proposed restrictions

RESOLVED:

That the objections be dismissed and the relaxed proposal be introduced  as shown on the amended plan at Appendix 2 to the report namely The reduction in the proposed length of restrictions to the Northwest side of Sandy Lane.

NOTE: An objector addressed the Panel on the application.

The Committee considered a report regarding the objections received to the proposed waiting restrictions at Under Lane and Old Kiln Lane, Grotton. A report recommending the introduction of prohibition of waiting restrictions on Under Lane and Old Kiln Lane, Grotton, was approved under delegated powers on 22 December 2023. The proposal was subsequently advertised, and 20 objections and 12 supporting letters were received and attached as  Appendix B and C to the report. The report summarised the main points made together with the Council’s comments.

Ward councillors had been consulted and no objections received. One ward councillor had expressed support for the proposed Order.

Options Considered:

Option 1. Introduce the proposed restrictions as advertised.

Option 2. Relax the proposal to maintain some on-street parking options for residents.

Option 3. To not introduce the proposed restrictions.

The recommended option was Option 1 – to introduce the restrictions as advertised, as this option best addressed the safety concerns raised about visibility and road safety at the junctions.

RESOLVED:

That the objection be dismissed and the proposal be introduced as advertised in accordance with the schedule and plan in the original report.

NOTE: An objector, a supporter, and a Ward Councillor addressed the Panel on the application.

It was reported that the Council has received an application from Langtree Property Partners, Warrington, via their agent, Spawforths, Wakefield, to divert Footpath 20 Failsworth under S257 Town and Country Planning Act 1990, to facilitate the proposed development of a food retail unit at Hollinwood Junction, Albert Street, Failsworth. The diversion was considered necessary in order to implement the planning permission

Ward councillors and footpath societies had been consulted and no objections had been received.

Options Considered

Option 1: To approve the recommendation.

Option 2: Not to approve the recommendation

Resolved

That the application for a Public Path Diversion & Definitive Map and Statement Modification Order for the diversion of Footpath 20 Failsworth, under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and Section 53A of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, be approved as detailed in the report and the Director of Environment and the Director of Legal be authorised to carry out the necessary procedures with a view to confirming the Order in the event that no objections are made to the Order.

The Highways Regulation Committee considered a report that the Council has received an application from Lancet Homes, Sale, via their agent, Mode Transport Planning, Manchester, to divert part of Definitive Footpath 28 Chadderton to facilitate the proposed residential development of 10 dwellings on land off Westhulme Way, Coldhurst.  The diversion was considered necessary in order to implement the planning permission.

Ward councillors and footpath societies had been consulted and no objections had been received.

Options considered:

Option 1: To approve the recommendation.

Option 2: Not to approve the recommendation.

RESOLVED

That the application be approved and the Council make a Public Path Diversion & Definitive Map and Statement Modification Order for the diversion of Footpath 28 Chadderton under Section 257 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, and Section 53A of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as detailed in the report and the Director of Environment and the Director of Legal be authorised to carry out the necessary procedures with a view to confirming the Order in the event that no objections are made to the Order.

Highways Regulation Committee was asked to determine an application submitted under Schedule 14 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (the 1981 Act), requesting that a Modification Order be made in respect of routes running across land at the middle of Arncliffe Rise, Moorside (the Application Routes), which were shown on the plan, 764/A4/248/1, attached to the report.

It was reported that the application met the required legal test of 20 years use of the whole of the Application Routes ‘as of right’.

Options considered:

Option 1: To approve the application and add the Application Routes to the Definitive Map and Statement as footpaths.

Option 2: Not to approve the application

RESOLVED:

1.The application for a Modification Order in respect of the routes at Arncliffe Rise, Moorside to be recorded in the Definitive Map and Statement as footpaths as detailed in Schedule 1 be approved and the Director of Environment be authorised to carry out the necessary procedures with a view to confirming the Order in the event that no objections are made to the Order.

2.. The Applicant and the owner/occupier of the land subject to the application be notified of the Council’s decision as required by Schedule 14 of the 1981 Act.

The Highways Committee considered a  report on an objection received to the proposed extension of the existing Prohibition of Waiting restrictions on Hampton Road, Failsworth. A report recommending the extension of existing Prohibition of Waiting restriction on Hampton Road, Failsworth, was approved under delegated powers on 5 February 2024. The proposal was subsequently advertised, and one objection was received.

A copy of the approved report was attached in Appendix A and a copy of the objection was attached in Appendix B. In summary, the objector stated that the proposed extension of waiting restrictions would displace parking further north on Hampton Road.. The objector was concerned that a reduction of parking space was likely to cause more parking related issues for local residents.

Options Considered:

Option 1: Install Prohibition of Waiting restriction as advertised i.e. extend the existing restrictions both sides of Hampton Road. This proposal would meet the Highway Code requirement.

Option 2: Install a reduced Prohibition of Waiting restriction (extend restrictions by 4 meters on western side of Hampton Road). This proposal was aimed at improving safety issues identified with reduced displacement of parking spaces compared to Option 1.

Option 3: Do nothing

A revised schedule and plan to support the Option 2 recommendation was provided within Appendix C to the report.

It was reported that whilst Officers believed the original recommendation provided more benefits with regards to safety, Option 2 leads to an improvement and provides a balance which acknowledges the concern of the objector.

RESOLVED

That Option 2 be approved and the revised schedule and plan shown in Appendix C to the report be implemented..

NOTE: An objector addressed the Panel on the application.

The Highways Regulation Committee considered a report  on an objection received to the proposed introduction of traffic calming measures on Pretoria Road, Hollinwood. A report recommending the introduction of traffic calming measures on Pretoria Road, Hollinwood, was approved under delegated powers on 12 March 2024. The proposal was subsequently advertised, and one objection was received. A copy of the approved report was attached at Appendix A and a copy of the objection was attached at Appendix B. In summary, the objector stated that he will be unable to park his vehicles outside his property if the speed cushions were installed at the proposed location.

Officers did not accept this objection as there were no proposals to introduce a parking restriction as part of this traffic calming scheme. The objector may park on the speed cushion if required.

Options considered:

Option 1- Install traffic calming as advertised.

Option 2.- Do nothing.

RESOLVED

That the proposal be introduced as advertised.

The Panel Considered a report recommending the introduction of prohibition of waiting restrictions on Sandy Lane, Dobcross, which had been approved under delegated powers on 22 December 2023. The proposal was subsequently advertised and thirteen objections and one supporting letter were received. Three out of the thirteen objections were from members of the public not local to the area, who supported the comments of one of the objectors.

The objections were that there was a limited amount of on-street parking in the area and the proposed restrictions would result in some residents and customers and staff of the pub having no convenient place to park.

Officers recognised that the proposed restrictions would reduce the number of on-street parking options in Dobcross. However, the length of the proposed restrictions was the minimum necessary to address the access issues identified.

The Panel discussed the use of farm vehicles using the lane, and how bus services are unable to operate and the need to relax the proposals.

Options considered:

Option 1: Introduce the proposed restrictions as advertised.

Option 2. Relax the proposal.

Option 3. Do not introduce the proposed restrictions.

RESOLVED: That officers report to a future meeting of the Panel on the possibility of relaxing the proposals.

NOTE: An objector and a Parish Councillor addressed the Panel on the application

The Panel considered a report which recommended the introduction of prohibition of waiting restrictions on Alder Road, Hibbert Crescent and Clough Road, Failsworth, which had been approved under delegated powers on 22 December 2023. The proposal was subsequently advertised, and three letters of objection have been received.

The Panel were informed that objections received had stated there was limited amount of on-street parking in the area and the proposed restrictions would result in some residents having to park a distance away from their properties. The objections related to the east side of Alder Road and the south side of Clough Road where there were a number of flats. Some residents were elderly with mobility problems so the restrictions would affect them, including visiting carers.

It was noted by Officers that the proposed restrictions would reduce the number of on-street parking options for residents of the flats and the reduction to the length of the restrictions on the east side of Alder Road and on the south side of Clough Road which would maintain an estimated 4 spaces was proposed.

In response to questions asked by the Panel it was confirmed that layby outside the shops would not be affected by any recommendations, and parking would still be present.

Options Considered:

Option 1: Introduce the proposed restrictions as advertised.

Option 2. Introduce the amended proposal as shown on the plan in Appendix C of the report.

Option 3. Do not introduce the proposed restrictions.

RESOLVED: that the amended proposals as shown on the plan in Appendix C to the report be introduced.

The Panel Considered a report recommending the introduction of prohibition of waiting restrictions on Coverhill Road and Chimes Court, Grotton.  The proposal was approved under delegated powers on 22 December 2023 and subsequently advertised and four objections were received.

The Panel were informed that there had been objections relating to the issue of displacement in parking on Coverhill Road, which would have an effect on parking on to Chimes Court, or further south on Coverhill Road, with the possibility of causing problems for residents in these areas.

Officers noted that there may be displacement. However, the length of the proposed restrictions was the minimum considered necessary to address the safety issues identified and to protect other parts of Coverhill Road that may be affected by any displacement from the main area of concern.

Options considered:

Option 1: Introduce the proposed restrictions as advertised.

Option 2. Do not introduce the proposed restrictions.

RESOLVED: That the proposed restrictions as originally advertised be introduced.

Panel Members considered an application from Network Rail for the extinguishment of part of Footpath 209 Saddleworth as a result of the Transpennine Route (TRU) Upgrade Project at Moorgate Halt, Uppermill.

The Panel were informed that the TRU Upgrade Project will electrify and re-signal the railway at Moorgate Halt, Uppermill , where there is currently an unprotected ‘passive’ crossing.

The crossing receives an exceedingly high volume of usage. The most recent 9-day census recorded 434 movements over the crossing in 11 days, and a high proportion of this use was by vulnerable users.

The Panel discussed the safety concerns of removing a level crossing and the historical local importance of an estimated 175-year-old level crossing.

The Panel discussed the need for Network Rail to have an alternative in place to compensate for the loss of a level crossing.

Options Considered:

Option 1: To approve the application to make a Rail Crossing Extinguishment andDefinitive Map and Statement Modification Order in respect of Footpath 209 Saddleworth at Moorgate Halt, Uppermill as requested by Network Rail.

Option 2: Not to approve the application.

RESOLVED: That the application to make a Rail Crossing Extinguishment and Definitive Map and Statement Modification Order in respect of Footpath 209 Saddleworth at Moorgate Halt, Uppermill be refused. 

NOTE: A representative of Network Rail, an objector and a Parish Councillor addressed the Panel on the application and the Chair requested that his abstention on the vote be recorded.

The Panel considered a report considering objections and matters relating to three gating schemes following a consultation exercise to renew and/or reintroduce a number of Public Spaces Protection Orders across the Borough.

In relation to proposed Scheme 12/20 relating to Hampton Road and Roman Road Failsworth it was noted by the Panel that during the statutory consultation exercise there was an objection received that related to a resident having accessibility issues due to the disability of a family member who lives in one of the properties.  Subsequently after a further consultation, there had been objections from a second resident from a different household who had experienced difficulties with the gate due to a disability.  The report proposed that the gates currently in place be removed but further objections from residents to their proposed removal had been received.

It was reported that with amendments to the wording of the proposed Public Spaces Protection Order it would be possible to retain the gates in place.

Members of the Panel were informed that the gates had been operated by the Council’s First Response Team, who ensured the gates in the morning and locked them in the evening.  However, this arrangement could not continue in future.

In response to the Panel’s questions over who would be given access to the gate, it was confirmed that residents of the four properties would all receive a key.

In relation to proposed Scheme 51/20 relating to Retford Street and Waterloo Street, Oldham, objections had been received from local residents.  In response to the objections a discussion took place amongst Panel Members and Officers on which gates were required to secure the school premises at the location and also maintain rights of access for local businesses.  It was reported that if no decision was made on the proposal, the existing gates would have to be removed.

In relation to proposed Scheme 75/20 relating to 1-27 Lynton Avenue, 706-710 Hollins Road and 171-207 Chapel Road, Oldham Panel Members were informed that the property at 710 Hollins Road was now divided into two premises, with 710B Hollins Road having a single access and egress point situated within the gated area.  Under section 64(5) of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, a public spaces protection order was not permitted to restrict the public right of way over a highway that was the only or principal means of access to a dwelling.  Therefore the proposed Scheme would have to exclude several properties to comply with the Act.

RESOLVED: That:

1.    In relation to Scheme 12/20, a Public Spaces Protection Order be made as originally proposed with the following amendments: in Article 3 no person shall be entitled to use the public right of way, in Article 4 the gates shall be kept locked between 8 pm and 7.30 am, in Article 5 any person using the gates between 8 pm and 7.30 am shall ensure that the gates are closed and locked immediately after they are used and Article 14 shall not refer to breach of Article 3 being an offence.

2.    Scheme 75/20 be included in the proposed South District Public Spaces Protection Order with the relocation of the gate from position A adjacent to 710 Hollins Road to position B at the rear of 203-205 Chapel Road, thereby excluding 710/710B Hollins Road and 205, 207 and 207A Chapel Road from the scheme.

3.    5 District Public Spaces Protection Orders be made for all the remaining schemes which received no objections.

NOTE: In relation to Scheme 51/20 and objector addressed the Panel and no decision was made in respect of the proposal.

Purpose of the Report

a.    Government announced the High Street Accelerator Programme in September 2023 and invited Oldham Council to submit an expression of interest in participating due to the high level of vacant premises in the town centre.

b.    The Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities confirmed ten towns to participate in a High Street Accelerator pilot. Our High Street Nomination Form was completed for Union Street and Yorkshire Street as the pilot high streets for this funding based on existing data, notably.

c.    In 2019, Oldham town centre was identified as one of the top 20 town centres in the country most ‘at risk’ from key consumer trends (Oldham Economic Review).  Geographically, Oldham struggles with leakage of jobs, visitors and spending to central Manchester and surrounding towns, and employment has fallen consistently in recent years, leading to vacant retail and eatery units; according to CACI Retail Footprint Data, the flows to Oldham town centre have retracted significantly and the spend profile for Oldham reduced from £170m in 2010 to £156m in 2017.

Reasons for the Recommendations

The purpose of this report is to seek approval to accept Oldham’s pilot grant allocation of £500,000 from the Green Spaces Fund held by Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC), and to approve the programme of spend for the various projects it will fund. 

Options/Alternatives Considered:

·         Option 1: accept the Green Spaces Fund grant of £500,000 from DLUHC, progress the proposed projects detailed in this report and expend the grant monies as detailed in the funding breakdown.

·         Option 2: do not accept the Green Spaces Fund grant of £500,000 from DLUHC and do not progress the proposed projects detailed in this report.

The preferred option was option 1.

Decision

1.    To accept an external Green Spaces Fund grant and to expend the funding on progressing the proposed High Street Accelerator programme projects.

2.    To delegate authority to the Section 151 Officer to finalise and formalise a Memorandum of Understanding with DLUHC with regard to the Green Spaces Fund grant funding arrangements and any other documentation required by DLUHC.

3.    To delegate authority to the Borough Solicitor to carry out all necessary legal formalities.