To receive any questions from and provide answers to the public in relation to matters relevant to the Council’s activities.
Minutes:
Members of the public were invited to put questions to the Mayor and Councillors on any matters within the powers and duties of the Council.
Four public questions were submitted as follows:-
· Relating to the cost associated with the consultation, marketing and branding strategy for the Redrock development and the negative impression caused to visitors to the town centre by prominent graffiti adjacent to the town centre on the M60.
The Leader of the Council (Policy, Reform & Finance) (Councillor Sue Derbyshire) responded that the Council was working closely with the Highways Agency which was responsible for the condition of the wall which had been subject of graffiti. It was commented that it was difficult for contractors to safely access the wall to remove graffiti and that discussions were taking place to put in place a permanent solution to discourage future incidents.
· Relating to the recent closure of the Little Underbank Tea Room which had been attributed by the owner in part to “decline in little underbank area compounded by a lack of support from local authorities to invest in and promote the area” and what plans were in place to invest, improve and promote the town centre as a whole.
The Leader of the Council (Policy, Reform & Finance) (Councillor Sue Derbyshire) responded that the Council has invested heavily in the historic areas of the town centre, including in the market hall. It was further stated that it had since been announced that the business would be reopening under new management and that there had been further similar businesses opening in the historic areas of the town centre. Councillor Derbyshire reported that the Council had also given approval to a £7m package to regenerate and support the Market Place, the Underbanks and Lower Hillgate.
· Relating to Stockport’s economic vision and in particular the importance of Stockport’s districts and what, beyond the wider rollout of superfast broadband, was the Council’s strategy for the economic development of Stockport’s District Centres.
The Leader of the Council (Policy, Reform & Finance) (Councillor Sue Derbyshire) responded that both she and the Executive Councillor for Economic Development & Regeneration were very familiar with Stockport’s District Centres. Significant sums of money had been invested in transportation infrastructure in the district centres since 2003 to raise the standard of physical environment and to improve vehicular, cycling and pedestrian movements into and through the centres. It was stated that the Council did have a clear strategy for the District Centres, which consistently performed strongly with some of the lowest vacancy rates in Greater Manchester. The Council was working to support the development of a Neighbourhood Plan in Marple, however, the nature of such plans was such that they were intended to be led by the community rather than by the Council.
· Relating to traffic problems on Mill Lane, Woodley associated with the Stockport Sports Village development.
Councillor Christine Corris responded that the Sports Centre had been a victim of its own success and that the Council had been in negotiations with the owners of the centre to seek match funding to facilitate improvements to the junction of Mill Lane and Hyde Road to improve traffic movements. The Council’s enforcement team were investigating the implementation of the planning permission granted by the Council to ensure that the development as built was compliant with the permission. Councillor Corris further stated that she had requested that a report be submitted to the next meeting of the Werneth Area Committee outlining the investigation that had been undertaken on behalf of the Council into the traffic problems on Mill Lane.
Councillor Chris Gordon confirmed that he agreed with the response that had been provided by Councillor Corris, and further that the report into traffic problems on Mill Lane had been commissioned following complaints made to local ward councillors rather than following the submission of a petition.
A further public question had been submitted where the questioner was not present at the meeting and in accordance with the Code of Practice, the Chief Executive was requested to respond to the questioner in writing.