Members of the public are invited to put questions to the Chair of the Area Committee on any matters within the powers and duties of the Area Committee, subject to the exclusions set out in the Code of Practice (Questions must be submitted prior to the commencement of the meeting on the cards provided. These are available the meeting. You can also submit via the Council’s website at www.stockport.gov.uk/publicquestions.
Minutes:
Members of the public were invited to put questions to the Chair of the Area Committee on any matters within the powers and duties of the Area Committee, subject to the exclusions set out in the Code of Practice.
Six public questions were submitted as follows:-
· The first question related to motorists driving at excessive speed on Montagu Road, Offerton and a request for traffic calming measures on the road.
The Area Committee was advised that enforcement of the 20mph speed limit would be a matter for Greater Manchester Police as a moving traffic offence. In most cases, physical traffic calming on residential streets was usually intended to deter ‘rat running’ between arterial routes. The assumption in this case was that most drivers were local residents and they should be driving carefully under their duty of care. Physical traffic calming measures had to be properly justified.
· The second question enquired whether there was any funding for gully cleaning on Banks Lane, Offerton, particularly since the recent Storm Christoph.
The Area Committee was advised that the gully cleaning policy was being reviewed and the recommendations would be considered by Members at the earliest opportunity.
· The third question enquired whether an Equality Impact assessment had been carried for the new chicane barriers on Bexhill Road, Adswood.
The Area Committee was advised that the proposed works were trying to maintain authorised access to the playing fields whilst seeking to restrict unauthorised access for those persons engaged in anti-social behaviour at this site. It was inevitable that in restricting access for these purposes, that the Bexhill Road entrance to the park would become less accessible for some park users. This was a difficult balance as to maintain this entrance in a manner which would result in a satisfactory Equality Impact Assessment would offer nothing in terms of restricting unauthorised access and reducing the anti-social behaviour at the playing fields that was spoiling the enjoyment of the area for many park users.
· The fourth question related to why the proposals for the Offerton Lane – MCF scheme had changed with the inclusion of a shared use path and a chicane.
The Area Committee was reminded that it had supported Option 2, a toucan crossing with shared paths, and that this had subsequently approved by the Cabinet Member for Economy and Regeneration. The toucan crossing had been progressed with the widths maximised to reduce the risk of conflict between pedestrians and cyclists. Recognising the shared use environment, barriers had been added to the scheme to slow cyclists down when entering the southern footway of Offerton Lane from the development site. This would also deter the use of the path by unauthorised users. The design would be reviewed to accord with guidance issued by Sustrans.
· The fifth question related to the future of the old Adswood Hotel site in Adswood Lane West, Cale Green and the planning permission obtained by Millennium Care for the construction of a care home.
The Area Committee was advised that since the meeting of the Area Committee in December 2020, as promised, Planning Enforcement Officers had contacted the landowner to try to ascertain his intentions regarding the implementation of the planning permission secured for the development of a new 60 bed care home on the site (ref: DC/066750), noting that the planning permission was currently due to expire on 1 May 2021.
The landowner had stated he had been busy dealing with the impact of the pandemic in his other care homes, including the rollout of vaccinations. He was aware that the planning permission was currently due to expire in May and hoped to be able to start work before then. In the meantime, he had stated that the site was regularly visited to check it was tidy and local residents contacted him if problems arose.
Planning Enforcement Officers had regularly visited the site to establish whether its appearance was having a significant adverse effect on the amenity of the area. They had concluded that it was not and serving a Section 215 notice requiring aesthetic improvements was not currently necessary.
· The sixth public question related to the proposal to install a chicane at Bexhill Road because of the behaviour of motorcyclists impacting on the use of greenspace by others.
The Area Committee was advised that the proposed works followed on from a sustained period of anti-social behaviour in this area, including the use of off road motorbikes at the location. The proposal was trying to maintain authorised access to the playing fields whilst seeking to restrict unauthorised access for those persons engaged in anti-social behaviour at the site. This was a difficult balance as it was inevitable that in restricting access for these purposes, that the Bexhill Road entrance to the park would become less accessible for some park users.
RESOLVED – That written responses be sent to the questioners.