Agenda and minutes

1.1

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Julie Grocutt and Janet Ridler.

2.1

No items were identified where resolutions may be moved to exclude the public and press.

3.1

There were no declarations of interest.

4.1

The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 5 October, 2022 were approved as a correct record.

5.1

Tim Myatt, Head of Corporate Affairs at Yorkshire Water, reported on the recent gas incident in Stannington. Also present for this item were Nathan Sunderland (Manager of Asset Planning and Network Engineering) and Vicky Scroggins (Customer Liaison Advisor) who had been leading on communication with residents regarding ongoing works on Bankfield Lane.

5.2

My Myatt offered an apology on behalf of Yorkshire Water to all those who suffered inconvenience or distress due to the gas incident in Stannington. He added that Yorkshire Water deeply regretted the impact on residents, particularly those who lost heating during a very cold weather period. He added that Yorkshire Water was proud of its identity and, with the vast majority of staff living and working in Yorkshire, team members understood the importance of quickly resolving the issues in Stannington and Hillsborough.

5.3

Mr Myatt outlined the incident, which began late on the evening of December when treated water began to escape from a significant water supply main on Bankfield Lane, which is a significant water supply main. This was repaired quickly, and there were no issues remaining within the Yorkshire Water network. He noted that the presence, scale and impact of water in the gas network then became clear and full support from Yorkshire Water teams was offered to Cadent. Throughout the incident the Bronze and Silver level incident management teams coordinated support to Cadent. Support was coordinated through the Tactical Coordination Group and the Strategic Coordination Group, aiming to assist Cadent and other partners, including Sheffield City Council.

5.4

He noted that there had been a variety of communication methods to keep residents up-to-date and notify them on how they could access support. This included targeted text messages, the Yorkshire Water website, door-to-door visits, letter drops, press releases and media appearances.

5.5

Mr Myatt explained that as the inter-agency response to the incident began to have effect, a Yorkshire Water payment scheme was put into place for residents to help offset additional costs and expenses residents may have incurred. This was separate to payments that Cadent were making for loss of gas supply. He asked for any residents that had any queries regarding the payment scheme or claims to share their details with Yorkshire Water staff present at the meeting.

5.6

Yorkshire Water understood that residents wanted to know how this incident had occurred, and Mr Myatt advised that this was now the subject of an investigation by Burgoynes, an independent forensic expert appointed by Yorkshire Water.

5.7

Mr Holmes confirmed that on 9 January, 2023,  Yorkshire Water began work to replace and relocate the section of main which was damaged away from the gas mains. This work was being carried out in accordance with best practice and aimed to reduce the chance of similar incident. The work was expected to continue until around 10 February, 2023. Vicky Scroggins had been informing residents of this work, including door to door letter drops.

5.8

Taking a wider view of network resilience in Stannington, Yorkshire  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.1

The Committee received the following questions from a member of the public who had submitted the questions prior to the meeting, and who attended the meeting to raise them:-

(a)  Jenny van Tinteren, OBE, Co-Chair of Stannington Pavilion Renewal Committee (SPARC)

SPARC is a consortium of local groups set up in March 2022 to save Stannington Park Pavilion, with a view to raising funds to replace it with a new purpose-built band rehearsal room and community space.

SPARC submitted an Expression of Interest to the Council on 14 June 2022, copy attached. We received an acknowledgement, followed by 2 emails from Jo Pearce 30 June and 14 September, saying that no response could be provided due to capacity issues and many other higher priority projects across the city.

It is now 4 months later, and we still have no proper reply nor any indication of when someone might be willing to even start talking to us. This is unacceptable, especially when our EOI was specifically directed at relieving the Council a burden of costs through a transfer of the building to the community.

Question 1: Would the Council please agree to meet us soon to discuss the Expression of Interest and agree a way forward?

Question 2: What proposals does the Council have for consulting with the community in Stannington about the future of the pavilion?

Question 3: What proposals does the Council have to meet the need for more community space to house Stannington Brass Band, the after-school club, park sports activities etc?

Question 4 – What are the timescales for the review of community buildings authorised at the meeting of the Finance Sub-Committee on 7 November 2022 agenda item 6?

Question 5: How does the Council propose to involve local communities and consult publicly on that review?

Jenny also asked the following question on behalf of Action for Stannington:-

Question 1: Action for Stannington has offered repeatedly to partner with the council and raise money for a repair project, to safeguard Stannington Park Pavilion in the short term. The last time we did this was in 2012 and it is now needed again. Who is currently responsible for agreeing such projects and when will they talk to Action for Stannington please?

In response, Councillor Williams confirmed that he had met with Ajman Ali, Executive Director of Operational Services. He shared Jenny’s frustrations with the situation and advised that he would share the questions raised with Mr Ali.

Councillor Baker noted her thanks to the members of SPARC for showing an interest and for working to maintain the pavilion.

The Chair advised that the Council was currently carrying out a review of community buildings and the results of this would help to identify those in need of repair or disposal.

The Committee received the following question from Pete Hurrell who was not in attendance at the meeting and had submitted a question prior to the meeting, which the Chair read out:

(b)  Pete  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

7.1

The Chair provided an update on a public question regarding the issue around funding for bus services in the north of Sheffield that was raised at the North Local Area Committee on 7 July, 2022.

7.2

The issue was initially referred to the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee, however as the responsibility for public transport sits with South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (SYMCA), the issue was subsequently referred to the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority for a response.

7.3

The Chair referred to the response from SYMCA, that had also been included within the agenda pack.

7.4

David Luck, North Local Area Committee Manager, advised that Stannington councillors had been contacted by residents requesting a reduction of the speed limit on Rails Road. Residents believed it raised wider questions about policy and approaches to speed on rural roads.

7.5

Mr Luck also advised that East Ecclesfield councillors had been contacted by residents of Smith Street, Chapeltown, requesting a residents parking scheme. A survey had shown a very high level of support however Members had been advised no residents schemes were possible outside of the city centre.

7.6

Councillor Gamble Pugh noted that he was a member of the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee, and he hoped to raise these issues at their next meeting, due to take place the next day.

7.7

RESOLVED: That the Committee:

(a)  agrees that the issue around policy on speed on rural roads be referred to the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee; and

(b)  agrees that the issue around policy on residents parking schemes outside of the city centre be referred to the Transport, Regeneration and Climate Policy Committee.

8.1

Councillor Priestley provided an update from Bradfield Parish Council, who provided support to groups and organisations within the parish. This support, together with LAC funding, included the provision of a new football pitch at Wadsley Park Village. Councillor Priestley advised that the Parish Council continued to supply parks with new equipment. The Parish Council also had some CIL funding and was continually looking for organisations and projects that would benefit from CIL money. Councillor Priestley asked for anyone who knew of any such organisations to contact Bradfield Parish Council.

8.2

Tim Whitaker provided an update from Ecclesfield Parish Council. He advised that a coffee morning had been held in support of Ukrainian refugees. He noted that there had been no increase on pre-set spending limit. He also advised that tree planting had taken place in Chapeltown Park for the Queen’ Platinum Jubilee and that the Parish Community Hall had been refurbished and was due to open on 30 January, 2023. Mr Whitaker confirmed that over £10,000 in grants had been given by the Parish Council over the last quarter. This had included support for Ecclesfield Priory Players, Scouts, Sheffield Rainbows, Thorncliffe Football Club, and Friends of Grenoside Green.

9.1

David Luck provided an update on the North Local Area Committee budget. He advised that the Leader made a decision on 17 August, 2021 to allocate a budget of £100,000 to each Local Area Committee and the Leader’s Scheme of Delegation of Executive Functions has been amended to give Local Area Committees the power to approve expenditure from the budgets allocated to them.

9.2

The report presented highlighted current spend and also requested approval to provide replacement swings at The Rookery, Deepcar and Cross Lane Stocksbridge at a cost of £11,000. This would upgrade equipment that was coming to the end of its useful life and was based on conversations with the Parks and Countryside Department about sites in need of investment.

9.3

This proposal was recommended to address local priorities of developing a clean and attractive environment and vibrant community life.

9.4

The Chair thanked Mr Luck for the progress made on spending so far.

9.4

RESOLVED: That the North Local Area Committee:-

(i)    note the expenditure against the £100,000 budget to address local priorities in the North LAC in 2022/3, as detailed in the report, be noted.

(ii)   approve £11,000 further expenditure for replacement swings at The Rookery, Deepcar and Cross Lane, Stocksbridge.

9.5

Reasons for Decision

The North Local Area Committee was asked to note the use of funding as per the previous decision of 30 September, 2021, and agree further expenditure to address the identified local priorities.

9.6

Alternatives Considered and Rejected

None. This was in line with the previous decision of 30 September, 2021, regarding expenditure below £5,000 and the North Community Plan agreed on 9 March, 2022.

10.1

The Committee received a presentation from Richard Holmes, Principal Planning Officer, on the Draft Sheffield Plan.

10.2

Mr Holmes outlined the aims and objectives of the Plan and how the plan affected North Sheffield. He explained that this was the statutory Local Plan for the City and that all local authorities were required to produce one. The Plan set out a vision and framework for the future development of the city, and would guide decisions on planning applications.

10.3

Mr Holmes explained that the Draft Sheffield Plan covered the whole city except for the part of the city that fell within the Peak District National Park boundary, and covered the period up to 2039 but would be reviewed at least every five years. The plan would replace the Sheffield Core Strategy (2009) and the Unitary Development Plan (1998). For the North of Sheffield the plan was divided into two Sub-Areas:-Stocksbridge/Deepcar and Chapeltown/High Green Sub-Area.

10.4

In terms of the timeline, Mr Holmes advised that the public consultation period ran from 9 January, 2023 to 20 February, 2023. Details were available on the Council’s website: Emerging Draft Sheffield Plan | Sheffield City Council, and a paper copy was also available to view at Howden House. He advised that after public consultation, the Council may propose amendments to the Plan and that the proposed amendments would be submitted to the Government and considered by an independent planning inspector.

10.5

The Chair thanked Mr Holmes and his team for attending, and invited questions from those present.

David Holmes, Friends of Loxley Valley

We met last week and discussed preliminary views on the Draft Sheffield Plan. We are broadly supportive of the plan and welcome the protection of the green belt. However, the process is complicated and long and potential developers might be less supportive and have very different views to ours. If others argue strongly against the protection of certain sites, at what point in the process can we counter those objections?

In response, Richard Holmes advised that all comments would be processed by the Council and grouped into particular topics/areas before being submitted to the independent planning inspector who would then decide how the examination was run. Those submitting comments would be asked if they would like to appear at the examination and would then be invited to those sessions along with the developer.

10.6

Councillor Levery noted that a public consultation was held two years ago, and over 80% of those who participated believed that no development should take place on land designated as green belt. Members backed this and it was later agreed that green belt boundaries would be maintained whilst still achieving housing criteria.

10.7

Councillor Baker added that the Peak District had its own planning authority. She explained that over one third of the land mass in Stannington fell within the Peak District boundary and as such Sheffield City Council had no authority over planning matters in this area.

10.8

The Chair advised that representatives from South  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.