Agenda and minutes

Neighbourhood Committee (S1) - Fletton, Stanground and Woodston Neighbourhood Committee - Wednesday 17th October, 2012 7.45 pm

Venue: Assembly Hall - Heritage Park Primary School. View directions

Contact: Louise Tyers Tel: 01733 452284 Email: louise.tyers@peterborough.gov.uk 

Note: This Neighbourhood Committee will be preceded by a Ward Forum at 6-6.30pm and a Neighbourhood Panel from 6.30-7.30pm 

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies for Absence

To receive any apologies from members unable to attend the meeting

Minutes:

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Lee.

2.

Declarations of Interest and Whipping Declarations

At this point Members must declare whether they have a disclosable pecuniary interest, or other interest, in any of the items on the agenda, unless it is already entered in the register of members’ interests or is a “pending notification” that has been disclosed to the Solicitor to the Council.

Members must also declare if they are subject to their party group whip in relation to any items under consideration.

Minutes:

None

3.

Minutes from the previous meeting pdf icon PDF 82 KB

To agree the minutes of the last meeting and matters arising (including update from Neighbourhood Manager)

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held 5 July 2012 were agreed as a true and accurate record, subject to the following:

 

  • Adding Councillor Walsh to the list of those present;
  • Removing Councillor Serluca’s name from Stanground Central

 

Updates on items were circulated by the Neighbourhood Manager at the meeting and were also shown on a rolling presentation at the meeting.

 

Democratic Services to review the invitations list to ensure it is up to date.

4.

Youth Forum

Update on youth activities in the area

Minutes:

The Committee received a presentation from Harriet, Tyler and Kiran from the South Forum, a group of young people from Stanground, Fletton and Woodston.

 

The following key points were highlighted:

 

  • The Forum’s last project was going door to door with surveys to gain local opinion on a section of funding that had been allocated to Park Farm.  They also had spoken to young people from the Stanground Academy.
  • Once the information had been gathered the Forum chose relevant park equipment which had now been installed in Park Farm.
  • Positive feedback from the project had been received, including a teacher from Heritage Park Primary School saying it was good to see so many children playing on the new park equipment.
  • The Forum felt that the equipment had been very beneficial to members of Park Farm and hope that the equipment would be maintained for future generations.
  • The Forum hoped to be involved in another project in the near future that would also benefit young people in the same way.

 

Comments and responses to questions included:

 

  • Councillor Walsh commended the Forum on undertaking a very successful job.
  • Lisa Emmanuel advised that a similar project would be happening in Oakdale and asked the Forum if they would like to get involved in the project.

5.

Matters For Committee Decision pdf icon PDF 67 KB

Neighbourhood Committee Budget 2012/13

Proposals and agreement for the allocation of the capital budget of £25,000

Minutes:

Neighbourhood Committee Budget 2012/13

 

The Neighbourhood Committee considered a report on the proposals for allocating the committee’s capital budget of £25,000 for 2012/13.

 

The Neighbourhood Committee were asked to consider and approve the following:

 

1.      The proposals for allocation of the capital budget of £25,000 for 2012/13;

2.      The proposals which would receive an allocation of the budget;

3.       A reduction in the individual allocations should the approved proposals exceed the £25,000 budget, to be determined by the Neighbourhood Manager; and

4.      The Neighbourhood Manager would be responsible for determining the final detail of the project in consultation with Ward Councillors and other relevant parties.

 

The following project had been proposed by Members for approval:

 

·        Stanground Central – Coneygree Road Vergeway Improvements – estimated £25,000

 

Comments and responses to questions were as follows:

 

·        Councillor Rush explained that part of the vergeway in Coneygree Road had already been improved and the proposal was to make improvements from the junction with Southfields Drive to near 168 Coneygree Road.  The project would be looking at parking and trying to stop speeding traffic.  It would improve the area greatly.

·        Councillor Serluca sought confirmation that all of the Committee’s budget allocation was being spent in Stanground Central.  Lisa Emmanuel confirmed that it was as no other proposals had been put forward.  The request had been made during the last three months and a draft had been circulated to all members of the committee for comment.

·        Luke Pagliaro asked what would happen to the £25,000 if a decision was made not to spend it on the Coneygree Road project.  Lisa Emmanuel confirmed that a review of the process would be needed which would lead to a delay of around three months.

·        Councillor Walsh asked for clarification as to whether the process used to allocate the funding had been undertaken correctly.  The proposed allocation had stood unopposed for three months and other areas had already had money spent in them, including a major regeneration project at Fellowes Gardens.  Lisa Emmanuel confirmed that when developing the proposal she had taken into account where other monies were being spent in the area, e.g. Park Farm Play Area, Fellowes Gardens regeneration.  The Coneygree Road project was also a priority within the Highways Team.

 

Following a discussion in groups, the Committee agreed, by a majority (4 for and 2 against):

 

1.      the proposals for allocation of the capital budget of £25,000 for 2012/13;

2.      the proposal which would receive an allocation of the budget would be:

 

·               Stanground Central – Coneygree Road Vergeway Improvements – estimated £25,000

 

3.      to a reduction in the individual allocations should the approved proposals exceed the £25,000 budget, to be determined by the Neighbourhood Manager; and

4.      that the Neighbourhood Manager would be responsible for determining the final detail of the project in consultation with ward councillors and other relevant parties.

 

Reasons for the decision:

 

The budget assigned to Neighbourhood Committees was assigned specifically to spend on projects which addressed priorities from the communities for each Neighbourhood  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

6.

Updates on Matters of Interest Relevant to the Committee

(a)               Enterprise Peterborough’s Waste Management Team

 

Roll out of new food waste bins

 

(b)               Green Backyard

 

Update regarding the future location of the Green Backyard

Minutes:

a)  Roll out of New Food Waste Bins

 

Richard Oldfield from Enterprise Peterborough gave an update on the roll out of the new food waste bins.  The new bins were an integral part of raising recycling targets within the city and would be collected weekly.  The roll out would begin on Tuesday for six weeks.  The new bins were expected to save £300,000 a year in landfill costs when the scheme was fully up and running.

 

Responses to questions and comments included:

 

  • Councillor Serluca congratulated Enterprise on the project but asked if Richard could confirm that residents would have to buy the bags for the new bins.  Richard confirmed that they had checked in Peterborough and most supermarkets stocked the bags.  The bags needed to be biodegradable.
  • Councillor Serluca asked for clarification as to whether tea bags could also go in the bin.  Richard confirmed that both tea bags and loose tea could go in the bins.  The only thing that could not was liquids such as yoghurt.
  • Councillor Serluca advised that she shredded a lot of her paperwork.  Could shredded paper be put in the green recycling bin?  Richard confirmed that shredded paper caused a problem at the sorting centre and should be put inside something, such as a box or envelope.
  • Chris York asked where the AD plant the waste would be going to was and what impact would it have on the council’s carbon emissions targets.  What would the gate fees be at the AD plant?  Richard advised that the plant was in Northampton.  Enterprise had not been part of the decision making process but he was aware that the carbon footprint had been taken into account, however it would not be viable to build a plant in Peterborough.  He did not know what the gate fees would be.
  • A number of residents advised that they had received no information about the new service, including the labels which had been put on bins.  Richard advised that he would feed back that not everybody had seen the information and ask the agency to deliver the leaflets again.
  • Councillor Serluca asked about the 6.45am time for bins being out in the street for collection.  Richard advised that that had always been the case.  Due to the new service the rounds had been reconfigured and some timings would need to change.  The rounds would also be reviewed in a few months time.

 

b)  Future of the Green Backyard

 

Andrew Edwards, Head of Growth & Regeneration and Richard Hodgson, Head of Strategic Projects updated members on the progress made on the future of the Green Backyard.  The council had been working with the Green Backyard on the long term options for its future.  A meeting would be held next week with the Leader and the Green Backyard about the way forward.

 

Comments and responses to questions included:

 

7.

Open Session

An opportunity for any member of the public, elected and co-opted members of the Neighbourhood Committee to raise anything that affects your area and to suggest items for future meetings. 

Minutes:

Members of the public and elected members were given the opportunity to raise any issues affecting their area.

 

Comments and responses to questions included:

 

  • Luke Pagliaro advised that he was aware of a number of comments being made on how clean the streets used to be compared to now.  Did Richard Oldfield think that this was a fair assessment?  In response Richard confirmed that he did not think that it was a fair assessment.  The streets were cleansed every couple of week but there were a number of hotspot areas.  There had been challenges with the growth of shrubs this year.

 

  • Alan Clark advised that the residents of Fellowes Gardens had been told by one of the workmen that the work would not now be completed until December.  No updates had been received.  Lisa Emmanuel stated that the contractor had today said that they were on target. Newsletters did also go out from Cross Keys Homes.  Maureen Lazaretti from Cross Keys confirmed that updates had been issued every 6-8 weeks and one was due in the next two weeks.

 

  • Councillor Serluca advised that there was an issue of people knocking on doors up to 9pm, the latest being the British Heart Foundation.  Lisa Emmanuel confirmed that this could be addressed by Trading Standards who could contact the British Heart Foundation as it was in effect cold calling.

 

  • A resident asked where had the S106 monies for the Fletton Avenue flats gone.  Councillor Rush stated that he believed that there had not been any S106 monies.  Lisa Emmanuel would find out and feedback.

 

  • A resident raised her concern that if the chemist in Central Square moved to the Stanground Surgery it would mean that the post office would close.  Councillor Rush advised that an application to move had previously been rejected but another application had now been submitted to expand the surgery with proposals for a dispensary.

 

  • Shabbir Damani from Halls Chemist declared an interest as he was the owner Halls chemists.  He confirmed that a new application had been made and over 500 objection letters had been submitted.  He stated that there would be a risk to the post office and the nearest one would then be on Fletton High Street.  There would also be issues with parking.

 

  • Lisa Emmanuel advised that there was a difference between a dispensary and a pharmacy and this was an application for a dispensary.  Highways had already objected to the application due to safety issues when leaving the site.

 

  • Councillor Walsh declared an interest as a patient at Stanground Surgery. She stated that the entrance to the surgery was extremely dangerous.  Councillor Cereste also stated that the Planning Committee very rarely went against highways advice over safety concerns.

 

  • Councillor Rush advised that the Total Garage on Whittlesey Road would be closing on Saturday and would reopen in November as a Shell Garage.

 

8.

Next Meeting

The next meeting will be held on Wednesday 16 January 2013 at 7.45pm at the Stanground Polish Club.

Minutes:

Wednesday 16 January 2013 at the Stanground Polish Club.