Agenda and minutes

Consideration was given to the minutes of a meeting of the Tourism Panel held on 5^th February, 2007.

Resolved:-  That the minutes be approved as a correct record.

Tourism Panel

5th February, 2007

Consideration was given to the minutes of a meeting of the Town Centre Management Group held on 5^th February, 2007.

Resolved:-  That the minutes be noted.

-           to note.

Resolved:-  That the action of the Cabinet Member in opening the following tenders on 21^st February, 2007 be recorded:-

-        Public Realm Strategy for Rotherham Town Centre

Best Value Support Officer to report.

-           to report on the performance indicators for Environment and Development Services.

Consideration was given to a report, presented by the Best Value Officer, detailing the performance results for the third quarter of the year 2006/2007 (April to December).  Attention was drawn to the indicators affected by the following issues:-

·              Performance measures in the EDS suite of performance indicators.

·              Performance indicators that had not reached their target setting.

·              All England quartile comparisons.

·              New performance measures.

Particular reference was made to the following:-

-                      BV 156  Buildings accessible to people who have a disability – a programme of works had been prepared and was now dependant on funding approval

-                      BV 199 (a, b & d) Local street and environmental cleanliness – it was noted that targets were not met in respect of litter and detritus and levels of graffiti

-                      BV 204 Planning Appeals – It was noted that decision outcomes were on target

-                      BV 215 (b) Rectification of street lighting faults -- Improvements were noted.

-                      LPI 24 Revenue running cost of floor space per m² – a different calculating method was noted

-                      LPI 31 Informing the HSE of reportable injuries and dangerous occurrences within 10 working days – improvement was noted

-                      LPI 88 Number of missed collections per 100,000 collections of household waste – it was noted that the year end target was unlikely to be achieved

Resolved:-  (1)  That the EDS performance results be received.

(2)  That the performance indicator third quarter results for 2006/2007 be noted.

(3)  That the Council’s position in comparison with the Audit Commission 2005/2006 All England results be noted.

Transportation Unit Manager to report.

-           to finalise the review of Draft Development Control Lines across the Borough.

Consideration was given to a report presented by the Transportation Unit Manager, which detailed the result of a review of Draft Development Control Lines (DDCL’s) in the Borough, mostly inherited from previous Highway Authorities.

A DDCL illustrated the likely effect of any future highway improvement scheme on adjoining land or buildings and was of particular relevance in a planning context where an area was likely to be redeveloped or new buildings erected. The line was intended to be of guidance to property developers to ensure that any new development, particularly new buildings, did not prejudice, or was not prejudiced by, any future transportation proposals. The majority of DDCL’s in the Borough were imposed many years ago by previous Highway Authorities (West Riding County Council and South Yorkshire County Council) and most reflected the highway policies at the time.

The Council’s current transportation policies reflected the regional and national emphasis on better management of existing road space and travel demand rather than the provision of additional capacity, with road safety remaining permanent. In many cases, it was considered most unlikely that any future road improvement proposals, which would require the land protected by a DDCL, could be justified. For this reason, the DDCL’s listed in Appendix A to the report were recommended for deletion.

It was noted however that possible traffic conditions on the highways listed in the report could change in the future and warrant highway improvements, albeit to a lesser degree than originally envisaged. For this reason, the DDCL listed in Appendix B to the report should be revised to reflect this.

It was proposed that the DDCL’s listed in Appendix C to the report should be retained in view of possible highway/transportation issues in the future which could warrant improvements to these highways.

Plans illustrating the DDCL’s in the report had been deposited in the Members’ Room and were made available at the meeting.

It was noted that this report completed a full review of all the DDCL’s in the Borough.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the DDCL’s listed in the relevant section of the report (Appendix A) be deleted.

(2)  That the DDCL’s listed in the relevant section of the report (Appendix B) be revised.

(3)  That the DDCL’s listed in the relevant section of the report (Appendix C) be confirmed.

Markets General Manager to report.

-           to consider the establishment of a monthly farmers’ market.

Consideration was given to a report presented by the Markets General Manager, which detailed proposals to establish a monthly Farmers’ Market within the pedestrian area of Rotherham Town Centre.

There was currently only one Farmers’ Market held within the Borough.  This was organised privately and operated once a month on a Sunday, under a licence from the Council, at Wentworth Garden Centre.

Following consultation with Farmers’ Market producers and traders to identify the most suitable day to hold a market, Rotherham Markets team proposed to establish a Farmers’ Market on one Wednesday per month. Whilst it was proposed that the market would mainly take place on a Wednesday, it may have to be varied occasionally to suit other Town Centre events and public holidays.

The market would consist of approximately twenty stalls and retailing times would be from 10.00 a.m. until 3.00 p.m. The market would be managed by Rotherham Markets team and would comply with the Council’s existing Farmers’ Market guidelines already issued to Wentworth.

As well as providing and marketing the Farmers’ Market locally, an opportunity had been provided to work in partnership with the Regional Food Group for Yorkshire & Humber Limited and Business Link South Yorkshire. They were currently developing a strategy to increase the awareness of Farmers’ Markets across South Yorkshire to the general public and farmers/producers. This promotion, which was funded by Yorkshire Forward, would include literature and advertising promoting all the South Yorkshire Farmers’ markets and also provide a celebrity chef on a rota basis.

Resolved:-  (1)  That a monthly Farmers’ Market be established pursuant to Section 50 of the Food Act 1984.

(2)  That the said market operate on the last Wednesday of each month between the hours of 10.00 a.m. and 3.00 p.m. in Rotherham Town Centre (pursuant to Section 52 of the Food Act 1984).

The following item is likely to be considered in the absence of the press and public as being exempt under Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended March 2006) (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular individual (including the Council)):-

Resolved:-  That, under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the Council)).

Network Regulation Engineer to report.

-           to consider suggested revised charges.

Consideration was given to a report presented by the Network Regulation Engineer, which provided details of the proposed increase to the current charges made for a range of highway services.

It was felt that the current charges for processing and implementing a number of highway services should be increased, to keep pace with increasing costs.

All of the highway services under consideration fell within existing powers contained within either the Highways Act 1980 or the Road Traffic Regulations Act 1984. 

Research had been carried out throughout the whole Yorkshire region in relation to similar charges, to allow comparisons to be made between existing and proposed charges. A table containing the results of this research was submitted with the report.

In respect of the current charges, Rotherham did not have a single category of charge which was at the highest level in Yorkshire.  

Resolved:-  That the proposed revised charges for established highway services, outlined in the table now submitted, be adopted with effect from 1st April, 2007.