Agenda item

The following items were submitted by Parish Councils prior to the meeting:-

(a)     Restoration of Highfield Lane, Community Gain and Resources from the Waverley Development

         Karl Battersby, Strategic Director of Environment and Development Services, gave an update on the current position with regards to the restoration of Highfield Lane and the reasons why it had not taken place previously.  What had been agreed as part of the revised application was that a red shale public right of way would be erected for pedestrians and others for a safe walking route where Highfield Lane was previously.  The restoration of Highfield Lane would then be undertaken incrementally as the development progressed.

         A representative from Catcliffe Parish Council pointed out that a surveyor working on the Waverley development had indicated that Highfield Lane would not be restored as a road, which was actually incorrect.

         Karl Battersby, Strategic Director of Environment and Development Services, also provided information on Community Gain which formed part of the original Section 106 Agreement, which was part of the planning application.  Copies of the Section 106 Agreement could be provided if this was felt appropriate.

         A representative from Catcliffe Parish Council expressed some concern that some villages surrounding Waverley such as Treeton, Woodhouse Mill, Handsworth and Orgreave received some monies, but none was provided to Catcliffe and asked if this could be revisited as it appeared to be unfairly proportioned.

         Karl Battersby, Strategic Director of Environment and Development Services, confirmed that the Community Gain details could not be revisited, but was based on an assessment of need and sums of money were identified to fund gaps and to provide facilities to the areas identified.

         One significant investment for Catcliffe had been around flooding and the development work that had since taken place to mitigate risk to the area.

         A representative from Catcliffe Parish Council also referred to the negotiation of funds from British Coal relating to the open casting on the site and asked why there was no bid on behalf of Catcliffe.

         Karl Battersby, Strategic Director of Environment and Development Services, referred to the planning application which had been approved by the Planning Board, the need for regeneration and what could be achieved in planning terms regarding the impacts on provision and the discontent this had caused in Catcliffe.

         Another representative from Catcliffe Parish Council was of the view that Catcliffe had been overlooked completely and argued about the quality of provision, such as play in Catcliffe, and whether this was adequate.

         Karl Battersby, Strategic Director of Environment and Development Services referred to the many sessions about Waverley that were held and open to members of the public and the ample opportunities that Catcliffe Parish Council could have aired their views.  He pointed out that there would be a range of access to better facilities, not just in Catcliffe, and that the public open space would be freely available for anyone to use.  It was suggested that if there were concerns about provisions in Catcliffe such as play, then a relevant officer could be invited to a future Parish Council meeting to discuss concerns.

         A representative from Anston Parish Council did not feel that the distribution of the Section 106 monies had been done fairly and could see even more problems occurring once the Core Strategy for further housing developments across the borough were approved.

         Karl Battersby, Strategic Director of Environment and Development Services, pointed out that there had been some Government changes to the rules around Section 106 requirements and there was now a requirement for the Local Authority to adopt its own local scheme about its infrastructure needs.

         Further discussion ensued about the new development tax, where there were no defined rules, and whether this could be extended into other areas of the borough and not those just immediately within the development area or adjacent, for example traffic calming in smaller rural areas who suffered from traffic congestion.

(b)     Highway Network Maintenance Programme 2013/14

         A representative from Ravenfield Parish Council drew attention to the invitation to submit requests for priority highway maintenance in certain areas.  Three areas were identified, but notification had been received to indicate that the areas put forward would now be delayed beyond 2013/14.  It was acknowledged that the Council was having to face some hard times, but road repairs were a matter of some importance.

         Karl Battersby, Strategic Director of Environment and Development Services, provided information on the current budget provision for the Highway Network Maintenance Programme 2013/14 and the guidelines on filling potholes and on other areas of cost.

         A representative from Thrybergh Parish Council confirmed that areas had been selected in their area and whilst some weight had to be given to some routes, Park Lane had been identified as one needing development.

         Karl Battersby, Strategic Director of Environment and Development Services, confirmed that this would be looked into further.

         A representative from Anston Parish Council drew attention to the scheme that had been adopted by Sheffield City Council which would see major investment into the highway network across that area.

         A representative from Ulley Parish Council noted the comments above, but pointed out that Ulley had not received any representations, but was aware of concerns surrounding Carr Lane, off Penny Hill Lane.

         Karl Battersby, Strategic Director of Environment and Development Services, confirmed he would look into the areas that had been selected as priority for the 2013/14 Highway Network Maintenance Programme and would report back to individual Parish Councils in due course.