Agenda item

Questions to Cabinet Members and Chairmen

Minutes:

(1)  Councillor Gilding asked what steps were being taken to bring Rotherham’s ‘Third World’ roads up to an acceptable standard after a decade of neglect?

 

Councillor Smith stated that Rotherham Borough Council’s primary objective was to ensure that Rotherham’s roads were maintained to the nationally recognised safety standards.   This was achieved by the Highway Network Management Team, which carried out routine Safety Highway Inspections on a regular basis. For example, all main roads in Rotherham had safety inspections carried out every month.  The Council had very good procedures in place to enable it to respond to actionable defects. 90% of Insurance claims were successfully defended as a result.

 

As part of the Council’s long-term maintenance plan, surveys were carried out on all roads in Rotherham.  This information enabled Streetpride to place roads in priority order, which ensured that the worst effected and most cost effective roads were dealt with first. Unfortunately, budgets were limited and the Council was unable to carry programmed repairs on all roads that had been identified.  Where this was the case, the Council would always ensure that it carried out routine inspections and arrange for the immediate repair of any hazardous defects if they did occur.

 

Central grant funding of £5m was secured between 2008 and 2010 to arrest the deterioration of the principle network (‘A’ Roads), with only 4% of those roads now requiring significant works.  Of the Unclassified network (estate type roads), approximately 18% of those roads required significant works.   However, a £3M investment programme was currently being carried out on large patching type works on these roads, which was also being supported by a Department of Transport additional highway maintenance grant of approximately £430,000 for 2013/4 and £228,000 in 2014/15. 

 

(2)  Councillor Middleton stated that work had ceased on Firsby Reservoirs in December.  Both reservoirs had been reduced to muddy and apparently lifeless ponds.  Most of the wildlife has disappeared.  When would the restoration work be completed and at what past and future cost?

 

Councillor Wyatt agreed that this was a very popular spot, but stated that the recent works at Firsby Reservoir were prompted by subsidence that appeared in the main Dam near to the reservoir cottage early in October. The Council sought professional advice in this respect from the All Reservoirs Panel Engineer who was already overseeing ‘matters in the interest of safety’ and was advised to reduce the water level in the lakes immediately and in the manner that could now be seen on site. It was recognised that the emergency works had had some impact on wildlife and on the mussels living in the lake.

 

The works were carried out during mostly wet weather in November and early December. It was felt that the site had been left in a reasonable condition under the circumstances. The site would improve generally in the spring when the site dried out. It was also expected that natural colonisation of the exposed areas by vegetation would mitigate the visual impact of the works. 

 

The works were an interim measure in that further recommendations would be made shortly by the Panel Engineer as to other works that should be undertaken to supplement the works already undertaken. However, it was expected that these would be minimal.

 

The Council would then have to decide whether to invest further monies into the Dam and associated structures, both in the short term and the long term. To return the main lake to its former level would require the Dam to be re-built. Options may exist for isolating the smaller lake and allowing it to refill. The option also existed to take no further action for now, although the works undertaken had a limited life span and, therefore, may need to be supplemented or repaired in the future.

 

­(3)  Councillor Gilding asked, in order to boost the appearance of the town centre, could consideration be given to improving the setting of the Chantry Chapel by removing the ugly tree from its frontage and installing proper floodlights?

 

Councillor Smith thanked Councillor Gilding for his useful suggestion.  However, the tree in question was not under the control or ownership of the Council and was privately owned. It was believed that it was probably owned by the Canal and River Trust (formally British Waterways). The tree in question was one of only a small number of trees in that part of the town centre and did provide amenity in an otherwise built environment and was also in the Conservation Area.  Consideration would be given to the request as well as the issue of floodlights and ascertained if they could be upgraded and renew the lighting to improve the setting once discussions had taken place with the Canal and River Trust.

 

A further response would be given to Councillor Gilding once the issue had been explored further.

 

(4)  Councillor Middleton asked, following the discovery of further agricultural activity in High Street, Rotherham, could an updated report be given on the economic progress in reviving the area as a shopping street?

 

Councillor Smith stated that, following the Council’s use of its prudential borrowing powers, five key buildings were being brought into use equating to 9,500 sq. ft. of commercial floorspace and £1.5 million investment. Two properties had been renovated and were occupied and another was almost complete with a tenant ready for immediate occupation. Final approval was expected shortly for the restoration of the adjacent listed buildings as part of the scheme. A total of five new businesses opened on High Street in 2012 including the popular antiques centre.

 

In adjacent Imperial Buildings, all but one unit was occupied or had Heads of Terms agreed. Recent activity included the opening of the expanded Whistlestop Sweetshop and Temperance Bar and the imminent opening of Rotherham’s first ‘Pop up Shop’ bringing more retail activity to the area.

 

It was this cluster of specialist businesses that was helping to differentiate Rotherham’s shopping offer and had significantly impacted on the increased satisfaction of its shoppers. In February, 2012, 92% of shoppers said they were satisfied or very satisfied with the independent shopping offer (compared to 42% in 2009).

 

Investment, historic restoration and the subsequent arrival of new businesses was clearly having an impact; footfall on the street had increased significantly, 9.5% in 2011 (compared to 2010) and another 18% in 2012 (compared to 2011) contributing to the 6% and 8 % increases across the town centre as a whole for the same periods.

 

(5)  Councillor Gilding asked (a)  how many persons were the Council paying for in Adult Residential Homes, (b) how many residents were having to pay and (c) what was the present rate per week for a Council-paid resident?”

 

Councillor Doyle reported that currently the Council funded 1,291 Service users in long term residential/nursing care, but this figure did fluctuate slightly.

 

All Service users were financially assessed under the Government policy to pay a contribution based on their ability to pay; the only exceptions were Service users who had been sectioned under Section 3 of the Mental Health Act, and these were exempt under Section 117 of the said Act.

 

There were currently four contract prices for service users over 65 depending on the category of their care.

 

For service users under 65 years of age their fees were individually negotiated by the Social Worker involved in their placement.