Agenda item

Questions from Members of the Public

 

To receive questions from members of the public who wish to ask a general question in respect of matters within the Council’s area of responsibility or influence.

 

Subject to the Chair’s discretion, members of the public may ask one question and one supplementary question, which should relate to the original question and answered received.

 

Councillors may also ask questions under this agenda item.

Minutes:

(1)    Councillor Ball asked a question in relation to referrals from the Fire Service to Rotherham Council Social Services. He noted that there were 45 referrals in Rotherham but that Sheffield had over 700 and this had been the case for the last 3 years. There had been some training by the Fire Service over the past couple of months but Councillor Ball asked whether Cabinet could look at why the figures were low and look at what could be done to improve them?

 

      The Leader agreed to provide a written response in consultation with South Yorkshire Fire and Rescue Authority.

 

(2)    Councillor Tinsley asked a question in relation to the recent severe delays caused by the traffic lights at the roundabout at Junction 1 of the M18 in Hellaby. He queried whether the new industrial unit on Cumwell Lane would have the same impact with traffic backing up into Maltby and what could be done to alleviate the problems?

 

      The Strategic Director of Regeneration and Environment responded and explained that the motorway traffic light junctions were controlled by National Highways. Following conversations between National Highways and the Council, the sequencing problems had been rectified. In terms of the new unit on Cumwell Lane, all traffic matters were considered at the time of the planning application and deemed acceptable as the application was approved.

 

(3)    Councillor Bennet-Sylvester asked a question in relation to Rotherham Town Centre and specifically about delays and how delays were communicated. He expressed concerns as the pocket park had been delayed and the Forge Island development had been announced in 2018 yet was not due for completion until 2024. Councillor Bennett-Sylvester asked if the announcement of delivery dates could be better communicated and the communication in general be looked at?

 

      In response, Councillor Read explained that there had been some delays, mainly due to COVID-19. However, the development was nearing the construction phase and it was hoped that construction would begin in late 2022.

 

      Councillor Lelliott explained that work had continued on Forge Island since 2018 with major works on flood alleviation completed. Councillor Lelliott expressed pride in what had been achieved so far and credited the officers with the work on what will be a quality development. She agreed that communication could be improved.

 

      In his follow up question, Councillor Bennett-Sylvester expressed frustration with the delays and was concerned that the Forge Island development was announced in 2018 as a way of rejuvenating the town centre but with the completion not due until 2024, he queried what happened in terms of rejuvenation in the meantime?

 

      Councillor Lelliott explained that work on the communications strategy was underway now that funding had been provided through the Levelling Up and Towns Funds.

 

      The Assistant Director of Planning, Regeneration and Transport explained that the website had recently been updated and more information would be provided shortly.