Agenda and minutes

         The Minutes of the meeting held on 22^nd March 2006 having been printed and circulated were taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

     It was confirmed that no questions had been received.

         The Minutes of the Executive Board, Executive Board Sub Committee and Executive (Transmodal Implementation) Sub Board meetings relating to the work of the Board since the last meeting were submitted for information.

 

         RESOLVED: That the Minutes be received.

         The Board received a report detailing the new terms of reference for the Urban Renewal Policy Performance Board. As part of the recent revision of the Council’s Constitution at Annual Council on 19^th May 2006, a number of changes had been made to the Council’s decision-making structure to be implemented in the 2006/07 municipal year.

 

The changes brought the Policy and Performance Boards inline with the Council’s Strategic Priorities as contained within the Corporate and Community Plans.

 

RESOLVED: That the Terms of Reference be noted.

The Board was presented with its’ draft Annual Report, which detailed the activities of the Urban Renewal Policy and Performance Board (PPB) during 2005/06. 

 

It was noted that although the membership of the Board comprised eleven Councillors only ten were listed in the annual report.

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(1)       the Annual Report of the PPB’s activities in 2005/6 be agreed subject to Councillor E. Cargill being added to the membership; and

 

(2)       the amended Annual Report be endorsed for adoption at a forthcoming meeting of the full Council.

The Board was informed of the receipt of a petition entitled “Petition to keep our landscape gardener ‘Mike’” containing 42 signatures from residents of West Bank, Widnes.

 

The petition referred to one of the gardeners from the Waterfront Maintenance Team, who worked some of his time on the Victoria Promenade at West Bank. This was a pilot project for two years funded by the Mersey Waterfront Regional Park and the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund. The team was established in June 2004 and consisted of four operative staff with a dedicated remit to improving the quality of the external environment on the publicly accessible waterfront sites in Halton. During that time a significant improvement was achieved in the quality of maintenance and the team demonstrated their effectiveness through the gaining of a Green Flag Award for Victoria Promenade in 2005.

 

Funding for the project had expired and the exit strategy for the project was a combination of seeking to secure further funding from Mersey Waterfront Regional Park and Neighbourhood Renewal Fund for an extension to the pilot stage to allow further time to secure long term funding, and to seek mainstream funding from the council. Unfortunately none of those approaches had been successful.

 

            Efforts were continuing to be made to secure appropriate Section 106 funding to re-establish the team, although this would likely take a number of years to achieve subject to the achievement of appropriate development opportunities in line with the approved Waterside Development Strategy.

 

            RESOLVED: That the lead signature to the petition be informed that whilst the Council recognises the valued work that the Waterfront Maintenance Team has carried out over the last two years, as a pilot project funded from the Mersey Waterfront Regional Park and the Neighbourhood Renewal Fund, it has not been possible to secure long term funding and regrettably the team have had to be disbanded.

The Board was informed of the receipt of a petition containing 239 signatures requesting closure of the path connecting Mayfield Avenue and Liverpool Road, to the side of Our Lady of Perpetual Succour church, which was received on 19 April 2006. Residents signing the petition were mostly local but with some as far afield as Clincton View, Cradley and Hale Road.  The reasons for the request, as set out in the petition were outlined within the report.

 

Two recent newspaper reports of separate attacks were also attached to the petition, one regarding a mobile phone theft from a 16 year old boy and an assault of a 19 year old woman, both in the late evening.

 

The path was an adopted highway and to close it would require a legal order. To obtain a legal order under the Highways Act, it must be proven to the Magistrates Court that the route was unnecessary or that a new more commodious route would be provided.  This was not the case here as the path provided a shorter route to facilities such as bus stops, shops, sheltered accommodation and church.

 

A precedent also existed, were a similar case was taken to the Magistrates Court for the path connecting Hale Road and Deansway. The order was rejected by the Magistrates, as the Highways Act legislation was inappropriate.

 

A possible alternative would be to use legislation under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act. This would be a lengthy process where an area must first be designated as an area where crimes occur which were related to highways and evidence would need to be built up. An order could then be made, subject to any objections.

 

Therefore it was recommended that the signatories be advised to attend the next local Police Participation and Delivery (PAD) meeting run by the Community Action Team, to request that the area was treated as a “hotspot”. The necessary evidence could then be built up to support a proposed closure.

 

Arising from the discussion concerns were raised with regard to the length of time this process had taken for previous applications and it was agreed that a letter would be written to the Secretary of State outlining these concerns.  

            RESOLVED: That

 

(1)   the signatories be advised to attend the next local Police Participation and Delivery (PAD) meeting run by the Community Action Team, to request that the area be focussed on as a “hotspot” to enable evidence gathering;

(2)   the request for closure of the footpath between Mayfield Avenue and Liverpool Road be reviewed, once evidence had been gathered; and

(3)   a letter be sent to the Secretary of State outlining the concerns raised above.

The Board was presented with the progress made on the delivery of the Castlefields Regeneration programme by the Regeneration Programme Manager. 

 

The Castlefields Masterplan was approved by the Executive Board on the 25^th September 2003, following extensive consultation. The strategy for regeneration set out proposals, which aimed to ensure that Castlefields became a sustainable, stable, integrated and prosperous community. The regeneration programme was being delivered through a multi-agency partnership consisting of Halton Borough Council, The Housing Corporation, English Partnerships, Liverpool Housing Trust and CDS Housing.

 

The regeneration process was now well underway and had made a real impact on the area. The partners had committed circa £45m of public sector funding to the first phase of the programme and it was estimated that this would lever in over £58m of private sector investment.

 

Proposals for the next phase of the housing programme had also been developed, and a further  £6.7m of Housing Corporation funding had been allocated to support the redevelopment of additional deck access blocks.

 

The progress made in 2005/6 and the next steps between 2006-2011 were also outlined within the report. In particular it was noted that the Council was now pursuing Compulsory Purchase Order powers to secure the purchase of the local centre from its current owners.

 

RESOLVED: That the progress, which has been made in achieving the objectives of the Castlefields Regeneration Programme be agreed.

The Board was updated on the current progress of the Halton Local Development Framework and in particular the Core Strategy. The content of the Core Strategy draft Issues and Options Papers would facilitate progression towards public consultation on these documents, ideally this process would begin in July and August of 2006.

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(1)   the content of the report be noted; and

(2) the draft Issues and Options papers, with a view to progressing to Executive Board for approval  for public consultation be endorsed.

The Board was presented with the Widnes Waterfront Economic Development Zone (EDZ) Northwest Development Agency (NWDA) Performance Plan for the financial year 2006/07. 

For NWDA schemes that last more than 1 year it was a requirement of the scheme approval that the delivery organisation, in this case Halton Borough Council (HBC), prepared an Annual Performance Plan.

The Performance Plan summarised what the Widnes Waterfront Scheme was intending to achieve in the year 2006/07. It provided output detail and clarified how Halton Borough Council intended to deliver and achieve them.

RESOLVED: That the annual Widnes Waterfront NWDA Performance Plan for 2006/07 be agreed.

The Board received a presentation on the Delivery Report of the first Local Transport Plan 2001/02 to 2005/06 (LTP1 DR), for submission to the Government, from the Divisional Manager for Transportation.  His presentation outlined:

 

·        what a delivery report consisted of;

·        where funding was received from;

·        the key achievements of LTP1;

·        how performance was measured; and

·        what recognition had been received.

 

The purpose of the LTP1 DR was to compare delivery of transport infrastructure and initiatives with that originally set out in LTP1. Of particular importance was the difference that the Plan had made in terms of the Council’s strategic priorities at that time as set out in the Borough’s Corporate Plan.

 

RESOLVED: That the Delivery Report of the first Local Transport Plan be noted.

The Board was informed of the need to appoint a Chairman and three Members to the Public Transport Advisory Panel.

 

RESOLVED: That the following Councillors be appointed to the Public Transport Advisory Panel:

 

Councillor R. Hignett           

Councillor D. Leadbetter    

Councillor T. Sly

Councillor R. Polhill             

 

Progress was reported against the fourth quarter Performance Monitoring Reports, key milestones, statutory and local performance indicators and targets for the Regeneration, Major Projects, Planning and Environmental Health and Highways and Transportation departments.

 

Arising from the discussion it was agreed that in future any queries/questions in relation to the monitoring reports would be submitted to the relevant officer prior to the meeting and if so required the officer would attend the next PPB meeting to give further details. 

 

RESOLVED: That the fourth quarter performance management reports be received.