Agenda item
Centres Strategy - pre-scrutiny
Minutes:
The Portfolio Holder for Economic Development, the Town Centre and Strategic Partnerships reminded Members that they had received a summary of the Centres Strategy at the previous meeting and they now had before them the full document. It was highlighted that whilst the strategy covered seven specific centres, it could be adapted to take account of the changing landscape of the District and would be reviewed in 3 years.
Members discussed a number of areas in more detail, including:
· Whether consideration had been given to re-developing some areas of Bromsgrove centre for town living. The Portfolio Holder responded that this was something which was being considered, with particular reference to areas above the shops, although some resistance to this had been met, it was an ongoing piece of work.
· Concerns were raised that there was no mention of Aston Fields within the Strategy. The Portfolio Holder responded that this would be considered as part of the review. The Centres Manager role had made specific reference to the seven centres highlighted in the Strategy; however this did not mean that she did not provide support to the remaining centres, where possible.
· Whether a strategy covering 3 years was sufficient time in light of the significant body of work which needed to be done. The Portfolio Holder responded that it was a realistic rolling programme and that it was in line with the 3 year contract of the Town Centres Manager.
· Development opportunity sites and the inclusion of the Recreation Ground – it was explained that this referred to improvements rather than development, following the completion of the retirement village. It was suggested that this needed to be made clearer as it may be misunderstood by anyone reading it.
· Evidence to back up the low number of void rates – it was confirmed that this currently stood at 12.
· Connecting the station to the Town Centre and available funds to support this.
· The production of the strategy as a document and the procurement process which had been followed. Members were disappointed that this had not been produced by a local photographer.
There were a number of typographical errors which it was noted would be corrected.
Following discussion on the Centres Strategy the Board further discussed the access between the station and the Town Centre. It was noted that there had been an article in the local press in respect of a new connecting bridge which would be built at Bant Mill Road. Concerns were raised in respect of how this decision had been reached and what involvement, if any the District Council had had. It was disputed as to whether this was the quickest route from Aston Fields to the Town Centre and a number of Members believed that the junction which accessed the Industrial and Business parks further along would be a much more suitable site for a new footbridge as this junction was also used for accessing local schools.
It was confirmed that this project was the result of funding from Central Government being made available. During the debate a number of areas were discussed:
· The distance, using the proposed footbridge to access the station and whether this was the shortest route to the Town Centre.
· Whether the Portfolio Holder had been consulted on the location of the bridge – it was confirmed that she had not.
· Whether the District would need to make any contribution to the cost of the new footbridge – it was confirmed that they had not been asked to.
· Whether this project would have an adverse effect on other projects within the district.
· Whether there had been or would be a consultation of residents to see whether this was what they wanted/needed.
Members went on to discuss a number of issues in respect of the A38, including a suggestion which had been made to make the section where the new footbridge was proposed dual carriage way. Members could not understand how this could be done without removing the sound barrier, which would not be acceptable to residents. Concerns were raised that there appeared not to be any joined up thinking between the County and District Councils. Officers advised that the Board were able to scrutinise areas which were outside of the District’s control, particularly where there was an impact on its residents. If appropriate, a representative from Worcestershire County Council could be invited to a future meeting to discuss how this decision had been reached.
RESOLVED that
1) the Centres Strategy be noted; and
2) a briefing paper be prepared by officers covering the areas discussed in the pre-amble above in respect of the proposed footbridge on the A38 be presented to a future meeting on the Board.
Supporting documents:
PDF 6 MB