Agenda and minutes

Councillor Rita Patel will Chair the meeting.

Councillor Rita Patel as Chair welcomed everyone to the Humberstone and Hamilton Community Meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Sarbjit, and Chrissie Field – Area Manager, Housing Services.

Councillors were asked to declare any interests they may have in the business on the agenda, and / or indicate that Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applied to them.

Councillors Potter and Sandhu declared that in respect of item 5, Greenfield Development – East of Heritage Way, they were both members of the Planning and Development Control Committee.

Councillor Potter further declared that in respect of item 8, Local Policing Update and item 9, the Budget, she was a member of the Police Authority.

The minutes of the previous Humberstone and Hamilton Community Meeting, held on 1^st July 2011, are attached and Members are asked to confirm them as a correct record.

RESOLVED:

that the minutes of the meeting of the Humberstone and Hamilton Community Meeting held on 1 July 2011 be agreed as a correct record.

To discuss proposals relating to the development, for residential use and the erection of 320 dwellings, on land east of Heritage Way, Leicester. A planning application has been submitted to Charnwood Borough Council for determination and this application will also need to be considered by Leicester City Council on the basis that the access to the proposed development will be from the City side of the development.

Darryl Watson, Senior Planner from Leicester City Council and Owen Bentley from the Barkby and Barkby Thorpe Parishes Action Group (BABTAG) were present to talk to members of the community about the proposed Greenfield Development – East of Heritage Way. An outline planning application had already been submitted to Charnwood Borough Council for 320 houses on agricultural land situated off Hamilton Land in the Barkby Thorpe Parish. However, the vehicular access to the proposed site would be within the City and therefore a planning application would also need to be submitted to Leicester City Council.

Councillors Potter and Sandhu explained that as they were members of the Planning and Development Control Committee, if members of the public wanted them to act as advocates on the application, the Councillors would need to declare a pre-determined interest, withdraw from the meeting and not participate as members of the committee when the application was considered.  If however, members of the public wished them to attend as members of the Planning and Development Control Committee and participate fully in the consideration and vote when the planning application came to committee, they needed to remain impartial and therefore withdraw from the forthcoming discussion on the planning application to avoid any appearance of bias and impartiality.  After some discussion, members of the community agreed that both Councillors Potter and Sandhu should remain in the Community Meeting for the discussion on the application. This meant that when the planning application came to committee they would need to declare a pre-determined view and withdraw from meeting when the application was under consideration.

Darryl explained that the City Council were expecting a planning application to be submitted, but this would only be in respect of the vehicle and pedestrian access, and that was the only part of the application which the City Council would consider.  The development itself would be considered by the Charnwood Borough Council.

Owen Bentley then addressed the meeting and he explained that BABTAG were opposed to the proposal for the following reasons:

·         The development would be a very considerable strain on both the City and Charnwood.

·         There would be additional pressures of schools, including the Pochin School which was located closest to the development. This would result also in an increase in traffic generally in Barkby and Barkby Thorpe and exacerbate parking problems.

·         There would be additional strain on medical amenities such as local General Practitioners.

·         The development would result in the loss of 46 acres of highly productive agricultural land, on which wheat was grown.

·         Roads from the development would lead into Heritage Way and also Bryony Way, which was a narrow road.

·         The development was within one mile of the Hamilton Deserted Medieval Village, and it would threaten the environment of such a nationally recognised monument.

·         Smaller developments scattered through Charnwood would be preferable to this proposal for such a large development.

Members of the community made the following comments:

·         Wise expansion of the City was essential and an orderly process and thoughtful  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

Officers representing Waste Management will be present at the meeting to outline the rollout of the new Orange Bag recycling Scheme across the City during October, replacing the previous Green Box Scheme.

Geoff Soden, Waste Services Manager gave a presentation on the new Orange Bag Recycling Scheme. Geoff made the following points:

·         The main difference was that a whole range of items could now be recycled.

·         The new scheme started in October when the orange bags and information pack would be circulated.

·         The first collections of the orange bags would take place during week beginning Monday 17 October.

·         People were asked to wash out any items which had contained food or liquid.

·         The orange bags would be collected on the normal refuse collection day, and there was no limit to the number of orange bags which could be put out for collection.

·         Green boxes could be kept or returned.

·         Food waste, nappies etc could not be recycled and should still be placed in the refuse bin.

·         The scheme had be trialled in parts of the City with great success. More people were recycling and more waste was being recycled.

·         It was hoped that much less waste would end up in land-fill. This would result in the Council paying reduced land fill taxes.

·         It was recognised that people who lived in flats were generally short of space and the next phase of the scheme would look at their recycling arrangements.

A member of the community commented that he had taken part in the pilot scheme, which he said had worked very well, resulting in the waste in his wheely bin being reduced to approximately one third.

The Community Meeting to receive an update from the City Warden.

Charlotte Glover, the City Warden for the Humberstone and Hamilton Ward addressed the community meeting on local street scene enforcement issues. Charlotte made the following points:

·         There had been a considerable amount of graffiti around the Hamilton estate, much of which had been cleaned up.

·         A litter picking event had taken place around Netherhall.

·         The Tesco store at Hamilton had introduced a £1 deposit on their shopping trolleys and it was hoped that this would result in fewer abandoned trolleys around Hamilton.

·         2 more people had been prosecuted for illegal fly tipping.

Members of the community raised the following queries and concerns:

·         When the Council cleared a flat, they left rubbish, including doors and toilets outside for collection.  It could sometimes be up to three weeks before they were collected.

Suzanne Collins from the Leicester City Council Housing Services stated that she would report back on that query.

·         Currently street cleaning was carried on the same day that the refuse collections took place, but cleaning took place before the bins were emptied. Could the cleaning be carried out after the bins were emptied rather than before?

·         Could the City Wardens monitor people who allow their dogs to foul in public places?

Charlotte explained that she did monitor the situation and that she had to power to issue fixed penalty notices.

·         There were notices advising people not to let their dogs foul, but there were no telephone numbers on the posters. If telephone numbers were given, then members of the public could phone to report problems.

Councillors commented that this was a good idea and requested that the suggestion be actioned.

·         There was graffiti on Maidenwell Avenue  - has this been dealt with?

Charlotte explained that she was not able to remove large areas of graffiti but she had removed the smaller ‘tags’.

Councillors thanked Charlotte and commented that she was doing a good job.

The Community Meeting to receive an update on Local Policing issues.

Police Constable 2016 Martin Peberdy from the Keyham Lane Local Policing Unit gave the meeting an update on policing issues in the Humberstone and Hamilton Ward.

Anti-Social Behaviour

There had been a problem with anti-social behaviour on Sandhill Avenue, particularly near to the shops and on New Romney Crescent. High visibility patrols had taken place in those areas.  Anti-social behaviour on Sandhill Avenue had improved, but there was still a problem on New Romney Crescent with stone throwing and petty vandalism.  The Police were working with the Leicester Anti-Social Behaviour Unit (LASBU) and had spoken to youths and their parents. Shift patterns had been altered to address the issue.

Burglaries

There had been 10 burglaries in the 3 month period, compared to 26 during the previous 3 months, however the festival season was approaching. Members of the community were urged to use time switches, lock windows and to keep valuables out of sight.

A member of the community asked for clarity regarding the situation relatingto  road tax for off road vehicles. Pc Peberdy responded that vehicles used on the road needed to have current road tax, but if they were kept off road, the owner need to complete a Statutory Off Road Notice (SORN) so that the DVLA were aware that the vehicle was kept off the road and therefore road tax was not needed.

There then followed a discussion about facilities for young people:

·         Pc Peberdy had referred to anti-social behaviour from youths in the area, but there was nothing for them to do. What had happened with the Zodiac Gym?

Councillor Potter responded that the lack of youth activities was a problem, but more facilities had been implemented, which included the park at Netherhall and lighting on the ball court at the neighbourhood centre. There had been a health and safety issue at the Zodiac Gym because of the difficulty in finding appropriate instructors.

Hiten commented that there were after school play sessions and youth sessions at the Arnold Centre. The Chair also informed the meeting that Gateway College ran numerous activities in the evening.

·         People in Hamilton were not informed about events that were being held at Gateway College.

The Chair suggested that as Councillor Potter was on the College’s governing body, she could request that the College try to publicise information on activities for members of the public that were being held at Gateway.

Mehboob Bachoo, Sports Regeneration Officer, Sports Services informed that meeting that there would be a new programme of activities from October 2011.

Councillors suggested that an item on youth facilities should be added to the agenda at the next Humberstone and Hamilton Community Meeting.

·         At the previous Humberstone and Hamilton Community Meeting, Keith Vaz M.P. stated that there would be a Councillor dedicated to the Hamilton area.

The Chair explained that the different Ward Councillors had taken on specific issues within the Ward, and as an example, she had been working on issues relating to Columbine Road.  She added that Councillors  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

Councillors are reminded that they will need to declare any interest they may have in budget applications, and/or indicate that Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applies to them.

To report that the following application for funding has been received since the last meeting: -

Senior Citizens Residential                                                                     £498.50

An application has been received from the Twilight Group to part fund a proposed residential visit by elderly, housebound and vulnerable people from the local area to visit Hayling Island, Hampshire between 7^th and 11^th November 2011.

The group was previously funded by the Community Meeting in the sum of £550 in 2009.

Anita Patel, Member Support Officer presented the Community Meeting Budget. Anita explained that there were two budget applications; one had been detailed on the agenda and a further application from Leicestershire Constabulary had arrived after the agenda had been despatched.

The funding applications were as follows:

Senior Citizens Residential: Twilight Group

A representative from the Netherhall Neighbourhood Centre explained that the Twilight Group consisted of elderly, housebound and vulnerable people who met at the centre. £498.50 was requested for the cost of transport and carers to enable the senior citizens to participate in a ‘turkey and tinsel’ residential in Hayling Island during November.

Members of the community indicated their support for the initiative.

RESOLVED:

that the funding application to the value of £498.50 be supported.

Humberstone and Hamilton Target Hardening Project: Leicestershire Police, PS 4317 Catherine Haward / PC 2016 Martin Peberdy.

Copies of this funding application were circulated at the meeting.

PC Peberdy explained that the Police had applied for £1,000 from the Community Meeting Budget to provide door and window shock alarms, in order to reduce the likelihood of properties being subject to burglary. The devices would be given to victims of burglary and to properties in identified locations that were believed to be a greater risk of burglary.  One alarm would be given to each identified property and the Police would check the properties to assess the best place for the alarm to be fitted.

PC Peberdy explained that the alarms adhered to the windows and Councillors expressed some concern that they could easily be knocked off. They questioned whether the device needed to be more robust. PC Peberdy responded that the alarms had been already provided in the Rushey Mead Ward and were working well there. An officer from Housing Services explained that the same models of alarms had been used in her house for 6 years and only once during that time had one of the alarms fallen off.

Councillors also questioned whether one device per household was sufficient and suggested that an alarm needed to be fitted on every downstairs window.

Members of the community indicated their support for the initiative stating that it demonstrated good partnership working between the Police and Leicester City Council.  It was agreed that the funding should be approved in principle but there should be further consultation with Councillor Potter, as a member of the Police Authority, regarding the alarms.

RESOLVED:

that the funding application to the value of £1,000 be supported in principle, but with further consultation between the Police and Councillor Potter regarding the door / window shock alarms.

The Chair announced that the next Humberstone and Hamilton Community Meeting would be held on Wednesday 30 November at 6.00 pm in a venue to be confirmed.

The Chair asked members of the community if they wished to raise any other business.

A member of the community referred to the minutes of the previous Humberstone and Hamilton Community Meeting held on 1 July 2011, which stated that the issue relating to the re-opening of Columbine Road be placed on the agenda for the next meeting. However, this item had not been discussed.

The Chair explained that this particular issue was being dealt with and the Deputy City Mayor had also been involved. It was agreed that this item would be placed on the agenda for the next meeting.

The meeting closed at 8.14 pm.