Questions are invited from members of the public about the work of the Cabinet.
Notice of any question must be given to Democratic Services by midday on Monday, 9th February. Approximately 30 minutes will be set aside for Public Question Time, if required.
Minutes:
The following question was submitted in advance of the meeting by a member of the public, Raymond Portman:
On the land adjacent to residential properties on Heywood Old Road, there is a well established population of protected and priority wildlife species, including brown hare, lapwing, common snipe, jack snipe, grey partridge, roe deer, skylark, bank vols.
Many of these species are UK priority or declining species and are native to this area. Can the Council explain how the presence of these species has been identified, assessed, and taken into account at the plan-making stage for the Simister Bowlee development framework, and how the Council can justify progressing the allocation in the absence of published ecological surveys, impact assessments, or demonstrable biodiversity net gain proposals?
A further supplementary question was submitted:
If the ecological surveys are not being completed or published will the council commit to commissioning a full seasonal appropriate survey before any planning application is determined and will allocating be recognised if significant of priority species impacted?
Councillor O’Brien reported that as part of planning assessment, biodiversity of site must take place. To ensure we are holding developers to account and allows planning committee to take this into account.
The GM ecological unit ensures these sorts of investigations and evidence are pulled together and robust enough to ensure we have the information to make informed decisions. Through biodiversity net gain we can ensure biodiversity is enhanced by the fact we have these strong legal agreements.
The following question was submitted in advance of the meeting by a member of the public, Lindsey Bothwell:
Can the Council explain how it can justify approving a substantially larger “new town” development that relies on Heywood Old Road for access, when that road has repeatedly and historically been assessed as incapable of safely accommodating additional traffic, when no material highway improvements have been made over the last 20–30 years, and when existing traffic — including diverted motorway and heavy goods vehicle traffic — already causes demonstrable safety risks, congestion, environmental harm, and structural damage to nearby homes?
By way of scale, the Simister Bowlee allocation proposes up to 1,550 new homes, which even on a conservative assumption of two cars per household could introduce in excess of 3,000 additional vehicles, rising further when multi-vehicle households and adult children are taken into account.
Responding, Councillor O’Brien reported that strategic highway modelling has indicated that the existing highway network can accommodate the level of traffic that is envisaged to come from the developments with a series of off-site highways works. These are listed in Appendix D of Places for Everyone and include:
• M60 Junction 19/A576 Middleton Road
• M62 Junction 19/A6046 Heywood Interchange
• Corridor improvements on A576 Middleton Road/Manchester Old Road in the vicinity of M60 Junction 19
• A6045 Heywood Old Road/A576
• A6045Heywood Old Road/Langley Lane
• Active travel improvements
• Introduction of local bus services to, from and within the site
This strategic modelling was fully tested at the PfE Examination.
More detailed highways modelling will be undertaken as part of the as part of the planning application process and this may identify additional mitigation measures to improve accessibility and to mitigate highways impacts arising from the development.
Public transport and active travel will also be provided to provide alternative means of movement in and around the sites.
A further supplementary question was submitted:
It has been widely reported that there is growing frustration with governments new town policies. Traffic congestion is already severe on Heywood Old Road with extended journey time, speeding and ongoing vibration and damage to nearby homes. How can the council justify progressing the Simister Bowlee development, how is this consistent with statutory duties to prevent unacceptable harm to existing residents and with Greater Manchester’s commitment on air quality and CO2 reduction.
Councillor O’Brien reported that what is being proposed in not a ‘new town’. There are substantial improvements set out to the highways within the proposals. These have been tested at public examination and supported by independent experts. Confident it will mitigate an uncontrolled development.
Set out in the proposals are things the developers will have to contribute to, which we will use to hold them to account.
The following question was asked by a member of the public, Danny Jacobs
The council is reducing the live streaming of democratic meetings. I am live streaming the meeting at the moment, and have 200 viewers. The Council is not trying to maximise the number of viewers. What is more important is that we have clipped parts of the council meetings and it has been viewed more times. If we put it on the right platform we may get more viewers.
You have the money to live stream but don’t have the willingness to do so. Residents won’t go on the Bury Council website to view council meetings. Need to look at it as more of an archive and less as a content stream. Is that a fair assumption?
Responding, Councillor O’Brien reported that all committee meetings are public meetings and there are opportunities for public questions. All Members are elected and representatives of the public.
The Council live streams council and cabinet where key decisions get made. Where there are other meetings where significant will be made it is at the discretion of the chair for the meeting to be streamed. For example, at Overview and Scrutiny last night, the chair and committee members felt it was important for it to be live streamed so arrangements were made to do so.
When we have live streamed in the past, meetings have had a limited number of views, and we took a decision that it was not value for money. We do not think we need to expand the meetings that are livestreamed.
The following question was asked by a member of the public, Angus
As of today, is the council the legal registered owner of the Pinfold Lane library site?
Responding, Roger Frith, Assistant Director of Corporate Assets & Facilities Management reported that we have sold the land however the land registry have yet to complete the registration.
Councillor O’Brien reported that the sale has been agreed and completed by the parties.