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, 7 September. Approximately 30 minutes will be set aside for Public Question Time, if required.
Minutes:
Two questions were submitted in advance of the meeting by members of the public, Greg Hermanns and Andy W Morris. Neither member of the public was present at the meeting, so in accordance with council procedures written responses will be sent to them by Democratic Services.
Three members of the public were present at the meeting and asked the following questions:
Danielle Davies asked about drainage at the Simister Bowlee site and how the Council would ensure nothing runs into United Utilities drainage and also does not affect public septic tanks to make sure no damage and costs are left to individual residences.
Responding, the Leader advised that the introduction of a sustainable drainage system as part of any development of the Simister Bowlee site will be the responsibility of the developers to work in conjunction with the Council and United Utilities. We will likely monitor this though oversight around carrying out of works including planning enforcement powers and influencing planning applications.
James Tierney asked whether the Council can identify a single document currently available to residents that demonstrates, in one place, that the necessary highways, emergency access, drainage, sewerage, school and healthcare capacity will be delivered before the development creates the demand for them — and if such a document doesn't exist, why are members being asked to support the development before that evidence exists?
Responding, the Leader advised that the single document is the development frameworks which brings together all of the necessary policies in infrastructure requirements including drainage, schools, and health care. It is still a high level document and any planning applications would contain more specific information. Some of the infrastructure will be required before any development takes place, some will happen concurrently and there will be some elements that may be completed at the end of the process.
Amanda Foster asked that no planning application for the Simister Bowlee (JPA1.2) allocation will be validated or determined until an independent, up-to-date, and cumulative flood risk and drainage assessment has been carried out? The current evidence base traces back to a desktop study from August 2017, which was simply reissued as a further desktop exercise in September 2020 by consultants acting for the site promoter — not prepared independently — and which states in its own conclusion that further detailed investigation would be needed at the planning application stage. That evidence has never been independently verified since, and it also fails to account for the Rochdale AFC Bowlee Playing Fields application (PL/2026/0738), on land within the same catchment already identified as having longstanding drainage issues, which proposes converting grass to hard 3G surfacing and adding buildings and car parking — increasing runoff into ground already known to be constrained. Given this, what independent, cumulative verification will the Council require — covering both JPA1.2 and the Bowlee Playing Fields scheme together — before any application is accepted as validated?
Responding, the Leader advised that any planning application for JPA1.2 will need to provide sufficient and up to date evidence on flood risk and drainage, which will have to be properly assessed. As part of the process, the council will make a determination by consulting other relevant bodes including the Environment agency. The Council cannot give the requested commitment tonight, but it will ensure that flood risk and drainage are appropriately and robustly considered as part of the planning process.