Agenda item - Written questions from members of the public.

A list of public questions received by the due date of 12noon on the 10^th July 2014 will be circulated separately as part of an addendum at the meeting.

15.1      The Mayor reported that two written questions had been received from members of the public and invited Mr. Morris to come forward and address the council.

15.2      Mr. Morris thanked the Mayor and asked the following question;

            “The successful funding of £1.5 million from the heritage lottery fund for the Volks Railway is welcome news to the regeneration for this historic and much loved tourist attraction which has long been neglected. However, could the Green council explain how this will impact on future lottery fund bids for the city?”

15.3      Councillor Bowden replied;

“I actually don’t like to start by correcting you, we haven’t won £1.5 million, all we’ve been awarded is the first part of a lottery bid, as you will know from the past, they come in two phases, we’ve been awarded £96,000 for the Volks Railway, as I always highlight to tell Councillor Davey, a rapid transit screen, to work up a bid. If successful, we will hopefully get £1.5 million. I have to say in response; you will recall, as I seem to remember you opposed it, that we won £2.2 million for the very successful Level. The heritage lottery fund recognises cities such as Brighton, which is rich in heritage and does not set a cap for specific locations. Each application is judged on its merits and that’s what’s expected. We have a very productive and ongoing dialogue with the Heritage Lottery Fund officers exploring future plans across the city.”

15.4      Mr. Morris asked the following supplementary question;

            “I would actually just like to make one correction before I issue my supplementary. It is totally untrue that I opposed the lottery funding on the Level. This in fact, we had over 3000 signatures and we were merely, as friends of the Level, actually supporting local residents. We did not oppose that funding.

            My supplementary is, the residents of Queens Park are deeply concerned about the deterioration of their park which urgently needs repairs and regeneration. With the park failing to have green flag status, it’s appreciated that a consultation is being carried out and results with be published after closure on 23^rd July, ready for an application to the Heritage Lottery Fund. Many other projects are already in the queue for HLF funding, including the Dome complex proposal for a number of smaller bids for £5 million each. For nearly 3 years, this green council has promised restoration of the park, in Queens Park, when will the plans finally go ahead and an application to be made to the Heritage Lottery Fund?”

15.5      Councillor Bowden replied;

            “Had you come to the party in the park Adrian, you would have seen that we were continuing the consultation. I was serving ice creams as one of the team working with the Friends of Queens Park, who I have been working with very closely on getting this consultation going for some time. So the bid will go in once the consultation has informed that bid and that is coming to a conclusion very shortly. I have been tweeting and talking about it for some time, many years, not just since candidates were announced for Queens Park. But in terms of saying, “what is the Council been doing for the last three years?” I do have to tell you that over the last three years, the Heritage Lottery Fund is not the only pot of gold in town, or in the country, we’ve actually been successful in bidding for nearly £54 million worth of funding from various pots, and that has actually helped financed a lot of projects across the city, not just parks – Valley Gardens has just been announced. So there are a lot of things going on and as soon as the consultation is over, which I hope you have fed into, I have certainly fed into it and I’ve been actively getting people to feed in, then the bid will go in and let’s hope it’s successful.

            You mentioned the Dome, and we weren’t successful on that occasion, we had some very positive feedback and on this occasion, we weren’t successful. But I can remind you that we lost out to Canterbury Cathedral, who were also unsuccessful on their first bid, they had some very positive feedback and they were successful on their second attempt. So watch this space for the Royal Pavilion Estate.”

15.6      The Mayor thanked Mr. Morris for attending the meeting and asking his questions and invited Mr. Waugh to come forward and address the council.

15.7      Mr. Waugh thanked the Mayor and asked the following question:

            “Following the implementation of Controlled Parking Zone E, the Post Office, Thai Café/Coffee Shop, General Store, Post Office, Pharmacy and a few other businesses on Matlock Road have seen a catastrophic drop in business from the exact day the paid parking outside the shops was implemented. 

            Disastrously, at least three of the businesses will fail in the very short term unless immediate action is taken. It is critical the new parking scheme is modified to allow limited short term free parking outside the shops as in Richardson Road, both areas enjoyed by their local communities. 

            Please could I have confirmation immediate action will be undertaken to avoid the completely unnecessary destruction of our businesses?"

15.8      Councillor Davey replied;

            “There was a full consultation and it’s really unfortunate that these points weren’t raised during that consultation as we could have hopefully arrived at a solution much sooner. Officers have considered this carefully and I know there have been meetings on site with yourself and Ward Councillors. Free parking within a full resident parking scheme would be a diversion from policy at the Council and this is unlike Richardson Road which is a light touch scheme and it would require a change to that policy and would need to be agreed by members at the committee.

            Other changes to hours of operation would require a full traffic order to be advertised and consulted upon and any suspension of parking would not be appropriate as this will encourage all day parking and abandoned vehicles to user’s spaces which will be of no help to local businesses.

            However the Council could consider a change to the tariffs under a legal notice advertised for 21 days allowing the tariff to be reduced soon after this. This is the first time I’ve been involved in this but I know officers have met with you so their recommendation is the new extra low tariff within area E to help businesses and visitors on the basis that this new parking scheme is a residential area quite a way from the city centre with a number of small businesses located in close proximity.

            So the tariffs they’re proposing to you are 50p for 1 hour, £1 for 2 hours and £2 for 4 hours which is half of the current prices in that area and that should mean that, it being the wish of the traders there and the Councillors, be pursued in the shortest time scale possible.”

15.9      Mr. Waugh asked the following supplementary question;

          “I’d like to point out that when the parking was implemented it was highly controversial, my life savings are in that business and to change it from £1 to 50p isn’t going to make the slightest bit of difference, we had no idea that the area of Matlock Road would turn in to a ghost town during the day and I find it really quite extraordinary that, rather can keep policy, you’re happy to see our businesses go bankrupt and I think that’s just not on.

          It’s not a major change, the Council decided to move the cycle bay which took 2 men and a bulldozer an entire week to move a cycle bay from outside my shop to about 30 yards up the road and all we’re asking for is a change of a lamp post and removal of a parking machine. The Councillor replied subsequently, in other words the notices are up, they’ve already done the work so it could be done as a matter of urgency. I can’t believe anybody in this room would want to see our businesses go bankrupt so that the policy of the Council is upheld.

          One of the Council officials came up to the shop with Sue Shanks which I very much appreciate and he made it quite clear that the problem with and why he wants to have 50p is because it’s hard to administer the parking area and it’s not good for your contractors who do it and there is a precedent on Richardson Road, I went there myself and spoke to all the shop owners and 2 of them have given me letters of support stating that without the, you call it a soft touch, it’s 2 hours free no return within one hour outside the shops and that’s all we’re asking for, so there is a precedent.

          Time is critical, if you’re telling me that you would rather have your policies put through and my business and 2 other businesses go bust so that you don’t have to administer the area and it doesn’t meet with whatever your reasons are, I find that appalling and I’m asking you to take that in to consideration so you can do what you want but I go bust. Please explain to me why you would want to do that?”

15.10   Councillor Davey replied;

          “This is the first time there’s been any engagement between you and I on this, free parking is not an ideal option, you talk about Richardson Road, I live very close in fact I’ve visited there twice this morning and there were no parking spaces available in the free parking areas and that is one of the downsides of providing free parking so I am more than happy, and I will ask officers to look at this again and I will meet with the Ward Councillors and I will ask officers to outline exactly what the options are here, but there are timescales involved it is not just a question of changing signs whatever way forward was agreed it is a legal traffic regulation orders that has to be advertised, they have to be prepared they have to go in newspapers for 21 days, that is not of our making that is not of my making that is the law.

          There are rules and laws which have to be adhered to, that is not my choice, that is the law, traffic regulations have to be advertised and published in newspapers, they have to be prepared and then there can be objections, if there are, they have to go to committee for decision; that is unfortunately how it is. So we’ve been through that process to put the scheme in and I would wish to repeat such a lengthy process for any changes in this area. I’m perfectly amenable to looking at what is the best solution so I will ask officers to look at this again and I will meet with Ward Councillors to discuss what they officers suggest.”

15.11   The Mayor thanked Mr. Waugh for attending the meeting and asking his questions and noted that concluded the item.