Month: February 2011

Planning Committee – 15/2/2011 – Part 1

The meeting started with the Chair, Cllr Mitchell welcoming those present to the meeting. The minutes of the meeting held on the 25th January were agreed. Cllr Elderton declared a prejudicial interest in item 6. Cllr Johnson asked for a site visit for item 6 (Sheldrake’s Restaurant in Heswall) and Cllr Keeley asked for a … Continue reading “Planning Committee – 15/2/2011 – Part 1”

The meeting started with the Chair, Cllr Mitchell welcoming those present to the meeting. The minutes of the meeting held on the 25th January were agreed. Cllr Elderton declared a prejudicial interest in item 6.

Cllr Johnson asked for a site visit for item 6 (Sheldrake’s Restaurant in Heswall) and Cllr Keeley asked for a site visit for item 9 (Woodville in Thornton Hough). Both site visits were agreed.

The Planning Committee first considered item 10 (a change of use from an office to a dwelling in Claughton). An officer said it was a departure from the Unitary Development Plan and there had previous been a refusal for a nursery here on highway safety grounds. There was no petition against the application. Cllr Elderton said for the benefit of the audience that although it was not normally within the criteria that it had been marketed. Cllr Mitchell proposed the application was approved, seconded by Cllr Elderton. All councillors agreed to approve it.

The committee then went on to consider item 8 – a canopy and first floor balustrade for a restaurant in West Kirby. The officer pointed out that there were objections to this application and the condition restricting any music or amplified voices in this area. The committee then heard from the lead petitioner.

Park Group invest £6 million in Valley Road Business Park

In a good news story for Bidston & St. James, Park Group have bought the premises they use as a headquarters on the Valley Road Business Park in Bidston.

Chris Houghton, Managing Director Park, commented: “An opportunity has arisen to consolidate our freehold properties on the estate and the Board believes that by taking this opportunity we will significantly reduce our fixed costs, enhancing both our profitability and our future cashflow and secure the operational base of the group for the future.”

Chinese New Year celebrations 2011, Berry Street, Chinatown, Liverpool

I went to Liverpool today to see the Chinese New Year celebrations in Chinatown. There were many crowds there to watch the entertainment, firecrackers as well as a fun fair and market. Roads such as Berry Street and Great George Street were closed off giving it a carnival feel. Below is a video I recorded of the dragon in Berry Street.

The crowd was nice and friendly. There were plenty of families there. Children were being handed out red envelopes by a guy in costume (see below for a picture). Certainly the Chinese know how to celebrate the New Year in style!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfDMm2NWoaI


Chinese Arch and crowd during Chinese New Year celebrations 2011, Liverpool, England

Person handing out red envelopes during Chinese New Year celebrations 2011, Liverpool, England
Chinese New Year celebrations

Merseytravel respond on Mersey Tunnels issues – Fast Tag, Disability

Prior to yesterday’s meeting at Merseytravel, I submitted some questions about certain aspects of the Mersey Tunnel Tolls changes . A Merseytravel spokesperson responded today. Their answers are below the original questions. Q1) Is the difference in price charged between Fast Tag holders and cash payers because of increased costs to Merseytravel regarding the latter? […]

Prior to yesterday’s meeting at Merseytravel, I submitted some questions about certain aspects of the Mersey Tunnel Tolls changes . A Merseytravel spokesperson responded today. Their answers are below the original questions.

Q1) Is the difference in price charged between Fast Tag holders and cash payers because of increased costs to Merseytravel regarding the latter?

A) No, this about marketing the convenience of this system for regular commuters.

Q2) Regarding 4.24 in the report, would this report mentioned be available on Thursday or will it only be prepared if the recommendation is passed?

A) A review of concessions will now be undertaken, after the recommendation was approved.

Q3) There are references throughout the report to the County of Merseyside Act 1980 as amended by the Mersey Tunnels Act 2004, in relation to the increases in tolls and discount structure. However it seems (at least to me) misleading to include references to the legal basis behind the other proposed recommendations, but not in 4.24. As I have pointed out in previous correspondence, the authority does this using its powers under s.92 ss.1(a) of the County of Merseyside Act 1980 as amended by the Mersey Tunnels Act 2004. It seems strange the tunnels legislation would be referenced elsewhere, but not here. Is this just an oversight?

A) This is covered by the Act. The general power to offer concessions is actually to be found at s.92C(a)(c) – the Authority has power to allow a class of traffic to use the tunnels on payment of tolls at a reduced rate, “on such occasions or in such other circumstances as it may from time to time determine”. In other words, the authority can review concessions from time to time and it would be remiss if it did not do so, as it was proposed here. Thus this recommendation is a proper one, with a firm legal basis. There is no particular need to mention this legal reference, but equally nothing sinister in its absence.

A) A review of concessions will now be undertaken, after the recommendation to investigate the issue was approved.

Q4) Have the legal implications of removing the current exemption for Blue Badge holders (and other disabled users) been thought through, regarding the authority’s legal duties under the Equalities Act 2010 and other relevant legislation?

Q5) What would be the cost implications to Merseytravel if Blue Badge holders were charged?

A) (to questions 4 and 5) These issues will be covered in the review, all considerations taken into account.

Q6) If a report is agreed reviewing this, which Merseytravel committee will it go to and when will it be considered?

A) It will be reported to the P&R committee and/or the Equalities Committee, in an appropriately timely manner to enable due consideration of all the issues concerned.

Q7) Will the Merseytravel Access Panel (public or affected disabled users of the tunnel) be consulted on any changes?

A) It will be consulted upon in an appropriate manner.

Clearly if the report recommends charging disabled users of Mersey Tunnels it’s going to be something the disability associations, charities and disabled drivers on Merseyside will have a view on. P&R refers to Merseytravel’s Policy and Resources Committee.

Council Excellence Overview and Scrutiny Committee – 31/1/2011 Part 15 – Strategic Change Programme update (continued)

Cllr Davies continued by asking why the PACSPE (project 24) was only realising £200,000/year of savings?

Mr. Green said that was very unfair. Cllr Davies said the EVR had happened with the privatisation. Ian Coleman said there had been a reduction in the saving being of the EVR. Also certain areas had been taken out of the project’s scope reducing the saving.

Cllr Davies asked if the numbers relate to the outsourcing only? Mr. Green said they were making the savings now. Cllr Davies said what about the services not affected by outsourcing?

Cllr Gilchrist said that they welcome the progress report. He said the confidence in the office in delivering the projects is to be noted. He thanked the Cabinet Member for his attendance. Cllr Green said in a humourous way “God bless you, guv’nor” followed by saying he had a choice of attending either this or his daughter’s birthday.

The Council Excellence committee then went on to consider a report on performance management by the Interim Head of Corporate Planning, Engagement and Communications. Cllr Gilchrist said (in reference to Eric Pickles) that he was shocked when the saw the detail of which targets had been removed on the Department for Communities and Local Government website.