From the Canal to Sevenways

Author: admin

  • Academy Call-in Response

    We’ve just received word that call in has been allowed. Parents and other interested parties haven’t got long to get submissions in. The working deadline for submissions to this call-in is Tuesday 23rd March. It may be possible to submit til Thursday but much better if the submissions are by Tuesday. (Just a reminder that the decision being called in is the decision to begin the process to close the two schools)

    Dear Councillor / Colleague –
    Please note that Councillor Mrs. Reilly, as Chairman of Overview & Scrutiny Core Committee, has agreed that the above decision be called in for scrutiny by the Overview & Scrutiny Core Committee. A copy of the call-in proforma is attached, for information, along with the decision report and decision statement, for ease of reference.
    In view of the required timescale for hearing the call-in and a range of other scheduled meetings and logistic considerations, the options for the timing of this meeting are extremely constrained. It is therefore envisaged that the meeting will take place on Monday 29th March, at 6.30 p.m. I would be very grateful if Members of the Committee could confirm their availability.
    The venue for the meeting is likely to be Flixton House; this will be confirmed in due course. Further details, agenda papers, etc., will be circulated in the usual way.
    I am advised that members of the public will not be allowed to address the meeting; but that if written representations are submitted in advance they will be made available for the Committee’s consideration. Any such representations should be forwarded to the Scrutiny Office at TTH by the afternoon of Tuesday 23rd March to enable them to be included with the initial agenda distribution. It will be possible for additional items to be circulated as “to follow” papers provided they are received in the Scrutiny Office by 12.00 noon on Thursday 25th March at the very latest. Please note that any such representations are to be considered in a public forum; it is envisaged that they will be in the public domain, and their content should therefore avoid anything inappropriate for the public domain.
    Regards –

    Mike Cordingley

    Dave Acton
    Call in Proforma Response
    Decision being called in
    Executive Decision

  • Motion in Support of Stretford Town Centre

    The Council has recently been notified that Receivers have been appointed in respect of Stretford Town Centre Mall .
    In light of the above and of the lawful consent of 80,000 sq ft of food retail at White City, and the recent decision made by the Planning Committee to support the application to build a mega 175, 000 sq ft Tesco superstore, both of which are situated near to Stretford Town Centre, this Council recognises the urgent need to support the regeneration of Stretford town centre and the Mall.
    To this end the Council resolves to:
    • Do everything it can to support the Town Centre Mall in these difficult times
    • Develop a proper and thorough Town centre plan and strategy.
    • Develop a new  improved and strengthened Town Centre partnership, and the development of a more effective partnership role with whoever becomes the new owners of the Mall.
    • Ring fence the income from the mall and re-invest it back into Stretford town centre and the Mall.
    This Council recognises that investment in our town centres has been proved to be effective in protecting them and making them fit for the future, helping them to serve our local communities. This has been proved to be successful in Sale, Altrincham and Urmston, this Council recognises that it is now time to look at Stretford.

  • Call in of Executive Decision – Lostock College / Stretford High School Closure

    Call in Request -LACK OF CONSULTATION WITH PARENTS/LACK OF INFORMATION

    The parents feel very strongly that there has been a lack of meaningful consultation with the Council concerning this decision. A 5,000 named petition has been signed by people objecting to the decision. There are a range of concerns consisting of whether there will be enough places at a new Academy, particularly in the long term when it’s planned to build 900 dwellings around LCCC – year 5 is already at capacity, and there is a lack of vacancies at any other school – a lack of information about what will happen in September, whether siblings will be guaranteed a place – severe disruption to children’s education – parents whose children are not yet in secondary education haven’t been given any information and haven’t been invited to any consultation, yet this decision affects their lives – the Stretford High School land should not be sold and the capital receipt given to LCCC, particularly so when the site of the proposed school is barely large enough for a new enlarged school – the 6th Form provision has been dropped from the original proposals for a new school. These are just a few of parents’ concerns, there are many more issues. The parents are also concerned that the decision on moving to statutory closure consultation has been made and the Executive will sign funding agreement with the Department for Education prior to the completion of the statutory consultation. This to them seems to be completely wrong and unacceptable. These concerns need to be heard by the committee and we suggest parents are invited to the call-in meeting so that the committee members can listen directly to those concerns.

    Dave Acton – Labour Councillor for Gorse Hill
    Mike Cordingley – Labour Councillor for Gorse Hill
    Dave Jarman – Labour Councillor for Longford

  • Happy Birthday to Old Trafford and to Gordon Brown

    The Old Trafford stadium is 100 years old today. Still think they could do a lot more for their neighbourhood. Gordon Brown has had a good day in the polls; or at least the lead is shrinking; unlike Chelseas’s.

  • Tories require you to get burgled before they’ll support gating schemes

    MetroAlleygate

    This story highlights just how out of touch Tories are. Gating schemes don’t just deter burglaries and anti social behaviour, they can create communal spaces that give pride to neighbourhoods.

    See earlier story

  • A submission on the Tesco/LCCC planning application

    It’s proved to be one of the most controversial proposals in recent years. I’m deeply disappointed that we were never allowed by the ruling Conservatives to properly scrutinise the proposal, to look at alternatives, or to test the amounts required to restore Ashes cricket. The suppression of debate in council or executive has been scandalous.

    However, we are where we are and the application has reached planning stage and the options for further examination are diminishing. Given that we’ve not been able to satisfy the most unsceptical eye that this is has been properly tested by Trafford, we’re left with lodging objections to the proposal. I’d much rather we’d been allowed to properly scrutinise and look at ways to support test cricket that didn’t impact on the scope for developing the Academy, that didn’t run the risk of creating gridlock, but the scope for realising a really exciting development has been wasted.

    For the record I’ve included my objection to the proposal:

    I believe that the proposal will generate levels of traffic that are unsustainable without prejudicing the free movement of traffic along Chester Road.

    Introducing a right turn into Tescos for customers coming from Stretford will cause gridlock. Traffic is often already reduced to single file as buses stop traffic on the inside lane.

    Additionally, the transport assessment takes no account of plans to ramp up permitted custom at White City together with an application to build a supermarket there.

    There is a lack of analysis in the submissions as to whether Chester Road can cope with a second large superstore in this proximity. Since there is already
    permission for food retail at White City, clearly the planning authority should take cognisance of that development.

    Although the playing field upon which the Tesco is to be built has not been utilised for the past few years, it is not clear that the proposed much larger (and yet to be formalised) academy will not require its use. There seems to be an implied assumption that the grounds of the academy can be supplemented by
    taking from the park with associated loss of amenity. In any event, the store takes much needed green space, in comparison with the White City proposal which is brownfield under any definition.

    The argument for permitting the Tesco is in respect of the planning gain afforded by the regeneration of LCCC. It’s clear that LCCC needs regenerating but it’s not clear that their business case stacks up. Everything is predicated on the winning of Ashes cricket back to Old Trafford. There is no guarantee that
    the bid will be successful, there’s no guarantee that even if it is, that the derived income will be sufficient to finance the borrowing. I would want
    to see much more independent scrutiny of the business plan before proceeding.

    There is loss of public funds associated with this proposal and it requires that residents ignore the degree of trust that is being placed upon the success
    of the cricket ground’s future management. It is not clear that the local authority has tested whether the cricket club needs the £21m. With better management, could the call on public funds be reduced and hence the case for the Tesco part of the development be completely nullified?

    Mike Cordingley