Agenda item

1.     Question to the Portfolio Holder for Services received from Cllr Bentley

“Could I ask if we can have the same price on annual parking on Well Street car park in Cheadle as the California car park in Leek (e.g. Cheadle £360 cheapest leek cheapest £55) and a 20 mins free parking outside the Post office and bakery on Tape Street car park as a trial?”

Response:

“Pricing is set by the Council on an annual basis as part of agreeing the forthcoming year’s Fees and Charges. There is a range of fees based on the usage of the car park, its location, and other factors. The 20 minutes free may be considered as part of the parking review and may be best done as a wider consideration to ensure benefits are maximised across the District.”

In response to supplementary questions the portfolio holder stated that the California Car Park season ticket had been available for a number of years and the cost had increased incremently helping to avoid people parking on residential streets.  Charges would be based on what the market dictates and as part of the budget but comparisons could not be made across the three towns as they have their own challenges.

2.     Question to the Portfolio Holder for Services received received from Cllr Aberley

“Can the portfolio holder please update full council on the plans and timescales for the forthcoming parking review?”

Response:

“The questionnaire to Members that will provide useful information for this was delayed in circulation which has slowed progress on its input to the wider review of car parking. The intention is that the review will conclude before the end of the current financial year.”

In response to supplementary questions the portfolio holder urged councillors to complete the car park survey for their individual wards and the survey was not placed on social media by the Council.  Any proposals would be consulted on more widely (e.g. parish councils) on aspects such as overnight parking, community use and season tickets.  The did not include charging policy or charging periods which would be an issue for the budget.  Timescales for wider consultation would be dependent on the results of the councillor survey.

3.     Question to the Portfolio Holder for Regeneration and Planning received received from Cllr Flunder

“With only about 6 months left, what promotional and supporting advice are the councils re-generation team going to offer local business’s and possibly other community/business groups. To ensure that all the allocated UKSFP funding is spent in the by the deadline in 2025?”

Response:

“With just under 6 months remaining the majority of UKSPF funds have now been allocated and provided significant improvements to business, residents, and communities across the whole of the district/Staffordshire Moorlands.

The Regeneration team have just released the final round of business grants to help stimulate growth and innovation, and to drive new employment opportunities and these are being promoted through all of our promotional channels, parishes, towns and partner agencies.

Where original plans were not feasible i.e. an ambition to develop a new business enterprise centre, we have reallocated these funds to other strategic activities such as the purchase of Cheadle Market to further ignite town centre and high street regeneration plans.

Working in partnership with multiple community and business organisations we are confident that all funding will be fully delivered and provide maximum benefit to our area.”

In response to supplementary questions the portfolio holder stated that UKSPF funds were reallocated to Cheadle market from projects that were not deliverable during the timeframe which were very challenging.  Cheadle councillors had been engaged with regards to the use of unused funds for other regeneration projects.

4.     Question to the Portfolio Holder for Leisure and Tourism received received from Cllr Flunder

“Can the portfolio holder tell us what support package the officers are proposing to support the market traders in Leek, now that the re-opening date has been delayed 6 weeks, until Nov. 25^th? The Market Traders will lose 6 weeks trading in the refurbished market building, during the busiest trading period of the year, leaving only 3 weeks before Christmas, some fear that the reduction in trading will result in not being able to pay charges in the new market facilities and may have to close.”

Response:

“Prior to closing the Butter and Trestle market earlier in the year for the refurbishment, the team held one to one sessions with the markets traders and developed a suite of compensation options based on the feedback received. Compensation payments for the 6 week delay has been calculated using the same methodology as before. All traders eligible for compensation have received a communication over recent weeks setting out the sums payable and seeking confirmation of bank details to enable payments to be processed. I am pleased to confirm that all compensation payments have been processed and the final tranche of bank transfers will go out in the payment run on Thursday.

We also supported a number of market traders to trade outdoors during the closure and this option continues during this period of delay. If any traders are concerned about their ability to pay their rent on return to the market, officers would be happy to discuss this on a one-to-one basis and develop a payment plan.”

In response to supplementary questions the portfolio holder stated that he had confidence in the calulation of compensation and paid tribute to market traders operating in poor summer weather conditions.  The delay in re-opening was dissapointing but reflected a complex project involving an historic building.  As structured approach to the future development of town centres would be presented to future scrutiny meetings.  It was confirmed that the local MP was on the UKSPF Board.