Agenda and minutes

Venue: Training and Conference Suite, First Floor, Number One Riverside, Smith Street, Rochdale, OL16 1XU

Contact: Michael Garraway  4716

No. Item


Declarations of Interest pdf icon PDF 27 KB

    Members are requested to indicate at this stage any items on the agenda in which they intend to declare an interest.  Members are reminded that, in accordance with the Localism Act 2011 and the Council's adopted Code of Conduct, they must declare the nature of any personal or discloseable pecuniary interest required of them and, in the case of any discloseable pecuniary interest, withdraw from the meeting during consideration of the item, unless permitted otherwise within the Code of Conduct.


    Further to the Council’s Code of Conduct, Councillor Sultan Ali declared a personal interest in agenda item 11 (Land to the Rear of Cherrington Drive, Castleton) as he was a Corporate member of Hopwood Hall College.


Presentation - Young People


    The Township Committee received a presentation from Members of the Rochdale Youth Forum, which met weekly on Thursday evenings at Moss Street, Rochdale.


    The presentation highlighted the work undertaken by the Youth Service and also focused on the issues they regarded as priorities, including mental health, sexual health, bullying, disability issues and community cohesion.


    Members asked questions of the young people and complimented the young people on the enthusiasm with which they presented their activities. A member suggested that Youth Forum give consideration to having a ‘Youth Mayor’, noting that a similar position was already in place at Oldham.


    DECIDED – That (1) the presentation by members of the Rochdale Youth Forum be noted and welcomed;

                (2) the Director of Children’s Services be requested to investigate the feasibility of a the establishment of a position of Youth Mayor for the Borough, and report back thereon to a future meeting of the Township Committee.


Open Forum


Greater Manchester Police


    Inspector M. Hughes (Greater Manchester Police) and M. Reynolds (Community Safety) updated the Township Committee on activities and initiatives that were undertaken by Greater Manchester Police in the Rochdale Township Division, in partnership with the Council’s Community Safety Team.


    The Community Safety Officer presented the Township’s crime figures for the third quarter 2015/16 (September – December). The report advised that there had been some notable reductions in crime and ant-social behaviour across the Township. In particular Balderstone and Kirkholt had seen reductions in total crime, as well as ant-social behaviour. The Bamford, Norden and Spotland and Falinge Wards had seen similar reductions in overall crime although in the latter Ward there had been reported increases in violent crime. There had been some specific issues relating to anti-social behaviour in the Kingsway Ward but the overall volumes were well down in the Quarter 3 period compared to earlier periods, but the overall volume of incidents was down as were instances of criminal damage and burglary.


    Inspector Hughes reported on upcoming initiatives that Greater Manchester Police were planning for the Rochdale area including a reorganisation and revision of the PCSO’s working rosters and a ‘hate awareness’ week.


    Inspector Hughes also referred to the recent murder in the Township’s Central Ward and thanked members of the local community for their ongoing assistance with the police’s investigations. This investigation had taken up a substantial amount of the local police’s resources.


    DECIDED – That the Greater Manchester Police update be noted and welcomed.   


Minutes pdf icon PDF 91 KB

    To consider the minutes of the meeting held on 6th January 2016.


    The Committee considered the Minutes of the meeting held 6th January 2016. Further to Minute 63 (b) (Taxi Issues) the Chair advised that the meeting with the representatives of Transport for Greater Manchester had recently been held. At this meeting the Transport for Greater Manchester representatives had reiterated its position that on safety grounds they would not be permitting taxi and private hire vehicles to use Smith Street and Drake Street in Rochdale town centre. The Chair also advised that the Committee had resolved that Milkstone and Deeplish Ward Members be invited to the meeting, at which they were duly represented.


    DECIDED – That, subject to the inclusion of Milkstone and Deeplish Ward Members in the list of people to be invited to the meeting with Transport for Greater Manchester (minute 63 (b) refers), the Minutes of the meeting of Rochdale Township Committee held 6th January 2016 be approved as a correct record.


Rochdale Township Planning Sub-Committee pdf icon PDF 61 KB


Neighbourhood Planning – Designation of the proposed Rooley Moor Neighbourhood Area and Forum pdf icon PDF 1 MB


    The Township Committee considered a report of the Director of Economy that informed Members of consultation that had taken place on the applications for the designation of a Neighbourhood Area and a Neighbourhood Forum for Rooley Moor (details of which were included at Appendices 1 and 2 to the submitted report. The report also sought the Committee’s approval to designate the Rooley Moor Neighbourhood Area and Forum to support future preparation of the Rooley Moor Neighbourhood Plan.


    The recommendations in the report were presented as the 2011 Localism Act had introduced new powers for local communities to become involved in planning matters and specifically relates to the production of Neighbourhood Plans, Neighbourhood Development Orders (NDO) and Community Right to Build Orders (CRtB).  The Act sought to hand more power to local communities in influencing how their local area develops. By providing a statutory framework, the Act opened up the opportunity for residents to create community-led plans (or neighbourhood plans) to meet local aspirations. However, the need for neighbourhood plans was required to be both positive and in conformity with local strategic planning policies. In addition, any neighbourhood plan must be ‘pro-development’ and was not to be used to stop development already allocated or permitted, or propose less development than the Local Plan. The first stage of this - the Core Strategy - is currently being prepared and should be adopted in 2016. Neighbourhood development plans or orders do not take effect unless there is a majority of support in a referendum of the neighbourhood. They also have to meet a number of conditions before they can be put to a community referendum and legally come into force. They must: have regard to national planning policy; be in general conformity with strategic policies in the development plan for the local area and be compatible with the European Union’s obligations and human rights requirements.


    Alternatives considered: If Members decide to refuse to designate a neighbourhood area and forum, the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations require that the Council publishes a statement of the reasons for making that decision. In the event of such a decision, it was therefore considered important that the Township Committee sets out clear reasons why the decision has been made. Such a decision would also be likely to delay the production of the Neighbourhood Plan and the ability for members of the local community to come together to create a neighbourhood area and forum.


    DECIDED – That (1) the Township Committee approves the Rooley Moor Neighbourhood Area and Forum for designation;

    (2) the area and forum designation publicised on the Council’s website as soon as possible including a statement containing the name of the designated neighbourhood forum, a copy of the written constitution, name of the neighbourhood area and the name of at least one member on the forum.

    Eligible for call-in: Yes


Disposal of land at Cut Lane/Caldershaw Road and Swift Road, Rochdale pdf icon PDF 154 KB

    Additional documents:


    The Township Committee considered a report to the Director of Economy, the purpose of which was to report and to seek approval for a course of action for two plots of land at Cut Lane/Caldershaw Road, Rochdale and Swift Road, Rochdale, which were highlighted on plans attached at Appendices 1 and 2 of the submitted report.


    The recommendations in the report were presented as there were no legal impediments to the Council’s ability to dispose of the sites regardless of whether the applications for village green status were successful. The disposals would be consistent with the Council’s corporate priorities, reducing its asset base and associated costs and, in the case of sale for development, obtaining capital receipts. The Head of Planning’s view was that the development is permissible on both sites. Also, as things presently stand, registration of the sites as village greens would prevent the development of the sites. However, village green legislation may change in the future and Community Asset Transfer would give the local communities a further opportunity to permanently safeguard the future of the sites in accordance with their priorities, and to invest in the sites to enhance their value to the local communities.


    Alternatives considered: a range of options were available for the future of both sites in the report that were identical and dependent on the outcome of the Village Green Application: Retention by the Council as Village greens; Community Asset Transfer; Release for Disposal; Retention in Council ownership for the current use as open land. To retain both sites in their current use, regardless of the outcome of the Village Green applications was a further alternative that could be considered as was the retention of the sites if they did not secure capital receipts or beneficial development, nor reduce the Council’s financial and/or environmental liabilities.


    DECIDED – That the Committee agrees to retain both sites (Cut Lane/Caldershaw Road and Swift Road) in their current use, regardless of the outcome of the Village Green applications, noting that retention of the two sites will not secure capital receipts or beneficial development, nor reduce the Council’s financial and/or environmental liabilities.

    Eligible for call-in: Yes


Land at Sparth Bottoms, Rochdale pdf icon PDF 146 KB

    Additional documents:


    The Committee considered a report of the Director of Economy, the purpose of which was to advise Members of a request to acquire land to the rear of the Sparth Islamic Centre as an extension to the existing facilities.


    The recommendations in the report were presented as the area related to a small part of Sparth Bottoms Open Space, located to the rear of the Islamic Centre and adjacent to the concrete batching plant. Sparth Islamic Centre was described as a thriving local amenity providing services to the local community. One of the services the building hosts is Islamic funerals and at such events, attendances can be substantial, with many mourners not being able to enter the building and being left to stand outside the building, often blocking the footpaths around the facility and not being able to properly show their respects. The Islamic Centre would therefore like to acquire an area of land from the council to create a walled area within which, on special occasions and for large gatherings, the outdoor space can be used for prayer. At a meeting held 26th August 2014, Rochdale Township Planning Sub-Committee granted planning approval for the proposed external prayer area (minute 25 refers).


    Alternatives considered: The land could remain as open space, but on the occasions that the Islamic Centre is holding special events or large funerals, large numbers of people will continue to attend and cannot be accommodated within the Centre and consequently the local area will continue to be inconvenienced by attendees standing outside the building on the grass and footpaths.


    DECIDED – That (1) the Committee agrees to release the land for disposal;

                (2) the Assistant Director (Legal, Governance and Workforce) be requested to carry out the legal work in connection with the disposal, including a Title Check to ensure there are no restrictions that would prevent disposal;

                (3) the Purchaser be requested to pay the Council’s legal and surveyor’s costs.

    Eligible for Call-in: Yes.


Exclusion of Press and Public

    To consider excluding the press and public from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business in accordance with the provisions of Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, as amended.






    DECIDED – That the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business since it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, if members of the public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information, namely information relating to the business or financial affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information).


Land to the rear of Cherrington Drive, Castleton


The Township Committee considered a report of the Director of Economy, the purpose of which was to seek the view of Members and, if appropriate, to seek approval for the Council to discuss terms and enter into an agreement with a local training company who have expressed an interest in leasing an area of open space to the rear of 2 - 38 Cherrington Drive as shown on a plan attached to the submitted report.


The recommendations in the report were presented as it was understood that the Council had acquired the land shown cross hatched on plan that was attached to the report, for highways purposes in 1980.  However, not all of the land was required for that purpose and the remaining land has been left in an undeveloped and naturalised condition. The land was located within the Green Belt and measured approximately 8.72 acres.  However, in recent months, the Council has been contacted by a local training company who were keen to occupy a portion of the site shown hatched on the submitted plan.  This area measured approximately 2.05 acres and avoided the right of way that will runs close to the Southern boundary of the potential opportunity.


Alternatives considered: there are a range of options available to the Council including; doing nothing; releasing the land in support of the proposals; agreeing not to release the site but assist to the company which had expressed the interest.


DECIDED – That, further to paragraph 4.2 of the submitted report, the Committee determines to do nothing and agrees not to release the land and not to support a startup business.

Eligible for Call-in: Yes.