MenuMinutes of a meeting of Amble Town Council regarding North Street/North View held on Wednesday 7th November 2012 at 4.00 p.m. Room 2, Fourways 2, Dilston Terrace, Amble
1. PRESENT: Councillors Hinson, Weir, Mrs Lewis, Mrs Dargue, Miss Morrison and Rev’d Nicholson together with the Clerk, Miss Brown.
Also: Darin Fawcett – Amble Police Station; John Gray – NCC Community Safety; Judith Davis – NCC Community Safety; Doug Wilson – Tesco; 5 Residents of North Street/North View
2. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE: Cllrs Arckless- other meeting.
3. TESCO DEVELOPMENT: Tesco Corporate Affairs Manager – Doug Wilson
3.1: Positioning of bollards
3.2: Untidiness of land
3.3: Future liaising with local residents
Doug updated that due to the economic climate there had been a review of schemes including the proposed build in Amble and the build start date had been postponed until Spring 2013. The supermarket should open for business November 2013 with staff recruitment to start between July & August 2013.
Doug was in agreement that the state of the site should have been looked at in greater detail by Tesco at lot sooner; however having viewed it today, he concurred that more tidying up needed to be done and he would set this in motion as soon as possible.
Tesco became responsible for the site when it was purchased from Northumberland Estates after planning permission had been obtained and were not party to any negotiations or discussions before then. However Doug agreed to a request from a resident to look at a sound survey that had been carried out.
Doug commented that he would like to start dialogue with residents as he appreciated they had concerns about the area, the demolition, the build and the subsequent operating procedures.
The recent Northumberland Estates sewage works had been necessary for site preparation work. Tesco Assets and Estates department had viewed the site and the size makes securing it a huge impractical job.
3.1: Darrin commented that the concrete slabs that were put in place as bollards have been a cause of anti-social behaviour – they may as well have put seats there. Doug agreed these should be removed.
3.2: Demolition of buildings – Doug will ask Tesco why this has not been done as it is clearly attracting anti-social behaviour. Despite the access road not being in place, it may be possible to demolish onsite into one of the buildings and so reduce the dangerous state and the ‘attraction’ level. He was very sympathetic to the overall detrimental look of the area both for and to the residents and prospective buyers of their properties.
Doug noticed the grass and parts of the hedge had been cut recently – the hedge had been cut by residents – he felt that Tesco should be cutting the hedge.
Steps half way along the path down to the previously private land were very dangerous.
3.3: The boulevard path was to be relooked at to improve the situation for the residents as it was so close to their properties. Cllr Mrs Lewis queried whether the current path was actually in the land boundary as it existed previously as a footpath outside of the perimeter and suggested a new path could be created within the site.
Doug confirmed the path would be looked at along with various other issues.
A detailed planting plan will be created and will be very specific in terms of size and species to maximise screening of the properties and to reduce noise impact; this would be done by a specialist.
Tesco would also carry out a full structural survey of the properties, which are grade 2 listed, before and after the construction and any damage would be put right.
Doug is willing to commit to meeting with the residents and main contractors before the construction commences where the phasing of the programme would be discussed. There will be some areas of work which by their nature will be disruptive e.g. pile driving, but discussions regarding mitigation wherever possible to lessen the impact on the residents at all stages of the work will take place. He is always happy to update and communicate; there will be a site manager available during all the work for residents to contact.
Security would be onsite during both demolition and construction.
After the opening of the store, planning conditions will be adhered to but Environmental Health can be called to monitor the situation if necessary.
Doug reassured the residents that he would hold talks with various sections within Tesco next week and then respond to the current problems regarding the appearance of the site which was the main concern at present. He left his contact details with them and would be in touch to meet them in their homes to see the area from that prospective as well as arrange a future meeting to update everyone. The residents main concerns for the future of the site post Tesco Development were the noise levels, footpaths and car parks.
4. ANTI-SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR:
LMAPS (Local Multi Agency Problem Solving) John Gray/Claire Hart
Northumbria Police – Inspector Paul Truscott
NCC Community Safety Officer – Judith Davis
4.1: Youths hanging around
4.2: Noise levels
4.3: Residents becoming problems – landlord/tenant issues
4.4: Consequences of anti-social behaviour – cleanliness
4.5: Improving lighting
4.6: The consideration of a gate for the arch
4.1: Approx. 80% of the current level of anti-social behaviour was as a result of the site, with 20% coming from elsewhere. Positive policing in other areas of the town had moved the anti-social behaviour to this location. It was acknowledged that many of those present were not local residents. PCSO Fawcett had been a big help in minimalizing anti-social behaviour and was warmly thanked by the residents.
4.2, 4 & 6: The archway is not only used as a public toilet by patrons of the local licenced establishments but also young people gather under the arch; this is both obnoxious and very intimidating. It results in lots of noise and bad language at all hours. Residents feel it would not be tolerated in other towns, so why allow it here.
John Gray would liaise with NCC licencing as there may be measures that can be put in place, but the blocking of the archway could be problematic as it is a public highway.
4.3: The residents stressed the detrimental effects the long standing issues were having on their health; several had moved out of the area and others had their houses on the market although the site was a deterrent to buyers. They also felt there had been lack of concern for their plight by people in authoritative positions.
Cars that are parked in this area are from shoppers rather than residents and cause many noise and access problems for residents. The improvements to Turner Street were commented on as being pleasing to the eye but lorries making deliveries to properties were causing damage to the paths/kerbs and on occasions blocking residential doorways –perhaps the provision of bollards is the answer to this.
Due to all the problems, residents felt that landlords were giving up on their properties and accepting lesser quality tenants. John Gray suggested Judith could work with the landlords re: problems, there are schemes in place for landlords to ‘vet’ potential tenants, however only responsible landlords take this up.
4.5: Following a previous meeting between Judith and residents, Judith informed that a street light had been converted to a brighter bulb, the brighter lights having proved in the past to have discouraged youths congregating; the residents admitted there had been an improvement in the last 2 weeks. Judith would investigate extra lighting.
Residents felt that the entrance to Amble over the Braid was a ‘gateway to dereliction’. This was not only the condition of the Tesco site but the general appearance of the road and paths. They felt the last maintenance that was carried out to North Street was done over 5 years ago. John Gray would report all concerns to NCC.
The residents thanked all for attending and were likewise thanked by the Chairman of the Council for their coherent expression of the problems they had encountered and their concerns for the future. He added that he felt some progress had been made and a clear way forward established.
5. MONITORING THE IMPACT OF DEMOLITION: Discussed in section 3
The meeting closed at 5.50pm