Agenda item

Mundella Building, Green Street

 

JH asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

 

The Mundella Building, Green Street was sold to Blueprint for £70,164.  Why was there no public consultation about the future and sale of this fine educational facility, built on land sold to the Council by Jesse Boot expressly for educational purposes?  Could they not come to some arrangement to hand this beautifully proportioned educational building back into public/community ownership, for example, training, education, crafts, cultural events, a community kitchen and a cafe, with al fresco dining in its outdoor courtyard? Is there enough good will amongst this new Council and their partners for this building to be developed into a useful community asset serving the many, not the few, serving thousands of people, rather than be turned into 10 luxury apartments?  If there is now appetite within this new Council to retain the building for the citizens of Nottingham, will the profits (from what may well be in excess of a £2million development) be ploughed into the 3 local schools?

 

Councillor David Mellen replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor, and can I thank the citizen for the question.  The vacant Mundella Centre was transferred from Nottinghamshire County Council to Nottingham City Council in 2011.  When the property was transferred its potential reuse for educational purposes was considered but not progressed and the building has subsequently stood vacant for a number of years.  During this time the building has been subject to vandalism and we have incurred costs related to holding the vacant building.  We undertook extensive discussions and negotiations with a local organisation that had expressed an interest in reusing the building but the costs of the refurbishment were prohibitive and it withdrew its interest.  No community group has approached the Council during this time with a view to its reuse.  To support the regeneration plans for the Meadows we decided to sell the site to Blueprint at best consideration rather than leave it vacant any longer.  The price paid takes into account the condition of the building, layout and location.  The Council supports the conversion of such buildings rather than demolition and the costs of refurbishing such an old building are significant. 

 

Investment has been made over the past decade into schools in the Meadows.  At Wellbeck Primary a consultation approved the increase in numbers of pupils in the school from 210 to 315.  This required the demolition of the Trent Family Centre next door to create more space for the school and a new build.  It cost about £800,000.  The conditions works at the school have required around a further £200,000 of investment.  At Victoria Primary, previously Riverside Primary, the expansion works in 2013/14 included a new hall and six new classes taking the school from a 210 place to a 420 place.  The cost was about £1.1million.  This included condition works to improve drainage at the site.  Greenfields Primary School, one of six schools in the City to benefit from the Primary Capital Programme (before the Government cancelled this investment) was reconfigured at a cost of £1.4million in 2011.  A further investment is planned to improve Greenfields’ roof this year at a cost of £380,000.  In addition, a Sure Start Centre was built adjacent to the Greenfields Primary School in 2006/07 at a cost of around £0.5million. 

 

Finally, Blueprint is a joint venture company with 50% of the profits returning to the Council, critical to enabling the Council to deliver frontline services to communities across the City, including the Meadows.

 

Teaching about same sex relationships in schools

 

CMD asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Early Years, Education and Employment:

 

What does Nottingham City Council think about the banning of protesters in Birmingham over the teachings in schools? Does our Council support the teaching of same sex relationships?  Is our Council prepared to vote on a motion?

 

Councillor Neghat Nawaz Khan replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor.  Can I start by thanking the citizen for their question.  It would be inappropriate for Nottingham City Council to make judgement about the decisions made by another democratically elected council.  We recognise and uphold the right of people to hold peaceful protest, it is the bedrock of any democracy.  However, we would suggest that it is also the shared responsibility of schools, local authorities, parents and local communities to ensure that children are able to arrive at, and leave their school in an atmosphere that does not cause them to feel any anxiety or distress. 

 

The Council supports schools and academies to uphold their legal duty to ensure that children and young people have access to high quality relationship and sex education. They have been doing this for many years and we believe it is vital to ensure that, in a fast changing world, children and young people are equipped to make choices that enable them to stay safe and enjoy healthy respectful relationships.  As part of the teachings, the Council supports schools to ensure that Nottingham’s children and young people are given the opportunity to explore a range of family and relationship types in a way that is supportive, inclusive and affirms children’s different experiences of family life.  In modern Britain families come in many different shapes and sizes including same sex parents, single parents, fostering and adoptive parents.  On 25 June 2019, to mark the national Relationships and Sex Education (SRE) Day, which was pioneered in Nottingham, a public statement was signed by 54 of the Council’s 55 councillors that affirms across the entire political spectrum Nottingham’s commitment to being a diverse City that celebrates equality, inclusivity and respect.

 

Acoustic cameras

 

GB asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Adult Care and Local Transport:

 

The Department of Transport is trialling acoustic cameras to detect illegally noisy vehicles.  I think it would be great for Nottingham to take a lead in this area and continue the pioneering effort for reduction of pollution of all kinds across the City.  In particular, I think such a trial would be highly effective in Talbot Street, Wollaton Street and Derby Road. All three roads tend to ‘funnel’ sound in because of the high buildings and narrow roadway, and all three roads are common places for ‘boy racers’ and noisy motorcycles to be heard. All three roads have a high residential population (including myself) who suffer from this noise pollution.  So my question is: will Nottingham be taking a lead in the use of this technology?

Councillor Adele Williams replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor, and thanks to the citizen for this question.  Nottingham won’t be taking a lead in the use of this technology at this stage.  Noise from road traffic is exempted from the enforcement provisions of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and therefore it is not something that we can currently locally enforce.  Road traffic noise from illegal or faulty exhausts is a police enforcement matter under the Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations.  The Department of Transport trial that the citizen mentioned seems to be focused on rural areas and it would appear from the Department of Transport website that those locations have already been identified.  Such a trial in a rural setting, as you can imagine, would provide a straightforward ideal location.  It is likely that a similar trial in an urban area, for example Talbot Street or Wollaton Street, would be more difficult and problematic to conduct because of the increased likelihood of acoustic reflections from buildings and street infrastructure, and of course the fact that they are very busy areas.  Both of which may hamper the accurate identification of an offending vehicle.  The technology used in the trial is likely to make use of an array of acoustic intensity meters which can provide directionality to any noise source rather then the sound level meters that most local authorities, or acoustic consultants would use for standard environmental monitoring such as a noisy neighbour. 

 

The report suggests that the relevant noise level has not yet been decided.  Current vehicle manufacturers have to ensure that their vehicles meet noise emission limits when they are to leave the factory.  Those levels are set and measured in ideal or standard conditions.  Adopting a noise limit in the real world would be tricky.  As well as acoustic reflections, sound propagation is affected by acoustic shielding i.e. other vehicles passing by, and other factors like wind strength and the rain.  So, it is a very complex process.  The Government’s guidance on the calculation of road traffic noise requires measurements to be carried out in dry conditions and light winds.  It is by no means clear that any trial here would be successful anyway.

 

One likely outcome of the move to electric vehicles, which are generally quieter than petrol or diesel vehicles at urban speeds, is that noisy vehicles may actually become more noticeable in the future so stand out amongst the quieter traffic levels.

 

In the longer term, if technology is proven to be reliable in both rural and urban settings then the logical course of action would be for the Government to create a specific offence and implement a network of acoustic cameras nationally and then carry out enforcement on a national basis.  That would not necessarily enable local anti social behaviour that is really annoying in an urban setting to be addressed.  Any transfer and sharing of these powers with the local authority would be up to the Government but may mean that a local authority could obtain approved equipment and locate it wherever they saw fit.  However, currently acoustic sound intensity meters are expensive and there would also be infrastructure and IT costs in order for the local authority to operate one and enforce breaches, including moving the equipment around so that offenders aren’t wise to where they are going to be monitored. 

 

So, I just wanted to thank the citizen for the question and I hope that I have set out that, in the current situation, this is not something that we would be able to take a lead on but really recognise the concerns around those noisy vehicles. 

 

Clifton Estate

 

JC asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

 

In a recent edition of the Nottingham Post, dated 10th May, the Leader of the Opposition declared that the Clifton Estate had undergone a period of decline and had been in 'demise' for an extended period of time. Does the Leader of the Council agree with me that this assessment of the state of the Clifton Estate is both inaccurate and offensive to it's residents and would he care to elaborate upon the efforts that the Council has made over the years to improve the state of the Clifton Estate and improve the lives of it's residents?

 

Councillor David Mellen replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor.  Can I thank the citizen for the question.  I am familiar with the article referred to in the question and I welcome the opportunity to address these issues in the Chamber today.  Nottingham City Council has invested significantly in Clifton, in the face of disproportionate cuts to Council funding, making it a desirable place to live, learn, work and play. 

 

There is an obvious benefit of having the tram now serving the area, providing a vital link to the city centre, the QMC, the north and the west of the City and attracting fresh investment into Clifton.  The long-awaited A453 improvements have given easy access to the M1 and much less congestion along the edge of the estate than there was previously. 

 

Nottingham City Council has also worked to secure significant investment in the Clifton Triangle retail development, which marks a significant expansion and strengthening of the Clifton district centre.  This includes £15million worth of investment in development including a new B&M store and Lidl, which in turn has created 130 new jobs, is offering more affordable shopping opportunities for local people with 85% of the jobs going to local people.  Approval has also been given for further retail development on the surplus car park land to the side of the Morrisons store and we have provided conditions for businesses to invest in Clifton, which have helped increase retail choices for shoppers.  Our shopping areas are performing extremely well, with our local shopping parades of Varney Road, Holy Trinity and Southchurch Drive being fully occupied. 

 

The Council also invested £0.5million in Clifton to improve pedestrian and shopping areas, including the local market and a new high quality entrance to the Central Flower Park.  The Clifton Cornerstone Joint Service Centre which opened in 2006 has brought the local Council, medical and housing services under one roof and we have facilitated extensive energy efficiency improvements to housing as well as new housing developments and new play areas.  There has been the expansion of Whitegate Primary School, the planned expansion of Nethergate Academy and the Clifton secondary school, Farnborough Academy, has had a brand new building making it accessible from the tram.  On Green Lane, the Clifton Young People’s Centre has had improvements leaving it as a great purpose-built youth club for the young people in the area, something which many other parts of the City would dearly love. 

 

There has been considerable investment in the Council housing stock in Clifton.  A total of just under £30million was invested between 2009 and 2019 by the Decent Homes Programme and other major schemes, most notably the External Wall Insulation Programme which has had a transformational impact on the Estate.  In terms of new homes, there has been a £1.8million investment in Clifton with the completion of 14 new homes on Eddlestone Drive, Meadowvale Crescent, Colesborne Road and Middlefell Way.  Through Nottingham City Homes we are currently investing a further £3.3million in 24 new build flats at the Clifton Triangle site due for completion next year.  On top of that we are also progressing the design of 32 new homes on Southchurch Court.  This will see another £4million investment in the Clifton area.  Houses sell very quickly with prices rising faster than the national average as demand outstrips supply.  Living in Clifton has become desirable as buyers want to access the new and improved facilities available in the area.  This hardly describes an area in decline. 

 

In May we adopted Nottingham Labour’s ambitious manifesto, which will form the basis of our plans for Nottingham over the next 4 years.  We want the best for Nottingham: quality jobs, good schools, an excellent public transport system, top class leisure facilities as well as affordable housing.  We have shown that only Nottingham Labour has a track record and ambitious vision for the City.

 

So, citizen JC, we thank you for your question.  I don’t agree with Councillor Clarke in those particular comments.  I will not talk down Clifton and its residents.  Clifton is an important part of our City.  Its citizens contribute much to Nottingham and I look forward to that continuing. 

 

 

Mobility bus passes

 

LS asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Adult Care and Local Transport:

I welcome the City Council’s commitment to a ‘robust and meaningful’ review of the decision to withdraw the pre 9.30am and post 11pm free travel for disabled people with a mobility pass.  Will the City Council ensure that:

1.  there will be full, wide-ranging publicity about the review, including the use of local media (local radio, Nottingham Post, local TV etc) and social media (Facebook etc);

2.  information about the review and the opportunity to provide  feedback and evidence will be widely publicised, including information being sent directly to disability organisations;

3.  the period of the review will be clearly publicised and information released before the start of the review period; and

4.  City Council departments and service areas will be asked about the impact of the Mobility Pass restrictions for their service users and volunteers?

What will be the dates for the review?

 

 

Councillor Adele Williams replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor and thanks to the citizen for sending in this question.  Thanks for your interest in the review that the Council is conducting into mobility passes.  I would really like to thank the Mobility Pass Campaign for their work on this issue.  I had a really positive meeting with the Campaign Group last week and I look forward to further engagement with them.  The review is underway within the Council in that we are already undertaking internal analysis on this, but we will follow that with a targeted consultation before any conclusions are reached.  We will directly invite comments from a range of disability and voluntary groups, and we are also planning to look at the connections between this policy and other areas of the Council’s work.  We want to hear from a wide range of people who are, or could be, impacted by the current policy.  We will engage with groups representing service users and with companies providing public transport and through them their users.  We will ensure that citizens are able to share their views as part of this review by electronic, paper and other accessible channels.

 

The Campaign Group has asked us to extend this review so that it is as accessible as possible given the holiday period approaching and the additional access needs of many of those affected.  So, with that in mind, we will launch the targeted consultation process in July and close it in mid-October, for a decision mid-November.  We will ensure that the review is well-publicised and accessible.  We will also review the Equality Impact Assessment, which is the City Council’s assessment of the impact of the measures on a range of citizens and service users. 

 

Thanks again for this question and I look forward to hearing from citizens on this issue.