Agenda item

Councillor Boss asked a question of Councillor J Lill as the Portfolio Holder.  He asked that given the time it took to apply for highway closures could he be assured that the St Crispin Street Funfair would go ahead.

Councillor J. Lill commented that the original key problem with the Street Fair was the viability of running the operation.  Her understanding was that last year the event had been reduced in size to operate along the pedestrianised Abington Street and a small area of the market.  Proposals for this year had retained the same overall area and therefore the issue of street closures was not as important but the prime issue was cost.  She then elaborated further upon anticipated costs which would significantly outweigh any income achieved from the event.  Therefore other options had been explored ie delivery of the event independently through Explore Northamptonshire or, at their request, the Showmen’s Guild. or a combination of the two.  She advised that discussions were continuing with regard to the issue.

Councillor Boss then asked another question of Councillor J Lill.  He asked when the Events Working Party would next meet  for a de-brief on the Balloon Festival and he also asked for a financial statement on the viability of the concerts.  Councillor J Lill advised that there had been a de-brief on 6 September and that a further Events Working Party was being arranged for the week commencing 17 October and that full details of the financial situation would be available for discussion at that meeting.

Councillor Wire then asked a question of Councillor Larratt as Leader stating that he was sure the Leader shared disappointment at the resignation of the Town Centre Manager.  He asked whether the Leader was aware of the Town Centre Manager’s intention to leave the position and was the administration committed to the Town Centre Partnership.  He asked that the position be filled as soon as possible with a quality applicant.  Councillor Larratt stated that he was as surprised as everyone else when the Town Centre Manager resigned but could confirm that the administration were committed to the work of the Town Centre Partnership and had been in discussion with Board Members as to how to go forward with the replacement.  In the interim an appointment had been made within the Council namely Kath Suer so that the ongoing commitments could be progressed.  She had taken up her new role following discussion with some of the external Board members.

Councillor Wire then asked a question of the Portfolio Holder for Housing stating that residents in Melbourne, Abbey and Devonshire House had experienced difficulty in parking in the allocated parking bays.  The parking spaces were taken up by non-residents  This was also a town-wide problem and Councillor Wire asked the Portfolio Holder whether he would introduce a permit scheme for tenants to be policed by parking attendants, the permits could be the same design as the ones used for residents parking areas.  Councillor Palethorpe stated that the problem had arisen because residents only parking had been introduced in the streets around those particular flats which had resulted in motorists using the parking area at the front of Melbourne House whilst they shopped or went to work.  Indeed the problem was one that prevailed throughout the town and the Housing Officers had received complaints from some residents and were attempting to pursue them although this was a difficult task.  He then briefly outlined the parking available in the area commenting that it was unlikely that a residents permit only could be implemented because he believed the land was housing and not highways but that he would undertake further investigation regarding land ownership and involve local Councillors as well.

Councillor Pritchard then asked a question of Councillor Hadland stating that the issue of the market had been dragging on for over a year now and the take up of stalls was running at an all time low.  There was uncertainty in the town and amongst market traders.  She asked whether the administration was committed to the future of the market,  when  a decision would be made on the new layout and whether the final layout would be put before the traders and general public for information and comment.  Finally what was the cost of Letts Wheeler as consultants on the project.

Councillor Hadland stated that yes the administration was committed to the market and the new layout would happen in two phases.  It had been decided to reduce the number of stalls and an interim layout had been submitted to the Market Liaison Committee which mirrored Letts Wheeler’s layout to some extent.  It was hoped that this would be implemented some time in October.  Letts Wheeler’s proposals were subject to consultation hopefully in October and it was anticipated that the public consultation be as far and wide reaching as possible.  The costs for preparing the scheme and consultation was £18,000 and to date £17,000 had been spent.

Councillor Simpson then asked a question of Councillor J Lill as to whether she was aware that with the new Licensing Laws some of the Councils had decided to automatically inform Ward Councillors of any new applications or changes to licences in their Ward and why had Northampton Borough Council chosen not to do this.

Councillor J Lill stated that she would  raise this with officers.

Councillor Simpson then asked a question of Councillor Caswell.  He asked whether following the recent announcement by First Bus of the withdrawal of the number 7 and number 50B bus services provided to Southfields, Eastfield and Weston Favell areas and reductions in other services could he advise what action had been taken to alleviate the hardship to residents that those changes would cause.

Councillor Caswell advised that route subsidies to bus companies were now the responsibility of the County Council.  However the Ward members and himself as Portfolio Holder had been advised of the service cuts and as a result the County Council had been informed of the Council’s concern that important services for the community were at risk.  Furthermore the withdrawal of service 7 would be raised at the Area Partnership 5 meeting on 4 October 2005.

Councillor Roy asked a question of Councillor Hadland as the relevant Portfolio Holder whether he could give details on the cost of Commission Consultancy for 2004/5 and Commission Consultancy for this financial year to date.  She asked whether he could also give details resources on consultancy in the same period of time.

Councillor Hadland advised he had been unable to obtain accurate figures in time for the meeting but that he would let Councillor Roy have details in writing within the next couple of days.