Agenda item

Cabinet members had considered a report which outlined proposals for the establishment of a Cheadle Town Centre Delivery Board, supported by a Stakeholder Panel, to oversee development and delivery of town centre projects including options appraisal for the emerging Cheadle town centre Masterplan and the High Streets Task Force programme of activity. The report also provided an update on progress with regards to the Cheadle Town Centre Options Appraisal Report and the High Streets Task Force and sought to agree next steps.

The decision made was: -

1.    That the proposals for the establishment of a Cheadle Town Centre Delivery Board and Stakeholder Panel, as set out in the report be approved.

2.    That the progress on current Cheadle town centre projects be noted.

Following this decision, call-in requests had been received from Councillors: - L. Malyon,  P. Wilkinson, K.  Martin, I. Whitehouse, I. Plant and G. Bentley.

The call-in request confirmed the following principles of decision making which they believed had not been adhered to:

·         taking due regard of all relevant considerations and disregarding irrelevant considerations;

·         proportionality (i.e. the action will be proportionate to the desired outcome);

·         respect for human rights and equalities;

·         a presumption in favour of openness; and

·         clarity of aims and desired outcomes.

Members debated in detail the points raised both in the Cabinet report and the Call-in. Key points being:-

·         The hospital was vital to serve the increased population, many services were provided from the site which included one of the trials for a Covid-19 vaccination.

·         Cheadle Leisure Centre was an excellent facility and had received funding from the community, it was well attended by various clubs and disability swim sessions were accessed from this pool.

·         A document dated 2009 within the masterplan for Cheadle, stated that there were no alternative sites for car parking in the town centre so therefore, it would not be possible to develop the Tape Street Car Park.   

·         A 45 minute town centre site tour snapshot analysis of Cheadle was not acceptable.

·         Members were pleased that Cheadle was being considered for investment, however, there were concerns as this had been promised previously - but little had been delivered in terms of regeneration.

·         There was concern around prescriptive options being contained within the report, prior to any consultation being carried out with residents.

·         Tourism should be taken into account and it was suggested that a site for a hotel in the town was considered as part of the project.

·         For Cabinet to include a councillor from Cheadle and more involvement with Cheadle Town Council to help resolve communication issues.

·         A suggestion that the Stakeholder Panel and Cheadle Town Centre Delivery Board should be one entity.

Generally, members agreed that Cheadle required investment and were not against the projects but thought that the options for consideration should be removed from the report and led by the residents/businesses of Cheadle.

In response, Councillor Ralphs gave assurance that the projects hadn’t commenced and therefore no recommendations had been made. She re-iterated the importance of consultation with the residents of Cheadle and that Cheadle Hospital was not in the ownership of SMDC. Cheadle Town Centre Projects gave the opportunity for the town to receive investment and for improvements to be made, which would benefit the community.

Other members were also in agreement that Cheadle required investment and it was important that the projects were not delayed.

The matter was then put to a named vote as follows:-

In favour of the Call-in:

Councillors: Bentley, Brady, Hawkins, Hoptroff, Page, Price, Salt and Wilkinson (substitute for Whitehouse) (8)

Against the Call-in:

Councillors: Aberley, Emery, Hart, Herdman, Roberts, Sheldon and Ward (7)

Abstentions:

Councillor: Flunder (1)

In accordance with the procedure for consideration of Call-ins at Overview & Scrutiny Panel meetings, where the Panel decided (by a vote) to refer back a decision to Cabinet for reconsideration, Cabinet would now reconsider within a further 10 working days, amending the decision or not, before adopting a final decision.