Minutes:
The Committee received a verbal report from the Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Economic Growth and Development on progress of the Burntwood Town Deal. It was reported that it was a partnership between Staffordshire County Council, Lichfield District Council and Burntwood Town Council and it was noted that membership was made up of Councillors and Officers from all tiers. The purpose of the Deal was to provide guidance and coordination to a number of strategic projects to the District’s second settlement including retail and health provision. It was reported that the partnership did not have a set meeting calendar but did meet regularly and included site visits to the area. It was also reported that the partnership engage with external agencies, land owners and developers to ensure suitable development is relevant and identified in the District’s Local Plan as well as the Burntwood Neighbourhood Plan. It was noted that the partnership also investigated funding opportunities and mention was given to Councillor D Ennis and his work with LDC Officers to look at creating a Burntwood BID. It was also reported that the County and District Councils were looking into a joint venture.
The following views were given
· That O&S should keep an oversight and receive updates on the Town Deal
· That the Action Plan seems vague and all show medium to long timeframes.
· There has been a history of bad planning in Burntwood which has led to difficulties now especially with trying to create a town centre.
· Current input of funding seems low for the higher tier authorities and on a par to what the Town Council is providing.
· That the Leader and Deputy Leader put pressure on SCC to move projects forward.
The following questions were asked
· Had the MP been contacted regarding a possible second application of the Levelling up Fund? It was noted that he would be asked to support a second bid. It was also stated that consideration would be given on how the UK Shared Prosperity Fund would be spent as this was a known source of funding as long as deemed acceptable.
· Would other routes of funding not be considered until the UK Shared Prosperity Fund had been dealt with? It was reported that the Council would not at this time as there would be £3.2m coming so would look at using that money.
· When will there be firm proposals for development of Sankey’s Corner as it had been promised to residents for a long time and seems to have stagnated? It was reported that the Highway’s scheme was being dealt with by SCC as the relevant authority. It was recognised that there was frustration at the lack of progress but there was still commitment by the District Council and partnership. It was also reported that it had been recognised that the Town Council had not been kept in the loop with some developments as well as they could have been and lessons had been learnt.
· It was asked how negotiations on the vacant public house at Sankey’s Corner and how much of a barrier that had been on development. It was reported that the Town Council had led on these discussions. It was noted that there was a need for a community space in the area and with funding, this building could be viable although it was noted that it was not in the District Council’s ownership.
RESOLVED: That further updates be given to the Committee when appropriate.