Agenda item

This report provides the Community Committee with an update on the budget position for the Wellbeing Fund, Youth Activity Fund, Capital Budget, as well as the Community Infrastructure Levy Budget for 2024/25.

Cllr Campbell arrived at 13:10 at the start of this item.

Cllr Edwards arrived at 13:25 part way through this item

The report of the Head of Locality Partnerships provided the Community Committee with an update on the budget position for the Wellbeing Fund, Youth Activity Fund, Capital Budget, and the Community Infrastructure Levy Budget for 2024/25.

The report was presented to the Community Committee highlighting the following points:

·  The Community Committee currently has a remaining balance of £52,078.09 in Wellbeing Fund. Projects were listed in Table 1 of the submitted report

·  At Paragraph 20 of the submitted report a list was provided of the projects which have been approved since the last Outer North West Community Committee meeting held on 30^th September 2024, via Delegated Decision Notice (DDN).

·  It was noted that no projects had been declined since the last meeting held on 30^th September 2024.

·  The current remaining balance for the Youth Activity Fund is £22,707.56 with projects listed at Table 2 of the report.

·  It was noted that the Community Committee had approved a starting balance of £6,500.00 for the Small and Grants and Skips Budget 2024/25, this had since been topped up to £7,500.00. Table 3 provided a breakdown of the projects and skips funded, and a breakdown of allocations per ward.

·  The Committee has a remaining balance of £33,191.80 in the Capital Budget. Allocations per ward were summarised in Table 4.

·  Members were asked to note that the Community Infrastructure Levy Budget has a remaining balance of £296,274.32. This was detailed in Table 5.

·  Members were asked to consider applications from 2024/25 Wellbeing, YAF, Capital or CIL budgets, projects listed at Paragraphs 30,31 and 32.

·  Members had a long discussion in relation to the Arthington SID application which included representation in support of the application from two of the Arthington Parish Councillors. The discussions included the following:

o  This application had been ongoing since 2022. The SID is to be positioned near to the pre-school, as traffic needs to stop to enter the school[village hall car park]. It was noted that there are a lot of houses near, and the uses of the road need to be reminded that the speed limit is 30mph.

o  The Committee were informed that the village already has 1 SID which is run off a solar panel as the village has no electric streetlights. It was noted that there is also no pavement on one side of the road.

o  The Parish Council had not requested a speed camera only a SID. The Parish Council will own it, the current SID has been found to be low maintenance and has been operational for 5 years.

o  It was clarified for the Committee that the Pool-in Wharfedale and Bramhope Parish Councils had bought their own SID’s.

o  The Police have identified a location for a speed camera, which would be the grounds of the village hall. However, they were still in the process of assessing the need for a speed camera and if the camera needs to be a permanent one. It was noted that no accidents had been reported in the area.

o  Highways had assessed the area and were not convinced that speed was an issue. There had been concerns raised that a SID might not be seen on dark nights as there are no streetlights along this stretch of road.

o  The Committee were informed that Bramhope Parish Council had issues with their solar powered SID as they had difficulty sourcing parts for it. It was noted that this was a city-wide issue and there was a need to look for newer types of SIDs.

o  The Committee were advised that the data provided by Highways had been received and there was evidence to justify a speed camera, The speed limit on the road is currently 30mph which had been reduced from 40mph.

o  Members had concerns as it was not the decision for Highways but for the Police to do an assessment. Members also raised concerns in relation to the strict criteria required for a speed camera and that this area with no accidents recorded may not meet the criteria. Therefore, it was proposed by Cllr Thomson that the approval of the funding should be given in principle.

o  Concerns were raised that the Committee had agreed to split the funds by ward and that this should be a ward decision. However, it was noted that at the first meeting of the municipal year Members had agreed that should there not be a unanimous view shared by ward members when considering a ward-based application following a ward briefing, then the application shall be submitted to the next Community Committee meeting for consideration by all the Outer North West Community Committee Members. This was highlighted to Members at Paragraph 15 of the submitted Finance Report.

o  The Members also asked why the Parish Council had not raised the precept as other Parish Councils in the Outer North West area had. It was the view of the two Arthington Parish Councillors that this would not be acceptable as Arthington was such a small village.

·  A motion had been put forward by Cllr Thomson for the funding to be approved in principle subject to the decision of the Police after they had conducted their assessment. It was suggested by Cllr Downes that this should have a timeframe for the Police to carry out the assessment as the Parish Council had already been waiting over 2 years. It was agreed that the time frame should be until the end of the financial year.

·  As such the following motion was moved by Cllr Thomson and seconded by Cllr B Anderson:

That funding for the Arthington SID be approved in principle: however this being subject to the assessment by the Police for a potential speed camera in that location and if no such assessment is forthcoming before the end of the current financial year, or the Police confirm that within that time that the relevant criteria is not met for the establishment of a speed camera in that location then the funding be granted for the Arthington SID, as per the submitted application.

Upon being put to the vote, the motion was approved and therefore, this was carried.

In relation to the two remaining applications

·  Members of Otley and Yeadon asked that the application for the refurbishment of the stone steps in front of Yeadon Town Hall be taken from the Otley and Yeadon CIL allocation (£4,811.88) and fund the rest of the project through Capital.

·  Members requested more information in relation to the extension and renovation of the sports pavilion at Bramhope Recreation Ground.

RESOLVED - That:

a.  Details of the Wellbeing Budget position (Table 1) be noted.

b.  Details of the projects approved via Delegated Decision Notice (Paragraphs 20-21) be noted.

c.  Monitoring information of its funded projects (Paragraphs 22-23) be noted.

d.  Details of the Youth Activities Fund (YAF) position (Table 2) be noted.

e.  Details of the Small Grants and Skips Budget (Table 3 be noted.

f.  Details of applications submitted for consideration (Paragraphs 30-32) be determined as follows:

a.  The Arthington SID be approved in principle: however this being subject to the assessment by the Police for a potential speed camera in that location and if no such assessment is forthcoming before the end of the current financial year, or the Police confirm that within that time that the relevant criteria is not met for the establishment of a speed camera in that location then the funding be granted for the Arthington SID, as per the submitted application.

b.  Refurbishment of the stone steps at Yeadon Town Hall be Approved from CIL (£4,811.88) and from Capital (£8,188.12).

c.  Extension and renovation of the sports pavilion at Bramhope Recreation Ground – be deferred for further information.

Cllr Flynn left the meeting at 13:45 during this item.