At the commencement of the meeting, a minutes silence was observed as a mark of respect for Councillor Ian Greenwood OBE, who had very recently passed away.

(Members Code of Conduct - Part 4A of the Constitution)

To receive disclosures of interests from members and co-opted members on matters to be considered at the meeting. The disclosure must include the nature of the interest.

An interest must also be disclosed in the meeting when it becomes apparent to the member during the meeting.

Notes:

(1)       Members may remain in the meeting and take part fully in discussion and voting unless the interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an interest which the Member feels would call into question their compliance with the wider principles set out in the Code of Conduct.  Disclosable pecuniary interests relate to the Member concerned or their spouse/partner.

(2)       Members in arrears of Council Tax by more than two months must not vote in decisions on, or which might affect, budget calculations, and must disclose at the meeting that this restriction applies to them.  A failure to comply with these requirements is a criminal offence under section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992. 

(3)       Members are also welcome to disclose interests which are not disclosable pecuniary interests but which they consider should be made in the interest of clarity.

(4)       Officers must disclose interests in accordance with Council Standing Order 44.

At the commencement of the meeting, in the interests of clarity, Councillor Ward disclosed an interest in the item in respect of Westfield Lane (minute 34) as he lived in close proximity. He advised that he would take no part in the discussion or voting thereon.

During the course of the item in respect of Peel Park Lower Play Area (minute 36), Councillor Sajawal disclosed in the interests of clarity that he was on the board of Better Start Bradford.

During the course of the item in respect of the Parks and Green Spaces Annual Report (minute 37), Councillor Shafiq disclosed in the interests of clarity that he lived in the vicinity of Back Derby Place.  

Action: City Solicitor

Recommended –

That the minutes of the meeting held on 18 October 2018 be signed as a correct record (previously circulated).

(Tracey Sugden – 01274 434287)

Resolved –

That the minutes of the meeting held on 18 October 2018 be signed as a correct record.

ACTION: City Solicitor

(Access to Information Procedure Rules – Part 3B of the Constitution)

Reports and background papers for agenda items may be inspected by contacting the person shown after each agenda item.  Certain reports and background papers may be restricted. 

Any request to remove the restriction on a report or background paper should be made to the relevant Strategic Director or Assistant Director whose name is shown on the front page of the report. 

If that request is refused, there is a right of appeal to this meeting. 

Please contact the officer shown below in advance of the meeting if you wish to appeal. 

(Tracey Sugden - 01274 434287)

There were no appeals submitted by the public to review decisions to restrict documents.

(Access to Information Procedure Rules – Part 3B of the Constitution)

To hear questions from electors within the District on any matter this is the responsibility of the Committee. 

Questions must be received in writing by the City Solicitor in Room 112, City Hall, Bradford, BD1 1HY, by mid-day on Tuesday 20 November 2018.

(Tracey Sugden – 01274 434287)

There were no questions submitted by the public.

Previous Reference: Minute 9 (2018/19)

The Strategic Director, Place will present a report (Document “O”) which gives the Committee an update on a petition requesting the closure of Westfield Lane, Bradford which was originally considered on 5 July 2018.

At that time, the Committee requested that a weekend traffic survey be undertaken and an update report be provided. Accordingly, Document “O” reminds Members of the original traffic surveys undertaken and provides details of further surveys which were carried out over five days in November 2018.

Recommended –

(1)  That no further action be taken on the request for additional traffic management measures on Westfield Lane.

(2)  That the lead petitioner be informed accordingly.

(Regeneration & Environment Overview  &Scrutiny Committee)

(Andrew Smith – 01274 434674)

Previous Reference: Minute 9 (2018/19)

The Strategic Director, Place presented a report (Document “O”) which gave the Committee an update on a petition requesting the closure of Westfield Lane, Bradford which had originally been considered on 5 July 2018.

At that time, the Committee had requested that a weekend traffic survey be undertaken and an update report be provided. Accordingly, Document “O” reminded Members of the original traffic surveys undertaken and provided details of further surveys which were carried out over five days in November 2018.

A local resident attended the meeting and expressed some concern about the outcome of the surveys, noting that 15% of road users were still travelling at over 30mph and advising members that, although only one accident was reported, there had been at least four incidents of collisions resulting in trauma for those involved and for local people who witnessed the incidents or aided those involved. He also advised that his property had been damaged by a vehicle;  that he had incurred expense as a result and that his neighbour had been similarly affected. He considered that local feeling was that a fatality would have to occur before any action was taken.

In response, the Principal Engineer, Traffic and Road Safety highlighted the information within the report which showed that average speeds were well within the limit and that the proportion of drivers exceeding the speed limit was very low. Officers concentrated their efforts on collisions where the Police were in attendance as their remit was to reduce casualties and injuries to persons rather than property. He confirmed that there was no question of waiting for a fatality, rather that the reduction of collisions was the imperative. He also advised that there was extant traffic calming on Westfield Lane which had been in place for some time and which was having an effect as speeds were so low and only one collision which met the criteria had occurred.

Members then questioned the Principal Engineer in respect of the report, asking:-

·         For how long each day was data collected ?

·         What was the process for converting the lane to a 20mph zone ?

·         Was it reasonable to expect drivers to drive at 20mph without a speed limit being imposed ?

·         What would be the cost of traffic calming and what was the budget for the entire year ?

·         Had traffic calming measures ever been installed where there had been no incidence of casualties ?

·         If a scheme was prepared for this lane would it have to be considered by two Area Committees as it ran through two constituencies ?

·         Were there any schools on Westfield Lane ? 

·         Would it be possible to prepare a group order for more than one road and would that affect the cost of the order ?

In response, the Principal Engineer advised that three surveys had been undertaken, each one for a period of several days and in each case, the monitoring equipment ran for 24 hours per day  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

Previous Reference: Council, 16 October 2018

The Committee is asked to consider (Document “P”), which outlines a petition that has been received requesting a traffic light system at Milman Swing Bridge on Apperley Road, Bradford.

The report also outlines the response of the Strategic Director, Place to the petition.

Recommended –

(1)  That no action be taken on the request for a traffic signal system on Milman Swing Bridge, Apperley Road, Bradford.

(2)  That the petitioner be informed accordingly.

(Regeneration & Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committee)

(Andrew Smith – 01274 434674)

Previous Reference: Council, 16 October 2018

The Committee was asked to consider (Document “P”), which outlined a petition that had been received requesting a traffic light system at Milman Swing Bridge on Apperley Road, Bradford.

The report also outlined the response of the Strategic Director, Place to the petition. The Principal Engineer, Traffic and Road Safety attended the meeting and explained in detail the situation at the bridge, which was very narrow and was owned by the Canals and Rivers Trust. The Council was however responsible for maintaining the road surface and managing traffic flow. He stated that replacing the bridge entirely would be a significant cost to the Trust. He advised that, while there had been no incidents on the bridge, traffic flow was high as it was on a busy through route. Improvements such as the installation of lights or a separate footbridge would be prohibitively costly and previous works to improve signage had already taken place so the recommendation was for no further action to be taken.

The lead petitioner attended the meeting and spoke in support of the petition, arguing that simply to veto any action was not appropriate and did nothing to protect pedestrians who were very vulnerable when using the bridge. She reported anecdotal evidence of people being brushed by cars when both were on the bridge at the same time. She also explained that a significant new development of housing was underway near the bridge so traffic would only increase. She highlighted particularly the problem of trying to cross the bridge with children, a pram or in a wheelchair. She concluded by stressing that it was not appropriate to simply suggest that drivers must obey the highway code and by suggesting an alternative route for drivers which she considered to be more suitable.

The Principal Engineer responded by stating that this issue was a matter of available resources and that a new bridge would be extremely costly. He did not consider it to be suitable to consider closing the road at the moment but it could be considered in future alongside the lights scheme at Greengates.

Members asked the Principal Engineer about the layout of the bridge and road and were informed that the bridge crossed over the canal with a road and a narrow pavement on either side. The pavement could not be configured to a single path of greater width as a buffer was required at either side of the road to prevent vehicles striking the bridge.

Members discussed whether an improvement to the bridge could be considered once the major road improvements at Greengates were in place and asked that this be examined at the appropriate time.

They also asked whether more explicit signage could be used to alert drivers to the potential hazard but were informed that there was prescribed wording for road signs and any other signs would not be legally permissible.

A member considered that a more emphatic approach to the issue must be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35.

Previous Reference: Council, Minute 21 (2018/19)

The Committee is asked to consider (Document “Q”) which outlines a petition that has been presented to Council requesting the cessation of the removal of play equipment and fencing and a halt to the closure of the lower play area in Peel Park.

The report also provides the response of the Strategic Director, Place to the petition.

Recommended –

That officers work with the local community and the park’s friends of group to identify a more suitable and sustainable site for all age groups and ensure local user buy in to the scheme to foster a sense of local ownership and the inherent benefits this can bring.

(Regeneration & Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee)

(Phil Barker – 01274 431301)

Previous Reference: Council, Minute 21 (2018/19)

The Committee considered (Document “Q”) which outlined a petition that had been presented to Council requesting the cessation of the removal of play equipment and fencing and a halt to the closure of the lower play area in Peel Park.

The report also provided the response of the Strategic Director, Place to the petition and members were advised that no works had been undertaken at the lower play area since the petition had been received. They were also advised that, while the location of the lower play area was problematic, it was recognised that a play area was needed and a budget had been set aside to work with the park’s trustees to ensure that one was put in place.

Several petitioners attended the meeting and their spokesperson advised members that the lower play area had been established many years ago; that the friends of Peel Park had recently installed play equipment which had not been vandalised and disputed the issue of ground stability as a reason for removing play equipment. She also advised that funds could be matched by the Friends group and that the group ran a café in the park which was well used and generated income. She stressed that the petition was still gathering signatures and that the recommendations of this report were factually inaccurate. She concluded by stressing that the lower play area was popular with families and should be retained.

Another petitioner also addressed the meeting and advised that funding streams were available to be spent in the park, which she reminded the Committee was the biggest in the District. She urged members to take up the support being offered and make Peel Park an exemplar park for the twenty first century.

A member stated that there was no dispute about the facilities that were needed in the park, rather that the question was the siting of those facilities.

Members were advised that discussions were already underway with Better Start Bradford and Active Bradford and that officers were keen to work with the Friends of Peel Park to find an holistic solution.

A member stated that he would oppose the play equipment being in a single location and would prefer two play areas. Officers confirmed that the same message had come through feedback from the Friends group and that there was sufficient funding to maintain two play areas.

Resolved –

(1)  That officers work with the local community and the park’s friends of group to identify suitable and sustainable sites within the park for two fixed play areas for all age groups and ensure local user buy in to the scheme to foster a sense of local ownership and the inherent benefits this can bring.

(2)  That officers be requested to work with the Friends of Peel Park to investigate additional funding streams.

ACTION: Strategic Director, Place

(Regeneration & Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee)

Document “R” is the annual report of the Strategic Director, Place for the devolved Parks and Green Spaces Service which reviews activity during the past year and also considers the significant issues and proposed management structural changes that will have an effect over the coming twelve months with options where available for future service delivery, investment and savings.

Recommended –

That Bradford East Area Committee notes the content of this report and welcomes the planned merger of the Cleansing Service.

(Regeneration & Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committee)

(Ian Wood – 01274 432648)

Document “R” was the annual report of the Strategic Director, Place for the devolved Parks and Green Spaces Service which reviewed activity during the past year and also considered the significant issues and proposed management structural changes that would have an effect over the coming twelve months with options where available for future service delivery, investment and savings.

Members questioned the Assistant Director, Neighbourhoods and Communities about the report, asking:-

·         Whether the proposed merger would mean an end to distinct teams?

·         Whether the recent instance of travellers pitching up in the area had had an effect on the budget?

·         How were trees monitored and their condition maintained?

·         What were the plans for Bradford Moor Park and had any attempt been made to establish a “Friends of” group for the park?

·         What were the plans for Back Derby Place play area?

In response, they were advised that the proposed merger would mean that teams would work across all areas in a more integrated manner; that the recent stay by a traveller group had not impinged on the budget to any significant degree and that the Trees and Woodland Section was responsible for maintenance of the District’s trees and took action to remove only dangerous, diseased or dying trees.

In respect of Bradford Moor Park, members were advised that the park had been in decline over a number of years but that officers were actively seeking options to reverse that, such as offering pleasure boating or similar activities to encourage greater use of the park. Efforts had previously been made to establish a “Friends of” group but there had been little interest.  

In relation to Back Derby Place, officers undertook to provide a written response to the member question.

 Resolved –

That Bradford East Area Committee notes the content of Document “R” and welcomes the planned merger of the Cleansing Service.

ACTION: Strategic Director, Place

(Regeneration & Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committee)

The Strategic Director, Place will present a report (Document “S”) which sets out the Community Building Grants allocation process. Such grants are for Voluntary and Community Sector organisations to support them in meeting their associated building related costs.

Recommended –

(1)  That Bradford East Area Committee notes the proposed allocation process for Community Building Grants.

(2)  That the Bradford East Area Co-ordinator be requested to organise meetings of the Area Committee’s Grant Advisory Group to consider Community Building Grant Applications for funding from groups within the Bradford East Area.

(3)  That the Bradford East Area Co-ordinator bring a further report to a meeting within the 2018-19 municipal year, with recommendations for the Grant Advisory Group on how the allocate the Community Building Grants funds available.

(Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee)

(Mahmood Mohammed – 01274 437467)

The Strategic Director, Place presented a report (Document “S”) which set out the Community Building Grants allocation process. Such grants were for Voluntary and Community Sector organisations to support them in meeting their associated building related costs. Members were advised that funding was available for the next two years but at a much reduced level and that the principle behind the funding was to enable groups to become more self sustaining.

A member expressed serious concern that groups were being given less funding but being asked to do more each year. He criticised the late notice given about funding which meant groups hoping for support did not know until very late in the process whether it would be forthcoming and expressed concern that groups which expressed an interest in the funding were not advised that this did, in fact, constitute making a bid.

In response, officers stated that they were also not advised about available funding until very late in the process so could not inform groups earlier. They undertook to make the bidding process clearer to groups.

The member then asked whether all groups in the area could apply, or if groups which had previously been successful in their bid had priority. He also asked if information would be available about the previous success of groups in becoming self sustaining. He was advised that the Area Committee could decide whether any group could apply and that information about groups would be provided to the Grants Advisory Group. Officers also explained how groups were informed about the grants and how they were publicised.

 Resolved –

(1)  That Bradford East Area Committee notes the proposed allocation process for Community Building Grants but notes also the tight timescales and proposed that this be addressed in future years to give community groups fair chance of funding applications.

(2)  That the Bradford East Area Co-ordinator be requested to organise meetings of the Area Committee’s Grant Advisory Group to consider Community Building Grant Applications for funding from groups within the Bradford East Area.

(3)  That the Bradford East Area Co-ordinator bring a further report to a meeting within the 2018-19 municipal year, with recommendations for the Grant Advisory Group on how the allocate the Community Building Grants funds available.

(4)  That the allocation process be open to any eligible group in the Bradford East Area.

ACTION: Strategic Director, Place

(Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee)

The Area Co-ordinator will present a report (Document “T”) which is the annual report on street cleansing, environmental enforcement and council wardens. The report also provides information about the merger of the parks Service into Neighbourhood and Customer Services.

Recommended –

(1)  That Bradford Area Committee notes and welcomes the information in this report.

(2)  That a further report is presented in 2019 outlining a new operational model based on constituency working.

(Corporate/Regeneration & Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committees)

(Damien Fisher/Louise Williams – 01274 437146/431066)

The Area Co-ordinator presented Document “T” which was the annual report on street cleansing, environmental enforcement and council wardens. The report also provided information about the merger of the parks Service into Neighbourhood and Customer Services.

In response to a query about tables in the report and their accuracy, she undertook to update members as soon as possible.

Members raised various questions in relation to fly tipping and were informed that the proposed merger would build in resilience to the service to deal with issues such as fly tipping much better. Enforcement officers and wardens would work together and with local businesses to reduce littering. A member recalled that the scheme to reduce littering on Manchester Road had been very successful and asked that the process for dealing with fly tipping be streamlined to make it quicker to deal with. Members were reminded that fly tipping was a criminal offence and that time was needed to produce the high level of evidence required by the court.

In response to a question about warden roles, members were advised that 32 wardens would become civil enforcement officers focussing on parking enforcement, the remaining 41 would be split across the five area offices which would mean a reduction of two in Bradford East but that was mitigated as they would no longer be dealing with parking.

Members highlighted their concerns about fly tipping and littering and considered that residents should be encouraged to take the lead on ensuring their streets were kept clean and tidy. They also highlighted the problems caused in the area by parking on yellow lines. A member reported a successful resident scheme in his ward whereby carrier bags were hung on garden fences for youngsters to put their litter into on the way home from school.

A member asked how long civil enforcement officers patrolled for and was advised that they worked from 0730 to 2100. 

Resolved –

(1)  That Bradford Area Committee notes and welcomes the information in Document “T”.

(2)  That a further report is presented in 2019 outlining a new operational model based on constituency working.

ACTION: Area Co-ordinator

(Corporate/Regeneration & Environment Overview & Scrutiny Committees)