(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 must consider their interests, and act according to the following:

(2)       Disclosable pecuniary interests relate to the Member concerned or their spouse/partner.

(3)       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. 

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

Cllr Jamil declared, in the interest of transparency, that in relation to the item on Allocation of West Yorkshire Mayor’s Climate Community Grant Scheme (Minute No. 29) she was the Chair of WomenZone.

Cllr Sajawal declared, in the interest of transparency, that in relation to the items on Allocation of Combined Funding 2023-2024 (Minute No. 28) and Allocation of West Yorkshire Mayor’s Climate Community Grant Scheme (Minute No. 29) he worked for Bradford Trident.

Recommended –

That the minutes of the meeting held on 5 October 2023 be signed as a correct record (previously circulated).

(Louis Kingdom – 07890 416570)

Resolved –

That the minutes of the meeting held on 05 October 2023 be held as a correct record.

(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. 

(Louis Kingdom – 07890 416570)

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 Director of Legal and Governance in Room 112, City Hall, Bradford, BD1 1HY, by mid-day on Friday 3 November 2023.

(Louis Kingdom – 07890 416570)

There were no questions submitted by the public.

The Strategic Director, Place will submit a report (Document “L”) which sets out the background and purpose of the Bradford Development Framework. The report also outlines the approach being taken to public engagement on the draft framework and considers the opportunities for member involvement.

Recommended –

That the Area Committee are requested to provide views on the Draft Development Framework.

Overview and Scrutiny Area: Regeneration & Environment

(Sarah Carlin / Will Ridley-Ellis – 07816 351362 / 07582 101342)

The report of the Strategic Director, Place (Document “L”) set out the background and purpose of the Bradford Development Framework. The report also outlined the approach being taken toward public engagement on the draft framework and considered the opportunities for member involvement. The Head of Enablement and Growth summarised the report and told the Committee that Contracts were awarded to WSP and CBRE to undertake Development Frameworks covering the district in August 2022 following a competitive tender and that WSP was responsible for the Bradford East area. It was explained that the purpose of the Development Frameworks was to guide the future regeneration and development of the city and towns. The Development Frameworks set out an overarching vision for regeneration looking at the next 15-20 years. As a component of Bradford's Economic Growth Plan, the role of the Development Frameworks was to act as a guide for development. It was highlighted that the frameworks were not a funded programme of activity, and that we should not expect all the propositions within the framework to be achieved. The Committee were told that a key aim of the frameworks was to ensure that the Council was in a good position to take advantage of future funding opportunities.

A Member asked about infrastructure in relation to the growth areas that had been identified in the report and it was acknowledged that wider development of infrastructure would be needed to fulfil some of the development ideas. It was added that in Growth Area 11, Eccleshill swimming pool was not shown so it missed out key facilities and infrastructure. The Head of Enablement and Growth said that such feedback was necessary and helpful to show what may have initially been overlooked.

A Member commented that the Development Frameworks may be useful for envisioning progress and that it may be possible to develop in consultation with Ward Councillors plans for their own ward. The Head of Enablement and Growth told Members that their input would be useful and that development plans were flexible.

A Member drew attention to Growth Area 11 within the report and asked several questions about the green corridor and gateways. The Head of Enablement and Growth stated that a gateway related to how you experience an area as you arrive. In response to the query surrounding the green corridor and its placement in Growth Area 11 officers stated that clarification could be sent in the future.

Concerns were raised regarding the strategic routes shown in Growth Area 11 particularly that Delius Avenue was not suitable to be a strategic route if this would mean lots of traffic as it was in a residential area.

The Head of Enablement and Growth was asked why in Growth Area 10 did it show residential use in close proximity to Esholt Wastewater Treatment Works. The Committee were told that the frameworks were a vision for the future and that the feedback could be taken on board.

A Member expressed concern that none of the Growth Areas  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

The Strategic Director, Place will submit a report (Document “M”) which summarises the applications received from eligible local organisations, across the Bradford East Constituency, from the amalgamation of funding from United Kingdom Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF), West Yorkshire Mayor’s Cost of Living fund (CoLF) and Household Support Fund (HSF).

Recommended –

(1)           That the Area Committee agree the proposals for the funding allocations as outlined at Appendix C.

(2)           That the Grants Advisory Group be thanked for their work with this funding.

Overview and Scrutiny Area: Corporate

(Louise Williams – 01274 431066)

The report of the Strategic Director, Place (Document “M”) summarised the applications received from eligible local organisations, across the Bradford East Constituency, from the amalgamation of funding from United Kingdom Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF), West Yorkshire Mayor’s Cost of Living Fund (CoLF) and Household Support Fund (HSF).

A Member drew attention to Appendix C and asked about the allocation to Bradford Trident – Better Place Bradford and whether this was an offshoot of Better Start Bradford. The Programme Delivery Manager stated that they were an offshoot, but they were still eligible to apply.

The Programme Delivery Manager was asked why Grange Interlink had been able to apply when it was based in Bradford West and in response it was explained that they had demonstrated how they could reach out to beneficiaries through providing food parcels and had also showed that there was a need in the area.

A Member stated that he had not heard of some of the organisations based in Little Horton, in response the Area Coordinator and Programme Delivery Manager stated that all applications were inspected thoroughly, and that more information could be provided via email.

A Member asked what was meant by ‘outstanding monitoring’ and was informed that this resulted in a nil allocation, and this may be because an organisation had not delivered what they said they would in the past or that they have not responded to requests for information.

The Programme Delivery Manager was asked if the list at Appendix C included everyone who applied, and they stated that it was as it indicated which organisation were not allocated any funding.

A Member asked about the remaining amount for allocation and what the plans for it were. The Committee were told that there was £46,173 remaining for allocation and that a second round of applications could be started, and this could look at new applications however it was stated that timescales were the main challenge as the money must be spent within a certain timeframe.

The Committee queried what would happen if organisations were unable to spend all of the allocated funding before the timescale ran out. The Programme Delivery Manager highlighted the importance of being proactive and encouraging applications and told Members that they were still waiting on the Government to decide if any underspend could be rolled over.

Resolved –

(1)           That the proposals for the funding allocations as outlined at Appendix C be approved by the Area Committee.

(2)           That the Grants Advisory Group be thanked for their work with this funding.

(3)           That the funding allocations for the second round of applications be considered at the meeting of the Area Committee on 06 December 2023.

To be actioned by: Strategic Director, Place

Overview and Scrutiny Area: Corporate

The Strategic Director, Place will submit a report (Document “N”) which summarises the applications received from eligible local organisations, across the Bradford East Constituency, from West Yorkshire Mayor’s Climate Community Grant Scheme (Bradford).

Recommended –

(1)           That the Area Committee agree the proposals for the funding allocations as outlined at Appendix B.

(2)           That the Grants Advisory Group be thanked for their work with this funding.

Overview and Scrutiny Area: Regeneration & Environment

(Louise Williams – 01274 431066)

The report of the Strategic Director, Place (Document “N”) summarised the applications received from eligible local organisations, across the Bradford East Constituency, for West Yorkshire Mayor’s Climate Community Grant Scheme. The Committee were told that the grants from this funding were part of a two-stage process – an expression of interest form and then, after approval, further grant applications were considered by the Bradford East Grants Advisory Group. The West Yorkshire Mayor’s Climate Community Grant Scheme (Bradford) had a total budget of £369,000 allocated equally across the five areas at £73,800.

A Member of the Committee put forward concerns that the LEAP eco-sculpture park would not significantly reduce carbon emissions and that other projects would reduce carbon emissions more and would benefit from more funding. It was noted that other projects had been refused an allocation due to low carbon impact and the Area Coordinator was asked why this was different. It was suggested that the funding that was assigned for the LEAP project could be equally distributed between the other six approved projects. The Area Coordinator stated that the LEAP project was within the guidance of the scheme and that it would be typical as it promotes the climate message to the community.

A Member asked about the organisations refused due to being a private business and why these organisations had not been informed prior to an application that they would be ineligible. The Area Coordinator told the Committee that it would not be sent to private businesses, but it is possible that the application was forwarded on.

The Environment Manager was asked about the organisations that were refused due to the application being based mainly on salaries. It was explained that the focus was on projects that would deliver a carbon impact but there was also a need to look at a project doing something different in addition to this hence how the LEAP project came into it.

Following the comments around a focus on carbon impact for allocation a Member stated that the LEAP would not have an immediate carbon impact and that for allocation to be fair all criteria must be applied equally, for example other applications were refused for low carbon impact. Concerns were also expressed that the LEAP was well funded from other sources also and that some of the allocation would be spent on management fees which would not have a carbon impact. The Area Coordinator assured the Committee that the criteria had been applied and the LEAP did meet the criteria.

Resolved –

(1)           That the proposals for the funding allocations as outlined at Appendix B be agreed by the Area Committee.

(2)           That the Grants Advisory Group be thanked for their work with this funding.

To be actioned by: Strategic Director, Place

Overview and Scrutiny Area: Regeneration & Environment