There were no disclosures on interest in matters under consideration.

(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 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. 

(Sheila Farnhill - 01274 432268)

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

The Strategic Director, Place will submit a report (Document “AJ”) in respect of a request for the sale of a parcel of land at Parkwood Street, Keighley to an adjoining business for an extension of its existing service yard. 

The report explains that the land forms part of Parkwood Recreation Ground, Keighley, a registered charity of which the Council is the sole trustee. The land was conveyed to the Borough of Keighley by virtue of a conveyance by the Duke of Devonshire and the Chatsworth Estate dated 27 September 1928. 

Recommended –

That the sale of the land indicated in Document “AJ” be approved and that the net proceeds be reinvested in the Parkwood Recreation Ground.

(Phil Barker – 01274 432616)

The Strategic Director, Place submitted a report (Document “AJ”) in respect of a request for the sale of a parcel of land at Parkwood Street, Keighley to an adjoining business to facilitate the extension of its existing service yard.

The report explained that the land formed part of Parkwood Recreation Ground, Keighley; a registered charity of which the Council was the sole trustee. The Recreation Ground had been conveyed to the Borough of Keighley by virtue of a conveyance by the Duke of Devonshire and the Chatsworth Estate dated 27 September 1928.

The Strategic Director responded to Members’ questions as follows:

·         A request had been made to the Duke of Devonshire that the requirement for 66% of the sale proceeds to be paid to the Chatsworth House Trust be rescinded but it had been refused.

·         If the Trustees were concerned about the potential use of the land for anything other than parking vehicles then an appropriate covenant could be imposed.

·         The length of time that had passed since the Scout Hut had been located on the land was unknown. The land was now considered to be regenerated.

·         The provision of screening was a condition of the related planning consent but could also be made a condition of sale.

He also reported on the substance of a further letter of objection, received since the publication of his written report.  Members were advised that they should take account of the issues raised in making their decision.

A representative of the objectors made the following comments:

·         The Committee had been offered two options; to agree to the sale of the land or to refuse to sell it.

·         The Committee was being asked to agree to the sale for £5,000 (this being the amount that would be retained by the Charity further to the sale).

·         It was questioned whether the charity would receive the money.

·         What guarantees were there that the money would be spent on Parkwood?

·         Would it not be preferable for the buyer to make ongoing regular payments to compensate for the loss of this land rather than a one-off payment.

·         The reasons given for the sale were that the land had become overgrown, was subject to fly tipping, was unused and therefore unfit for recreational purposes.  The Friends of Parkwood Group (FoP) could remedy this situation; they would reopen the footpaths and the stiles and run events on the site. These could include social and educational events such as bushcraft courses and schools could become involved with local people being consulted on what they would like to see. Seating and signage could also be provided.  The land could be rejuvenated and this would benefit the FoP, local residents and other users of the Recreation Ground.

·         If permission for the sale was refused the FoP could put the land to good use.

The Strategic Director explained that any proceeds from a sale, if approved, would be kept in a dedicated bank account and only used for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 76.

Previous reference: Minute 59 (2014/15)

The Strategic Director, Place will present a report (Document “AK”) which requests the approval of the Committee to applications for the distribution of capital interest from the Royd House Trust, Wilsden.

Recommended –

That the applications for funding from the Royd House Trust, Wilsden, as set out in Document “AK”, be approved and that the Strategic Director, Place distribute the funds accordingly.

(Phil Barker – 01274 431301)

Previous reference: Minute 59 (2014/15)

The Strategic Director, Place presented a report (Document “AK”) which requested the approval of the Committee to applications for the distribution of capital interest from the Royd House Trust, Wilsden from Wilsden Scout Group and Wilsden Village Hall.

The report reminded Members that the purpose of the Trust was to ‘apply the income of the Charity for improvements (other than maintenance) of the property belonging to the charity as the trustees consider appropriate to meet the objectives of the charity and thereafter for the charitable purposes for the benefit of the inhabitants of Wilsden’.

Resolved –

That the applications for funding from the Royd House Trust, Wilsden, as set out in Document “AK”, be approved and that the Strategic Director, Place distribute the funds accordingly.

ACTION:       Strategic Director, Place

A report will be submitted by the Strategic Director, Corporate Services in relation to Priesthorpe Annexe, Mornington Road, Bingley which is held by the Council as Trustees of the former Bingley Science Arts and Technical School (Document “AL”).

The report explains that the building has been empty since 2002 and is in a poor state of repair.  The Council has been unable to find a use for the building that would promote the objectives of the Trust (for the educational benefit of the people (children and adults) of Bingley) or to provide a revenue budget to maintain it.  Approval is therefore sought to sell the property and for the proceeds of the sale, after costs and grant repayment, to be used to further the educational objectives of the Trust.

Recommended –

(1)       That the Strategic Director, Corporate Services seek representations from the public in respect of the proposed sale of Priesthorpe Annexe, Mornington Road, Bingley.

(2)       That, having given due consideration to the representations received, the Strategic Director, Corporate Services refer the matter back to this Committee for further consideration or, if no objections to the sale are received, progress the sale of the property and, subject to further legal advice, use the net sale proceeds for the educational benefit of the people of Bingley.

(Belinda Gaynor – 01274 434309)

A report was submitted by the Strategic Director, Corporate Services in relation to Priesthorpe Annexe, Mornington Road, Bingley which was held by the Council as Trustees of the former Bingley Science Arts and Technical School (Document “AL”).

The report explained that the building had been empty since 2002 and was in a poor state of repair. The Council had been unable to find a use for the building that would promote the objectives of the Trust (for the educational benefit of the people (children and adults) of Bingley) or to provide a revenue budget to maintain it. Approval was therefore sought to sell the property and for the proceeds of the sale, after costs and grant repayment, to be used to further the educational objectives of the Trust.

The City Solicitor responded to Members’ questions:

·         The issue of retention and re-use had been considered but the building was no longer needed and there was no educational use for it at this time.

·         The proceeds of any sale would be banked separately and the Trustees would then make decisions on how these funds were allocated.

A Town Councillor addressed the Committee with the following points:

·         There was a clear will to progress with this site.

·         The Town Council would consider the issue at its next meeting.

·         The degeneration and present state of this key unlisted building was a source of anger and frustration for local people.

·         The recommendation that representations be sought in respect of the future of the building was welcomed.

·         It could not be assumed that if sold the building would be developed; there were numerous examples of empty or derelict buildings in the locality which caused a blight on the town.  There was a risk that it could be allowed to degenerate further.  The building was already in a very poor state and had a negative impact on the neighbourhood.

·         There was a primary school located opposite and it was surrounded by footpaths.

·         It was requested that the Trustees consider the ‘disposal’ of the building rather than its definite sale as this term could also include other options such as its potential lease or transfer. If it was sold it was suggested that it may be possible to include conditions to ensure that it was developed in a sympathetic and timely manner.

·         A early and clear steer from the Conservation Officer would assist in the prompt and appropriate development of the site and it was requested that they be consulted now and asked to report on the potential ways forward.

·         It was considered that there was a need for clarity in respect of the definition of ‘educational benefit’ and how this could be delivered.

·         The report stated that there was a risk of criticism of the Council for the failure to maintain the property but this also applied if the Trustees failed to dispose of the property in a thoughtful and careful way.

·         The process of disposal needed to be carefully managed or the building could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 78.