Council committee and cabinet meetings

North Halifax is a densely populated area combining thousands of homes for families large and small, offering educational institutes for thousands of pupils primary and secondary and job opportunities again for thousands of employees across the working spectrum and is already suffering air pollution, smell and noise pollution.

The above project is proposed to be sited on part existing industrial site/previous green belt designated for employment (a notion which will fail to be preserved if this project succeeds).

It will be based next to numerous residential properties, farm land, wild life habitat and will require relocation of Calderdale Way. The project would be very close to 2 to 3 school base corridors.

I am concerned about the significant safety risks that this project brings with it. The batteries are reported to give no warning signs of explosion or fire. The thermal runaway/dangerous chain reaction over the 17.5 acre would devastate the north Halifax area in every shape and form, no more so than the immediately adjoining residential community.

The environmental impact of such a project manifests in many ways. It would become a toxic hotspot with loss/movement of green space, wildlife habitat, water pollution from substances used in a disaster, soil degradation, strain on emergency services, impact on grazing/farmland/agriculture and air pollution.

As a result of these battery sites, out of control fire hazard and explosions have already been reported all over the world including UK causing not only short term but also long term damage to property and injuries, fatalities, toxic gasses in the environment lethal to residents, homes and gardens, local schools which by their very nature are precious environments, employees on site, local business and staff.

How quickly would a fire/explosion be detected. It is understood that the project would not be staffed save for occasional security visits. The batteries have in some instances exploded/caused fire whilst in process of a plant being erected. As I understand it, these fires and explosions not only occur because of uncontrolled temperature and moisture (atmosphere) but battery damage, improper installation and manufacturing defects

It is not clear - that emergency services can deal with this particular explosive disaster to safeguard the immediate residential community adjoining the project or surrounding areas, or that a project of this size may be contained, (in some incidents the locality for safety reasons has been put into special measures for many days dealing with initial fall out)

How can local residents/schools, employees and wildlife, land be safeguarded with a project so near to the residential community.

This massive project¿s danger hazard would mean that North Halifax residents were sat in a toxic hotspot impacting on health, well being and general quality of life

There are so many concerns about such a project but I wish to advocate for protection of the residential community within the immediate vicinity of the project (and the wider area)

Request:

I ask the council if considering such a project to ensure a fair balance between the project and the existing immediate residential community and wider community to include schools, homes, businesses, walkways and nature.

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Climate Action and Housing Councillor Patient replied to Sara Scanlon [PDF file 80KB]|

It was agreed at the Budget Council meeting in February that £2.3m would be added to the Council¿s reserves in 2026/27 and 2027/2028 in an effort to `replenish reserves.¿ However, the Medium-Term Financial Plan is seeking Cabinet Approval to cease this funding into the reserves in those years. The Cabinet should not take this decision lightly. It is important that we add to the reserves to cover for any future financial shocks. Will the Cabinet please take this into account before agreeing to this element of the Plan.

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Resources Councillor Dacre replied to Councillor Leigh MBE [PDF file 85KB]|

Residents are deeply concerned about the prospect of future spending cuts. Item 8 forecasts a funding gap of £15.7 million by 2027/28, the report also reveals that the cost of financing this borrowing could rise from £1.9 million in 25/26 to potentially £10.3 million in 27/28. The Council's continuing investments whilst simultaneously cutting vital services is clearly cause for concern because the report lacks specific details about this borrowing (Item 8, Appendix 1). A list of investment projects is provided, but it does not include the Local Plan, which requires borrowing of at least £35 million. Will Cabinet please present a comprehensive report to full Council that includes the cost-benefit analyses for all these Capital Schemes.

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Resources Councillor Dacre replied to Councillor Blagbrough [PDF file 39KB]|

It has become apparent over the past few months that there has been a Borough wide spike in fly tipping, which has caused immense pressure on the Neighbourhood Teams and of course enforcement at CMBC. I know this because the pin drop map for Elland is littered with reported sites of terrible examples of fly tipping which both myself and residents have logged. In some cases, I have raised and re-raised increasing piles of fly tipping in Elland to no avail. When I press for answers, I am informed it is due to the overstretched enforcement team struggling to keep up with the increase in incidents across Calderdale. We as a council can either ignore this emergency and the miserable fall-out from allowing fly tipping to go unanswered or address the root causes for why we are unable to respond expeditiously and what we will do to deal with this issue going forward. What do you intend to do about this situation?¿

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Public Services and Communities Councillor Durrans replied to Councillor Hunt [PDF file 101KB]|

The Medium-Term Financial Plan re-confirms a projected overspend of £8.4 million for the current financial year. This shortfall is partly attributed to 'waste contract cost increases.¿ It is unclear whether these increased costs refer to the existing waste management contract, or the Council's plans to change the service to in-house management. Please provide these specific details such as the amount of the overspend and the underlying reasons for these increases.

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Resources Councillor Dacre replied to Councillor Mrs Carter [PDF file 85KB]|

May I first thank the Director of Resources & Transformation and her Team for bringing forward this very comprehensive and professional new Corporate Plan. The overall Plan has much to be commended, and the Conservative Group welcomes the new approach to deliver an effective Council. The Plan sets out indicators of successful performance, but disappointingly, it falls short in advising current performance against those indicators. For example, one indicator is `Neighbourhood Crime¿, and good performance is measured as `Low¿, but the actual figures are not shown nor are any upward or downward trends. It is vital we have this information to enable the Council to measure and scrutinise the Plan. Will the Cabinet kindly, but formally request this information be provided at the next Cabinet meeting?

The Leader Councillor Scullion replied to Councillor Issott [PDF file 79KB]|

At Council on 24/07/24 during the debate on the proposed incinerator in the Ryburn Valley, Councillor Patient explained that a Key Decision is a technical term in the council constitution.

Looking at the Constitution, Section 13.3 (b) (i) says ¿Key decisions, which means any executive decision ¿ which is likely to be significant in terms of its effects on communities living or working in an area comprising two or more wards.¿

In the debate, Councillors Ashton (Sowerby Bridge), Councillor Webster (Ryburn) and Councillor Bellenger (Greetland and Stainland) all confirmed that their residents would be affected by the proposal.

As such, can I ask that the cabinet confirm this to be a key decision to be made by themselves?

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Public Services and Communities Councillor Durrans replied to Councillor M Hey [PDF file 82KB]|

Following the Council's decision to dispose of Shelf Village Hall, we've been contacted by a non-profit organisation interested in purchasing the property. As well as using the building to conduct the organisations core objectives, the group¿s trustees are keen to ensure community access is restarted in Shelf¿s only accessible location.

In the light of the revelation that the creation of the village hall itself was dependent on donations of land and money from the local community, I would like to ask whether the Cabinet were minded to look favourably on a bid that would benefit everyone in Shelf.

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Resources Councillor Dacre replied to Councillor E Hey [PDF file 68KB]|

I have been in communication with the Planning Enforcement Department since March 2024 with regard to the array of illuminated signage within the conservation area of Greetland and West Vale, following complaints from residents. Several new businesses in the area have installed illuminated signage, some of which are flashing neon signs and it appears that there is a competition between these businesses, each trying to outdo the other with the style and colour of the signage. I was told in April that there was backlog of enforcement cases and due to the complexity of some of the cases, it could be months before this issue was investigated. I made the suggestion that perhaps a letter to local businesses informing them that some signage may require planning consent should be investigated and was told that this was under consideration. I received a letter from Planning Department dated 2nd July to say that an initial assessment of the issue would be undertaken to determine if further action is appropriate, but limited resources meant that it could be several weeks before I would hear anything further and I should refrain from any further emails about this issue. I would mention that further illuminated signage continues to be installed within the conservation area without any censure.

I would like cabinet to confirm:

¿Is Greetland and West Vale unequivocally a conservation area, or just in name only, because currently it bears the disreputable nickname of WEST VEGAS, due partially to the number of unregulated illuminated signs which are growing unchecked in number.¿

The Cabinet Member with responsibility for Climate Action and Housing Councillor Patient replied to Councillor Prashad [PDF file 83KB]|