MINUTES OF THE EXTRAORDINARY MEETING HELD ON MONDAY 20 JUNE 2011 AT KILHAM LANE RECREATION GROUND, BRANTON, COMMENCING AT 6.00 P.M.
PRESENT: Councillors G Warrender (Chair), J Worthington (Vice-Chair), B Fussey, M Sidebottom and J A Staniforth (Clerk to the Council)
IN ATTENDANCE: Three Residents from Whiphill Top Lane
1. TO CONSIDER APOLOGIES RECEIVED
That the apologies of Councillor Butterworth be accepted and duly recorded.
2. DECLARATIONS OF PERSONAL AND PREJUDICIAL INTERESTS
There were no declarations of personal and prejudicial interest.
3. REVIEW OF THE LOCATION OF THE BALL WALL
Members considered the original designated location of the ball wall and agreed that there was a potential safety issue in view of the proximity of the children’s play area and this was explained to the residents. In view of the size of the football pitch it was not possible to locate the ball wall nearer to Kilham Lane away from the play area and therefore the only suitable location was the area of the field furthest away from the community building adjacent to the football pitch. This was the furthest location from properties on Whiphill Top Lane that could be achieved. Residents expressed a preference for the wall to be nearer to KIlham Lane and felt that the football pitch should be relocated as further work may need to be undertaken to ensure the pitch was satisfactory. It was explained that the football team had specifically designated the area furthest away from the houses on Whiphill Top Lane and that there was no intention to revert to the former area as it was deemed unsuitable.
a) That the location of the ball wall be revised from the area in close proximity to the children’s play area to the area of the field furthest away from the community building adjacent to the football pitch.
b) That the building contractor is asked to mark out the new location prior to commencement in order for the parish council to confirm the location.
4. PROVISION OF TARMAC SURFACE AND CONFIRMATION OF EXPENDITURE
Discussion took place on the size of the area of hard standing and whether a slightly larger area would be more beneficial. It was noted that an amount of £3,000 had been budgeted for community development and the Clerk advised that most of the remainder of the budget allocation was likely to be expended and therefore the balance of the cost of building the ball wall and the provision of a tarmac surface would need to be met from the reserves. This would still leave a reserve in excess of one year’s precept the level recommended by the audit commission.
a) That the contractor is asked to provide details of the cost of a tarmac surface measuring 12m x 8m and this is considered at the next meeting.
b) That the additional expenditure is met from the council’s reserves in order to reduce the reserves to the recommended level.