Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Kevin Foster, Annabel Wilkinson and Peter Wilkinson.

Decision

That the minutes of the meeting held on 30 June 2025, be confirmed and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

All Members are invited to declare at this point any interests they have in items appearing on this agenda, including the nature of those interests.

There were no declarations of interest.

Members of the public may ask questions or make statements at this meeting if they have given notice to Democratic Services (democraticservices.east@northyorks.gov.uk) and supplied the text by midday on 10 September, three working days before the day of the meeting. Each speaker should limit themselves to three minutes on any item.

Members of the public who have given notice will be invited to speak:

·       at this point in the meeting if their questions/statements relate to matters which are not otherwise on the agenda (subject to an overall time limit of 30 minutes)

·       when the relevant agenda item is being considered if they wish to speak on a matter which is on the agenda for this meeting.

If you are exercising your right to speak at this meeting, but do not wish to be recorded, please inform the Chair who will instruct anyone who may be taking a recording to cease while you speak.

There were eight public questions or statements submitted to the committee. Questions 2 – 6 were considered at minute 167 – Receipt of a petition to save Richmond Swimming Pool. Questions 7 and 8 were considered at minute 168 – Presentation by Yorkshire Water.

1.     From Mr Kodi Sanerivi

Parent Statement re: Home to School Transport Reality Check - I came today in the hope of speaking directly to you, Cllr Les, as Leader of the Council —and to the Executive Member for Home to School Transport, my own councillor, Annabel Wilkinson. It’s a shame she isn’t here today. I know that’s just coincidence, but it does mean yet again parents like me don’t have the chance to put our concerns to her directly.

I want to tell you that trust between this council and parents has been broken — and not by accident. It has been broken by your decision to press ahead with this home-to school transport policy despite the warnings, despite the real human consequences being spelled out to you.

Three councillors on this committee — and I thank them for this — recognised the harm it would do to rural families and voted against it. But the majority either didn’t realise or chose to look the other way.

I know that in May to secure your vote at the Extraordinary Meeting many of you were told, “don’t worry, any anomalies will be sorted out in appeals.” But that was a false promise. Appeals are not the safety net we all hoped for — they have turned out to be just a box-ticking exercise. As one of your Conservative colleagues has said on the record, the whole appeals process appears to be rigged.

So let me give you just a hint of the injustices happening here, right on your doorstep and on your watch:

• Families in the Upper Dales denied transport because officers who’ve never even set foot there say single-track, high-elevation roads into Cumbria are “safe” — and won’t assess them until a child is enrolled. No parent would gamble their child’s safety just to tick a box in County Hall — especially when every local knows those routes are treacherous and impassable for much of the year.

• Families in North Richmondshire denied transport to Richmond School because the small Catholic school, SFX, is judged a stone’s throw nearer. Yet the same bus serves both — and for safety reasons only stops at Richmond School, with SFX pupils simply walking the two minutes down the road.

• And my own son, living with life-changing Type 1 diabetes. He was in unconscious in critical care when school applications were being made last year, and like many parents I was wrong-footed by the council’s poor communication. References to catchment schools were still on the website, so I thought I was doing the right thing. The first I knew transport had been denied was at the end of May. His best interests - his very safety - lie in staying  ...  view the full minutes text for item 165.

1. At the meeting of the committee held on 17 March 2025 Members requested further information on the following matters:

a)    Climate change activity report - Members highlighted that a number of inaccuracies that required amendment.

Reference to the Catterick Town Regeneration project was corrected to ‘Catterick Garrison’.

b)    The urgent need to connect the EVCs provided in the various market towns. Assurances had been given that this would be implemented but was yet to happen. There was concern that Members had been reassured that this would happen on several occasions without materialising and there was now an urgent need for these to be connected. In response it was stated that this would be fed back accordingly.

This delay it was due to a national procurement issue – something not unique to or controlled by NYC. This has now been resolved, and the LEVI (Local Electric Vehicle Infrastructure) fund is progressing. We are at the final stages of our procurement process with a couple of items to sign off before contract signature.

c)     Issues around heat pump heating were discussed and it was stated that there had been problems where these had been installed as repairs were an issue. It was stated that each property was considered on the merits of a specific provision and would not be forced into having a system that was inappropriate for their needs.

The Housing team take a ‘fabric first’ approach to retrofit, which prioritises improvements to the home before installing new heating systems. Therefore, properties are considered on an individual basis and appropriately installed with measures that are suitable for the home and the tenant.

2. The Chair received an update on 11 August on the Upper Dales flood alleviation scheme. The Flood Risk Project Manager advised that there had been a delay in some of the areas receiving property flood resilience (PFR) but this situation has changed.

Fremington inc. Grinton contract has been sent to the design and installation team. The contract for Whaw, Langthwaite, Reeth, Bainbridge and Gayle will be completed this week.

Watertight will start contacting residents over the next few weeks with a view to start design assessments from September onwards.

The Committee considered the following petition.

The Issue

Richmond swimming pool is under threat of closure.

My 7-year-old finds great joy in swimming at Richmond swimming pool. Lessons have given him so much confidence, and a new love of swimming.

He says, "It is great fun to learn to swim. I like the parents being able to watch from the cafe. It makes me feel like I'm very included in the swimming group. The teacher is really friendly and doesn't tell you off. My swimming has got much better. Without the swimming pool I would feel sad that I couldn't go to my swimming group."

Richmond swimming pool is not just about swimming; it’s about fostering community. It supports local jobs, brings people together, and helps reduce social isolation. With every swim session and lesson, bonds are strengthened, and friendships are forged in our community.

We understand the financial constraints, however, cutting off such an essential facility is not the right solution. We urge the local council to explore funding sources.

Please sign this petition to show your support to keep Richmond swimming pool open.

Six public questions/statements were submitted, and the response was given by the Assistant Director, Culture, Arts and Leisure as shown in minute 165.

It was proposed by Councillor Yvonne Peacock and seconded by Councillor Caroline Dickinson that the committee preferred options 1 and 4 of the report namely that:

·       Option 1: That the Richmond (Yorks) Area Committee supports the request to keep Richmond Swimming Pool open.

·       Option 4: The Richmond (Yorks) Area Committee can prepare a report to the decision maker, with recommendations to inform the decision.

Resolved

It was unanimously agreed that the Richmond (Yorks) Area Committee wants the Richmond Pool to remain open (option 1 of the report) and asks the Democratic Services Officer to send a report (the minutes) to the Housing and Leisure Overview & Scrutiny Committee and then to the Executive stating the Committee’s wishes (option 4 of the report).

Two public questions were asked and responded to as in minute 165 above.

Sarah Robinson, Corporate Affairs Manager, Yorkshire Water (YW) gave a presentation which addressed Members’ questions that had been submitted in advance.

• Response times to reported leaks and how their response is co-ordinated
• What steps are being taken to reduce river pollution?
• Housing development, sustainable water management and infrastructure
• Sewerage management, capacity, pollution incidents
• Sustainable land management and natural flood management
• Roadworks and traffic management
• Yorkshire Water are spending significant amounts of capital funding in Northallerton and Brompton, separating surface water runoff from combined drainage to prevent overloading water treatment plants. This is welcome but seems completely at odds with new developments in Northallerton being allowed to use retention ponds and pumping surface water drainage into the existing combined drainage water system in Northallerton. Who has ultimate responsibility for this in planning terms and what can Yorkshire Water do to resist such moves?

Following the presentation, members raised a number of other issues including:

·       Road works and closures signs left out after any works have finished.

This will be reported to the YW Streetworks Manager.

·       Bainbridge and Aysgarth not mentioned on list of works along the Swale. Community groups believe there are pollution issues there – can this be checked and does YW work with those groups who undertake sampling of the river?

Works are programmed based on the highest discharging sites but the officer will share more information on this. YW has 2050 to tackle CSO discharges. The River Health team works with local groups.

·       Leaks are a serious concern. There has been a leak on the main highway in the village of Moulton for more than year and there appears to be an issue of ownership. It is important to stop the leak before winter.

The officer asked to be provided with more details and would investigate and respond directly.

·       The algal bloom on R Swale has been very prolific – is that monitored and how does it compare to other parts of Swale?

YW test what may be discharged from their works. The Environment Agency is responsible for monitoring what’s happening in the rivers.

·       Does YW influence planning decisions, especially coping with increased development?

YW is not a statutory consultee but they will comment on planning applications if there are concerns and their Head of Town Planning works closely with NYC.

·       How does YW deal with invasive plants such as Himalayan Balsam?

YW has an Invasive, Non-native Plants Policy and also funds Yorkshire Wildlife Trust to assist with species control but this may be the EA’s responsibility if found on a general water course.

·       NYC supported Blue Flag status for all rivers but phosphate levels were high in the Swale. Coliform was also high and is a health issue.

The officer will take this back to their team and provide the correct information.

·       It was sometimes difficult to know who to contact YW or the EA. Is there a conflict?

The EA are the regulator  ...  view the full minutes text for item 168.

For discussion.

Members requested an update on the latest situation for banking and cash handling in the committee area.

Further recent closures of bank branches had raised concerns for a number of reasons including:

·       The distances residents may have to travel in order to access banking services, particularly if using public transport.

·       The impact of businesses at the lack of access to cash for customers and the costs to business of processing card payments.

·       Whilst the service provided by the Post office was welcome, Members were concerned at the lack of local access to other financial services.

·       The limited access to ATMs

Councillor Brynn Griffiths proposed and Councillor Stuart Parsons seconded that this Area Committee requests a review of the Stokesley community’s cash access needs by applying to LINK for a banking hub.

Resolved

It was unanimously agreed that this Area Committee requests a review of the Stokesley community’s cash access needs by applying to LINK for a banking hub.

It was subsequently realised that an assessment of Stokesley’s banking needs had already been undertaken and found that the provision of any new or improved cash access services in Stokesley was not recommended at this time.

Arriva Transport had agreed to attend the next meeting of the Committee to be held on 10 November 2025 and had requested that the Committee submit any questions in advance.

Members were asked to submit their questions to the Senior Democratic Services Officer by 13 October 2025.

For November’s meeting

·       Members requested an update on ambulance response times.

·       An update on the Catterick ICC and details of the services that would be available to the general public. Members had concerns that if services were moved into the garrison for the general public, had access to public transport been considered.

Emptying of litter bins and dog bins, especially in play areas and the fact that domestic waste may be left at litter bins.

Members had concerns about the resource in Planning teams across the Council.

Agenda items 10a-10d were for information only.

Members were asked to submit any questions or requests for further information from the authors or Senior Democratic Services Officer.

Cllr Heather Moorhouse joined the meeting at 11.05am.

Any other items which the Chair agrees should be considered as a matter of urgency because of special circumstances.

There were no urgent items of business.