i

PRESENT: Councillors Mrs Howes (Chairman), Kellaway (Vice-Chairman), Holness, Beer, J Evans and Muir.

Also present: Councillors Mrs Bateson, Grey, Mrs Knight and Lenton, Mike Noakes and Geoff Hill (BAA) and Parish Councillors McCaul and Stubblefield (Sunningdale Parish Council).

Officers: Ms Bailey, Mrs Dackombe, Mr Donnelly, Mr T Gould, Mr Herlinger, Ms Kenyon, Ms Long, Mr Oram, Mr D Scott, Mr Slaney and Miss Williams

42/08 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

None received.

43/08 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Mrs Bateson declared a personal interest in the Airtrack item as she was Ward Councillor for Sunningdale and lived close to the A30.

Councillor Beer declared a personal interest on the Airtrack item as he was Chairman of LAANC and the Borough representative on HAAC.

Councillor Lenton declared a personal interest in the Airtrack item as he was Ward Member for Horton & Wraysbury and was also a substitute for LAANC.

Peter Herlinger declared a personal interest on the Airtrack item as he was a member of the Board of Management at Staines Synagogue, which had formally objected to the chord element of the proposed scheme.

44/08 MINUTES

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meetings held on 3 November 2008 be approved subject to:

pii, 31/08 to read’….It was noted that Parishes, particularly Bisham, were concerned in relation to the flooding issue.’

45/08 PRESENTATION FROM AIRTRACK

Members received a presentation on the proposed Airtrack scheme from Mike Noakes (General Manager, BAA) and Geoff Hill (Infrastructure Consultant, BAA). Members noted the proposed timetable for the scheme:

Second stage public consultation 20 October 2008 – 15 December 2008 (although this deadline had been extended for comments from the Royal Borough);
Submission of a Transport and Works Act (TWA) in early 2009 after evaluation of comments received;
Public Inquiry anticipated for late 2009;
Approval of a Transport and Works Act mid 2010;
Construction could commence by late 2010;
Heathrow Airtrack services to start late 2014;

and the principal works required:

Utilisation of existing Network Rail network to Staines and Windsor
A new chord in Staines for Reading and Guildford services
A new bay platform at Staines Station
A fit out of Terminal 5 station to include two new platforms
New alignment from junction with Windsor line into Heathrow
Transition from overhead to third rail power before Staines Moor
New trains depot at disused railway siding at Feltham

Members noted that an environmental impact assessment process would be required as part of the TWA submission. In relation to level crossings, it was noted that all crossings had been visited and train/traffic operations had been observed. A ‘barrier down time’ model would be prepared and validated against observed operation. The incremental impact of Airtrack services barrier closures on traffic conditions would be examined and BAA would work with stakeholders to investigate mitigation measures.

In relation to the crossing at London Road, Sunningdale, BAA had met with officers and Councillor Mrs Bateson, following which BAA video recorded the morning peak operation on site on 5 December and observed extended barrier closures and long northbound traffic queues between 07:25 and 08:25. Network Rail had recently advised BAA of their ‘leaf fall’ timetable which operated from 29 September to 12 December, in which London bound trains were scheduled 3 minutes earlier to allow for reduced rail traction effects and barriers were closed earlier to minimise risk of trains overshooting the platform. Discussions with Network Rail were ongoing to determine whether the leaf fall timetable would be a yearly recurrence. If so, this issue would need to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Assessment.

The Panel was addressed by Parish Councillor Stubblefield from Sunningdale Parish Council, who stated that the Parish Council’s observations showed that traffic backed up to the M3 on the south side of the A30, to Virginia Water on the north side of the A30, and to the bridge on Chobham Road.

The Panel was then addressed by Parish Councillor McCaul from Sunningdale Parish Council who referred to the impact on local residents, as drivers used rat runs through residential areas to avoid the congestion caused by the closure of the level crossing. The Parish Council had received numerous complaints from residents, in particular parents trying to get their children to school on time and elderly residents waiting for buses. He asserted that the residents of Sunningdale would find it difficult to appreciate the long-term implications unless something was seen to be done to listen to their complaints. Parish Councillor McCaul requested a copy of the presentation used. The Interim Democratic Services Manager agreed to forward a copy to the Parish Clerk.

Councillor Lenton stated that the proposals would have an indirect impact on the residents of Horton & Wraysbury, as traffic backed up along the A30.

Members were provided with the average hourly closure figures between 7am-7pm for the level crossings at Thorpe Road, Staines, Vicarage Road, Pooley Green and Station Road, Egham. It was confirmed that rail lines were used heavily throughout the day outside of peak commuter hours, for empty coach and freight movements. Peak time closures were on average no mores than two minutes longer than off peak times. The Head of Highways and Engineering advised Members that the Borough had taken its own observations recently. During the peak morning period, closures were on average 5 ¼ minutes, the longest closure was for 10 ¼ minutes. During the evening period, closures were on average 6 ½ minutes, the longest closure was for 14 ½ minutes.

Councillor Mrs Bateson stated that the A30 was a trunk road prior to the building of the M3, when it was downgraded. If the M3 was closed, which happened approximately once every ten days, drivers used the A30 instead, which exacerbated the situation. She referred to a development for light industry at Longcross, Chobham Common, a feasibility study for which had shown that 17-20 % of employees would travel through Sunningdale. Narrow roads in the area were already used as rat runs, including those going past schools in the area. She asserted that the Borough would get no benefit from Airtrack as trains from Waterloo would stop at Staines and Bracknell only.

Mr Noakes advised that SEERA and SEEDA had identified improved public transport access to Heathrow as a key focus. The Airtrack scheme would be beneficial as it would improve access to Heathrow and increase the number of commuter seats on South West trains. The scheme would be joint funded by BAA and the public sector. It was confirmed that the chord would have no effect on frequency of services from Windsor to Waterloo; two services an hour would be maintained.

The Chairman thanksed Mr Noakes and Mr Hill for their presentation, and requested that Members of the Panel, and Councillors Lenton and Bateson, be sent copies of the Borough’s response to the consultation.

46/08 HOUSEHOLD WASTE INCENTIVES

Members noted that the item had been withdrawn from the agenda, and would be considered by the Panel at the special meeting scheduled for 12 January 2009.
47/08 FEES AND CHARGES

Members considered the report due to be submitted to Cabinet on 18 December 2008 on Fees and Charges. Members noted that there was a 5% baseline increase in charges, however as car parking charges had been set for two years, only marginal changes had been made in this area. It was confirmed that the aim of fees for taxi licences was to break even and any surplus would be used to reduce Council Tax. The increase in fees would be reported to the Licensing Panel in early 2009. In relation to increases for highway and development control charges, it was explained that these represented estimated real costs so as not to subsidise developers.

Members requested that, in light of the changeable financial situation, the Head of Finance report back to the Panel following future reviews as indicated in paragraph 4.2.1 of the report. Members also requested that, for future reports, including budget monitoring, the sections in relation to Planning & Environment be highlighted.

RESOLVED: That the report be endorsed and recommended to Cabinet with the additional comment that, in light of the changeable financial situation, the Head of Finance report back to the Panel following future reviews as indicated in paragraph 4.2.1 of the report.

48/08 PRELIMINARY BUDGET REPORT

Members considered the report due to be submitted to Cabinet on 18 December 2008 on the Preliminary Budget Report. Members noted the details of the analysis of budget pressures for Planning & Environment. It was confirmed that some contracts were based on September RPI figures, whereas some were based on January figures. Changes in inflation also affected interest on the Council’s balances.

Members expressed concern that the current economic climate would put increased financial pressure on residents and therefore the default level for Council Tax payments could rise and also that there would be increased pressure on the CAB and it would therefore be in the Borough's interest to consider increasing the grant provided to the CAB. Councillor J Evans reported that a number of measures were already being taken to help residents including short term loans to avoid situations of homelessness.

It was confirmed that, in relation to the property portfolio, surplus assets were those parts of the portfolio that were now redundant, rather than simply saleable. Members requested that this be clarified in the report. It was also suggested that, in paragraph 3.1.29, it be confirmed that any review of those fees which carried an element of subsidy would be to consider the appropriateness of the subsidy rather than to seek to reduce them arbitrarily.

RESOLVED: That the report be endorsed and recommended to Cabinet, with the additional comments:

i) A reference be made in 3.1.2 to the fact that the current economic climate would put increased financial pressure on residents and therefore the default level for Council Tax payments could rise.

ii) In view of the difficult economic circumstances there would be increased pressure on the CAB and it would therefore be in the Borough's interest to consider increasing the grant provided to the CAB.

iii) In paragraph 3.1.26, clarification be made that surplus assets were those parts of the property portfolio that were now redundant, rather than simply saleable.

iv) In paragraph 3.1.29, to confirm that any review of those fees which carried an element of subsidy be to consider the appropriateness of the subsidy rather than to seek to reduce them arbitrarily.

v) A typographical error in para 5.1.1, which should read '....commitments made before the May 2007 elections.

49/08 IMPROVEMENT OF FOOTWAY AT NORDEN ROAD RAIL BRIDGE, MAIDENHEAD - PETITION

Members considered the report due to be submitted to Cabinet on 18 December 2008 on the Petition ‘Improvement of Footway at Norden Road Rail Bridge.’ It was noted that the bridge was traffic controlled, but concerns had been raised about pedestrian safety. The proposed scheme would be to put railings between the kerb and the yellow lines. The scheme would be low cost and would come out of next year’s budget. The Head of Highways and Engineering had met with the Lead Petitioner, Councillor Herdson and Councillor D Wilson, who all supported the recommendations in the report.

RESOLVED: That the Panel endorsed the report and recommended it to Cabinet.

50/08 MAIDENHEAD TOWN CENTRE VISION AND ACTION PLAN

Members considered the report due to be submitted to Cabinet on 22 January 2009 on the Maidenhead Town Centre Vision and Action Plan. Members noted that there had been a large amount of public consultation on the document, which had been overseen by PRoM. Responses received had centered around:

the clarity and purpose of the document as a vision and strategy with economic and social aspirations, as opposed to just a planning document.
Strengthening the need to see the town centre as a whole

Members were advised that there were ten strategic objectives outlined in the document, which would guide all work in the town centre. The three key areas were:

The natural environment
The physical environment / accessibility
Economic and social management

Members agreed to endorse the report and urged for the scheme to progress as quickly as possible.

RESOLVED: That the report be endorsed and recommended to Cabinet.

51/08 BRAY CONSERVATION AREA APPRAISAL

Members considered the report due to be submitted to Cabinet on 22 January 2009 on the Bray Conservation Area Appraisal. Members noted that the Bray Conservation Area Appraisal was the first new appraisal of a programme agreed by Cabinet. The appraisal was in three parts:

The main appraisal, which included a detailed explanation of the character of the area.
A management plan which set out the actions the Council and other stakeholders could take.
A proposal to introduce additional planning controls, which would remove permitted development rights.

It was confirmed that Bray Parish Council had been closely involved in the production of both draft documents and were supportive of the proposals. Members expressed concern at the effect of excess traffic, which could destroy the unique nature of conservation areas. It was confirmed that the nature of a conservation area would be taken into account when, for example, a traffic calming scheme was proposed.

RESOLVED: That the report be endorsed and recommended to Cabinet.

52/08 BROADWAY/KING STREET/QUEEN STREET TRIANGLE PLANNING BRIEF: REPORT OF CONSULTATION AND ADOPTION

Members considered the report due to be submitted to Cabinet on 18 December 2008 on the Broadway/King Street/Queen Street Triangle Planning Brief. A letter from Cushman and Wakefield LLP, on behalf of Irish Life, was circulated to all Members. It was confirmed that dialogue was ongoing with Irish Life and their agents and officers were hopeful that this would be productive. Members endorsed this approach.

Members were advised that, since an earlier version of the report had been circulated to all Members, a number of consultation comments had been received and were now included. The comments related to:

Planning merits
Appropriate planning framework to ensure any development in the area could be properly managed.

Changes had been made in three key areas:

A need to strengthen linkages from the site to the south, particularly the station, and to the north, in particular to the Nicholson’s Centre and the primary retail area.
A need for a retail assessment to ensure the existing town centre remained vibrant.
A clear basis for useable open space.

Members endorsed the changes as detailed above. It was also noted that, despite the economic climate, Maidenhead continued to attract interest from developers and retailers.

RESOLVED: That the report be endorsed and recommended to Cabinet. The Panel in particular welcomed the retail assessment to ensure the town centre remained vibrant and the proposed linkages between the town centre and the station, which would help make Maidenhead a 'destination'. The Panel also endorsed the ongoing dialogue with Irish Life and their agents.

53/08 SERVICE MONITORING REPORT

Members received the latest Service Monitoring Report for all service areas, including areas relevant to the Planning and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Panel. It was confirmed that the Borough’s Building Control unit competed well in the market and aimed to break-even over a three year rolling period. The team had received a Charter Mark and national and regional awards. Levels of business were higher than counterparts in other local authorities, and the team competed strongly with Approved Inspectors.

Councillor Beer welcomes the contribution by the Borough to the legal challenge to runway three at Heathrow. It was confirmed that it was a securing of a commitment for up to £25,000 as part of a joint action which would be drawn down only when required. Final costs would depend on how many groups agreed to share the cost.

54/08 PROGRESS REVIEW – DPE IMPLEMENTATION OF PHASED REVIEW OF PARKING RESTRICTIONS

Members noted that, in accordance with section 100B (4) (b) of the Local Government Act 1972, the Chairman had agreed to consider an urgent item on ‘Progress Review – DPE Implementation of Phased Review of Parking Restrictions’, as the report was to be considered by Cabinet on 18 December 2008.

The Panel noted that the process had been amended to ensure Ward Members were aware of progress on schemes. All Members had been emailed a list showing schemes by ward. The report proposed a process which would involve localised consultation with Ward Members and potentially residents when changes were identified. Members requested that Cabinet be asked to include an additional stage to the proposed process whereby Ward Councillors be notified when residents first made a request, which would enable Ward Councillors to provide further relevant information. The Panel also requested that Parish Councils be made aware of the updated 'Phased Review of Parking Restrictions' list.

RESOLVED: That the report be endorsed and recommended to Cabinet with the request for a minor process change whereby Ward Councillors be notified of the requested review when residents first made a request, which would enable Ward Councillors to provide further relevant information. The Panel also requested that Parish Councils be made aware of the updated 'Phased Review of Parking Restrictions' list.

55/08 WORK PROGRAMME

Members noted the items suggested for discussion at the meeting of the Panel to be held on 12 January 2009:

Windsor Parking Consultation
Household Waste Incentives Scheme

56/08 MEETING

The meeting, which began at 6.00pm, concluded at 8.30pm.