Planning and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Panel
Wednesday 6 May 2009
iv
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL
6 MAY 2009
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY PANEL
6 MAY 2009
PRESENT: Councillors Mrs Howes (Chairman), Kellaway (Vice-Chairman), Beer, J Evans, Holness, Muir and Mrs Wilson
Officers: Mr Abrahamson, Mr Herlinger, Mrs Hornby, Mr Perkins and Mr Stallwood
part i
None were received.
80/08 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor Beer declared a Personal Interest in the Flood Monitoring item due to being a Parish Councillor in Old Windsor where flooding was an issue.
81/08 MINUTES
- RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meetings held on 2 March 2009 be approved.
82/08 FLOOD MONITORING REPORT
Members considered the report due to be submitted to Cabinet on 28 May 2009 on the Flood Monitoring Report. The Panel noted that the report provided an update on actions taken in regard to flooding since the last Flood Monitoring Report at November 2008 Cabinet. Namely –
- Ø The Draft Water Bill to be published in April 2009.
Ø The Council to develop plans with the Environment Agency to create a Local Flood Forum that would report to Cabinet every six months.
Ø The Strategic Flood Risk Assessment had been agreed by the Environment Agency and was due to be published in May 2009.
Ø Community Flood Plan template was available on the Council’s website and workshops were being held for Parish Councils. The Council would work with Parish Councils to assist in the formulation of these plans.
In respect of the dredging of the River Thames, Members felt that the Parishes and other relevant organisations believed that this was necessary, whereas the Environment Agency (EA) had a different view in that it believed it was not necessary and was not a priority. After some discussion, the Members agreed that the recommendation for the Lead Member of Highways & Streetcare, with The Chief Executive of the Royal Borough, should write a joint letter to the Government demanding that the EA receive funding for the dredging of the River Thames as they believed this would make a stronger case.
Members noted that the EA had canvassed the Local Authorities along the lower (downstream) Thames asking if they wished to be involved with a Thames Flood Forum. The Royal Borough and Surrey were the only Authorities who replied and therefore the EA would not progress the idea. Mr Perkins reported that he had set up a RBWM Flood Forum to include the EA, Planning, Thames Water, Thames Fire & Rescue Service, affected Parish Councils, Mr Perkins and relevant Officers, who would compose an Action Plan. It was planned that the forum would meet twice a year.
Members noted the background behind the Water Bill which was expected to be published in late April 2009. This included a raft of responsibilities and that different bodies who were involved seemed to be blaming everyone else following the floods in 2007.
Members were concerned that, according to the EA, the flood zones had changed but that this had not been noted on their website. The concern was also that it could potentially lead to some members of the public not being able to obtain insurance due to being in a perceived flood risk zone.
Members also noted the following points –
- Ø That the EA had undertaken a consultation survey in relation to their Flood Warning signage, and Members believed that signage should revert back to coloured signage as the print on the present signage was far too small.
Ø That at Burfield Road, Old Windsor the ditch had become blocked due to fallen trees and which had caused flooding in February 2009. It was noted that some of the blockage had been removed by the EA but that more work was required for a resolution.
- Ø In February 2009 there was a flooding incident in Stanwell Road Horton as a result of erosion, which also caused neighbouring ditches to fill up and required the area to be closed for some time. Slough Borough Council was considering seeking to recover its costs from the property owner as part of this action.
83/08 DESIGN REVIEW PANEL – REPORT AND UPDATE
Members received the report on the Design Review Panel and noted that this was a locally based panel comprised of volunteer independent local professionals with build environment skills such as architecture. The ultimate aim of the Panel would be to support and promote improvements to design quality of development within the Royal Borough and improve the quality of new developments being undertaken.
Members were very supportive of the positive work the Panel was already undertaking and were appreciative of the time given by the professionals on the Panel. It was noted that the advice provided by the Panel would provide robust, independent and qualified opinion, which planning officers and Members could take into account, but that the Council was not bound by the advice provided.
The Panel observed that the Borough Design Awards, once a popular feature had not taken place in recent years, and suggested that this be reinstated, with the possibility of making it a bi-annual award. Mr Stallwood undertook to discuss this with the Head of Planning and Development and the Lead Member for Planning and Development.
84/08 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.
The Panel noted that the Planning income was £100,000 below target, despite an increase during March, although this was better than expected due to vacancies being frozen.
The Panel also noted that there was a further fall in Car Parking income levels. Reductions in car parking income had been offset by savings on repairs.
The increase in subscriptions for the green waste scheme and other recycling schemes resulted in a final reduction in waste to landfill of 2,300 tonnes for the year, along with savings on transport as a direct result of the reduced tonnages.
The Panel noted that the Staffing budget gave the number of posts and grades where there were only so many people per grade. Those with career grades were expected to take examinations to meet the targets within their Contracts. The Panel noted that staff with higher grades were not moving on regularly.
Licensing had recently been transferred to the Directorate.
85/08 WORK PROGRAMME
Members noted a Briefing Note commenting that the Chairman and Vice Chairman had requested a brief discussion by the Panel on the efficient management and planning of future agendas, highlighting issues of importance to Members. The following items were suggested for discussion at the future meetings of the Panel.
- Ø Buses – a presentation to all Council Members
Ø LDF Sustainable Design & Construction Supplementary Planning Document.
Ø LDF Core Strategy Preferred Option.
Ø Maidenhead Waterways Planning Framework.
Ø Update on Carbon Management & Introduction of Smart Metering.
Ø Speed Limit Review and Speed Camera Review.
86/08 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972 – EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
To consider passing the following resolution:-
"That under Section 100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting whilst discussion takes place on item 7 on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act”