PRESENT: Councillors Mrs Howes (Chairman), Beer, J Evans, Mrs Hunt, Mrs Newbound (substituting for Cllr Holness) and Stretton

In attendance: Councillors Adams, Bicknell, Mrs Knight and Rayner.

Officers: Mr Brown, Mr Gould, Mr Herlinger, Mrs Hornby Ms Leonard, Mr Perkins, Mr Slaney, Mr B Smith and Mr Oram

64/09 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Holness.

65/09 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were none.

66/09 MINUTES

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meetings held on 15 December 2009 be approved subject to the following amendments –

Ø That it was noted Councillor J Evans declared an interest in the Flood Forum.
Ø That Councillor J Evans declared an interest in the Part II item due to being a member of the Windsor Town Partnership Board.
Ø That in relation to the Flood Monitoring Report it was noted that bullet point 2 should amended to read “Councillor Beer expressed concern that the flood risk mapping used on the Lower Thames Flood Risk Management Strategy was not as extensive as that used by the Development Control's High Risk Flood Zone 3 mapping, therefore the LTFRMS should show a far larger area.”

67/09 SERVICE MONITORING REPORT

Members considered the report being submitted to Cabinet on 28 January 2010 on the Service Monitoring Report and noted that the report was as previously seen by Cabinet. It was noted that there was an addition in relation to the severe weather requesting an additional £100,000. Clarification was also given to the Panel that the additional £100,000 was to cover for the severe weather in January 2010 as well as December 2009.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cabinet be advised the Panel agreed the recommendation and endorsed the report.

68/09 A ‘TREE AND WOODLAND STRATEGY’ FOR THE ROYAL BOROUGH

Members considered the report being submitted to Cabinet on 25 February 2010 on the ‘Tree and Woodland Strategy’ for the Royal Borough and it was noted there were 2800 responses to the recent consultation sent to all Borough residents about the tree issues that affected them and what residents believe the Borough’s priorities should be. During the ensuing discussion, the following points were noted –

Ø That funding was being sought externally and that Section 106 monies would assist in future tree planting.
Ø That a scheme of ‘Adopt a Tree’ would be launched.
Ø That there were no financial implications within the report and the Panel commented that financial implications should be included in the report.
Ø The trees along the River Thames were considered an important feature and should be included in the report.
Ø That landowners should be consulted more closely.
Ø That 40 trees had been planted along highways and that many more had been planted in parks and open spaces. It was also noted that there was an intention to plant trees along the Windsor Relief Road, but only after a full survey was completed showing that roots would not interfere with structure of the highway.
Ø That there would be trees planted in Maidenhead Town Centre.
Ø The Panel raised concern that no strategy was in place after 2020, and requested that the report include that the strategy would continue post-2020.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cabinet be advised that the Panel endorsed the report subject to the following amendments –

Ø That the trees along the River Thames be named as an important feature in the report.
Ø That a tree strategy would continue post-2020.
Ø That financial implications be included in the report.

69/09 REPORT ON THE COUNCIL’S RESPONSE TO THE SEVERE WEATHER CONDITIONS DECEMBER/JANUARY 2009/10

Members considered a report on the Council’s response to the severe weather conditions December/January 2009/2010 and noted that primary routes had been gritted although one or two were missed, and this was addressed at the time. It was noted that some hilly areas had been identified for future gritting should severe weather be experienced again. Officers had worked with Parish Council’s particularly in January when the Borough offered up to five 1-tonne bags of grit to each Parish Council for distribution in their parishes. It was noted that a number of parishes took up the offer and that this had worked well. The Panel noted that similar severe weather had not been experienced in the past 30 years and that it continued for a protracted amount of time.

The Panel thanked Officers for their hard work during the severe weather conditions and noted that all areas of the Council, including the CSC, were open for business as usual. There were regular updates via the local radio station, through the press and emails sent to Councillors. The Royal Borough website was also regularly updated. It was agreed that communication had overall been very well managed.

It was also noted that stocks of grit had been built up and that the Borough had not run out. It was reported that some grit had salt added to enable stocks to go further and this was used on public areas such as car parks. Officers were reviewing the situation regarding stocks of grit. The Panel expressed concern in relation to the grit stocks situation since the government had taken over responsibility and commented that Local Authorities would be better placed to know what was required within their area, rather than central government.

Salt bins were also an area of concern as many had been subject to abuse over recent years which had led to them being removed. In light of the recent severe weather it was noted that specific areas would be identified for bins to either be replaced or for new salt bins to be sited. It was requested that on hills, salt bins be sited at the top of the hill rather than the base. Officers were also looking into how to prevent vandalism/abuse of salt bins. The possibility of an ‘Adopt a Grit Bin’ was suggested.

The issue of the gridlock on the 21 December 2009 in Maidenhead and Windsor was raised. It was reported that a severe weather warning was received at around 1.00pm that day. It was believed that the gridlock was caused by workers and residents all leaving at virtually the same time to make sure they arrived home safely before the severe weather fully hit the Borough.

The Panel raised concern about whether any legal issues relating to residents clearing their own driveways and paths outside their properties would arise should somebody fall over and wish to sue. It was noted that it was possible residents were scared to clear the snow away for fear of litigation. It was noted that there was some useful information on the Westminster website relating to this issue. It was suggested that residents’ Home Insurance policies could possibly cover this issue.

The Army was utilised to assist with ‘Meals on Wheels’ as well as assisting residents in the Borough. The Panel suggested that the Army should be called upon should a similar situation arise.

It was reported that Officers took the decision to send lorries to collect more grit following the 21 December downfall but that the wait at the depot was in excess of seven hours. The Panel noted that the contractor, Balfour Beatty, did not run short on manpower at the time.

Officers requested that Members identify areas within their Wards that could potentially be a problem should severe weather conditions reoccur, any identified areas would be noted and be prioritised when the time came. The Panel also noted that towns in colder countries were being approached for advice on how they cope with snow and ice to keep services on the move, a prime example being buses.

The Panel wished to express their sincere thanks for all the Officers’ hard work during the severe weather spell.


70/09 BUDGET 2010/11

Members considered the report on the Budget 2010/11. During the ensuing discussion, the following points were noted –

Ø That the number of planning applications was down but that to counter this, there were two trained officers in the Code for Sustainable Homes who provided sustainability advice to residents who a fee.
Ø The industrial estates programme was explained to Members in that some properties’ income did not all take effect at the same time each year, as some took effect at the beginning of the year and others during the course of the year, and which was reflected in the produced figures.
Ø That the number or posts being taken out could have a possible impact on front-line services. Details of the posts being taken out were not clear that the Panel wished further detail.
Ø The panel noted that planning had taken place in relation to lean systems to cut out waste across the Borough.
Ø That the Printing and Car Parking charges items would be reported in more detail at the next Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Panel.
Ø That in relation to planning applications, each officer who visited the site undertook to do so within 5 days of the application being submitted and during that visit would place a Yellow Notice. Residents would be encouraged to sign up to MyAlerts to flag up any new application that had been submitted in their area.
Ø It was believed that the government would not be keen to give back funding if the Borough was seen to be saving so much in reducing the Council Tax by 4%.
Ø The Panel requested that Cabinet considered increasing the priority of the Maidenhead Station – Transport Hub as it was deemed an important issue within the Borough.
Ø That Section 106 funding was available now for use on the Cycle network.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cabinet be advised that the Panel agreed the recommendation and endorsed the report subject to them noting –

Ø Concern was raised over the number of posts being taken out as this could have a possible impact on front-line services.
Ø That Cabinet considered increasing the priority of the Maidenhead Station – Transport Hub.

71/09 WINDSOR TRAFFIC CONSULTATIONS (Peascod Street & Thames Street)

Members considered the report being submitted to Cabinet on 28 January 2010 on the Windsor Traffic Consultations (Peascod Street and Thames Street) and noted that the majority of respondents to the Peascod Street consultation wished the bus stop to remain in its current position. Therefore, having listened to those views, no further action would be taken and the bus stop would remain.

The Panel noted that in relation to the Thames Street consultation, traffic was, at present, following the revised flow. However the Panel expressed concern on how this would work at the height of the tourist season when the pavements were crowded with pedestrians. Several options would be looked at to aid flexibility including the possibility not allowing traffic to flow this way between certain hours of the day.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cabinet be advised that the Panel agreed the recommendation and endorsed the report.

72/09 CAR PARK ADVERTISING PROCUREMENTS

Members considered the report being submitted to Cabinet on 28 January on the Car Park Advertising Procurements and noted that this could potentially generate an extra level of income which had the possibility of increasing once the economic conditions improved. The Panel requested that advertisers be commercial and not political.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cabinet be advised that the Panel agreed the recommendation and endorsed the report.

73/09 LAMP COLUMN BANNER ADVERTISING PROCUREMENTS

Members considered the report being submitted to Cabinet on 28 January on Lamp Column Banner Advertising Procurements and expressed concern that this proposal would be inappropriate in the Royal Borough. The Panel noted that three pilot schemes had been carried out in Maidenhead, Ascot and Windsor and that there were no plans for consultation. It was also noted that no complaints in relation to the pilot scheme had been received. The Panel were informed that the lamp column advertising could be used to the Royal Borough’s own announcements and advertising which be at no extra cost to the Council.

The view was expressed that banners on lamp columns could be distracting to drivers, particularly when approaching junctions. The Panel also believed that the banners would be detrimental to the aesthetics of the Royal Borough.

The Panel voted on the motion “That Cabinet be advised that the Panel raised concerns about style and highway safety and that extra banners on lamp columns would be inappropriate in the Royal Borough” Five Councillors voted for the motion (Councillors Beer, Mrs Howes, Mrs Hunt, Mrs Newbound and Stretton). Two Councillors voted against the motion (Councillors J Evans and Mrs Kemp).

RESOLVED: That Cabinet be advised that the Panel raised concerns about style and highway safety and that extra banners on lamp columns would be inappropriate in the Royal Borough.

74/09 MEETING

The meeting, which began at 6.30pm, concluded at 9.00pm



DATE: …………………