To receive any apologies for absence

None received

To receive any declarations of interest

Councillor D. Wilson declared an interest in the item ‘Draft Conservation Area Appraisal: Holyport’ as he lived in Holyport (although outside the conservation area) and was a member of the Holyport Ward of Bray Parish Council. He would remain in the room for the discussion and voting on the time.

Councillor Hill declared an interest in the item ‘Draft Conservation Area Appraisal: Maidenhead Town Centre’ as he owned property in the conservation area. There was no change proposed to the conservation area therefore he would remain in the room for the discussion and voting on the time.

To consider the Part I minutes of the meeting held on 17 December 2015.

To note the Part I minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet Regeneration Sub Committee held on 16 December 2015.

To note the Part I minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet Participatory Budget Sub Committee held on 16 December 2015.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That:

i)             The Part I minutes of the meeting held on 17 December 2015 were approved.

ii)            The Part I minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet Regeneration Sub Committee held on 16 December 2015 be approved

iii)           The minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet Participatory Budget Sub Committee held on 16 December 2015 be approved

None

To consider the Forward Plan for the period February to May 2016.

Cabinet considered the contents of the Forward Plan for the next four months and noted the changes that had been made to the plan since the last meeting. In addition it was noted that:

·         The item ‘Creation of Windsor UK Community Interest Company’ was deferred to the meeting on 25 February 2016.

·         The item ‘Prevent – A Safeguarding Update’ would be presented to Cabinet on 25 February 2016

·         The item ‘Parking Penalty Discount Pilot’ would be presented to Cabinet on 25 February 2016

·         The item ‘Improved Textile Recycling in the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead’ would be presented to Cabinet in March 2016

·         The item ‘Increasing Home Ownership – Partnership and Investment Plan’ would be presented to Cabinet in April 2016

·         The item ‘New Road and Streetworks Permit scheme’, originally scheduled for 25 February 2016, would be deferred until March 2016.

·         The item ‘Shared Lives’, originally scheduled for March 2016, would be deferred to April 2016.

·         The item ‘Tender for Residential and Nursing Beds’, originally scheduled for 25 February 2016 would be withdrawn and included in a  procurement report at a later date.

·         An urgent item would be added to the agenda for the meeting on 11 February 2016 on ‘Maidenhead Post Office’, subject to the approval of the relevant Chairman of Overview & Scrutiny.

Members considered an update on the current arrangements for shared services and further opportunities for sharing of services with partners. The Chairman explained that the council had for some time been working to improve and enhance the amount of shared services in the borough. These typically took place with one or more of the other Berkshire authorities.  Legal services were shared with Wokingham and also in part with Slough. Recent co-operation on public health had established a joint Director of Public Health based in Bracknell. The borough also shared Building Control and Building Services with Wokingham. Four Berkshire authorities shared the Berkshire Adoption service.

The Strategic Director of Operations and Customer Services commented that the borough had a good history of seeking to deliver services in different ways. The three Directors had met with their Berkshire counterparts recently; the meeting had shown a new appetite for shared services across the county. However, he commented that the pace of change desired by the borough may be faster that that anticipated by its neighbours.

The Strategic Director of Corporate and Community Services highlighted that the report set out the potential for sharing of financial services. Initial work had suggested this may offer significant savings.  Further work would be undertaken and a report submitted to Cabinet with a full business case. His Directorate was also undergoing a series of fast Fundamental Services Reviews over the next couple of months, which he hoped would identify a number of shared service opportunities.

The Managing Director explained that the borough’s clear ambition had been set out to Berkshire colleagues, to share a wide range of services including front facing services in Children’s and Adult services. There was a clear opportunity to both achieve efficiencies and build resilience. A range of papers would be brought to Cabinet over the next year to drive services forward. Adopt Berkshire had been nationally recognised for its success and the Department for Education was pursuing the borough to add four more authorities to the partnership. There were also shared opportunities with the Clinical Commissioning Groups through the Better Care Fund, to deliver services to older people.

The Lead Member for Finance commented that the less positive financial position of other councils would create fertile ground to increase shared services. The Chairman commented that he would work with other Berkshire Leaders to develop shared services.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cabinet:

i.    Notes the level of shared service arrangements operated by the Royal Borough.

ii.   Delegate authority to Strategic Directors in agreement with Lead Members to continue to explore opportunities for shared services.

Members considered an update on progress relating to improved highway asset management and the proposed Highway Asset Management Plan (HAMP).

The Lead Member explained that asset management was the way an organisation managed its assets to deliver its strategic priorities and service needs effectively.

Highway asset management:

·         assessed the status of highway assets

·         identified need

·         indicated the level of investment required to maintain, and improve our performance

Members noted that borough highway assets included:

·         Roads Network:                    603km (375 miles)

·         Footways:                              800km

·         Bridges/Structures:              300+

·         Street Lights etc:                  17,000+

·         Traffic Signals:                     57 sites

·         Road Drains:                                    26,000+

·         Public Rights of Way:         300+km

·         Highway Trees:                    40,000+

The Lead Member explained that a Highway Asset Management Plan contained:

·         Strategy

·         Objectives and targets

·         Investment options

·         Inspection regimes

·         Treatments and intervention levels

Three documents formed the proposed RBWM Highway Asset Management Plan:

·         A Highway Asset Management Strategy.

·         A Highway Maintenance Management Plan.

·         A Highway Safety Inspection Manual

The borough needed a Highway Asset Management Plan to ensure it was able to obtain as much external grant as possible. If the council did not have a Highway Asset Management Plan it would lose some of the government grant allocation for 2016/17 and an increasing amount in the following years.

It was also likely to be a key factor in any ad-hoc grant allocation that may be made available from the Department for Transport (DfT).

A HAMP was also needed to ensure spending was focussed on need from surveys and condition data, and on desired outcomes by using investment models and choosing appropriate treatments. This would enable the council to continue to maintain or improve the condition of the roads in the borough. The council also had to show the government it was improving resident satisfaction:

In order to meet the DfT criteria to maximise grant funding for 2016/17 RBWM had to have an adopted HAMP which had been endorsed by the executive of the Council. The self-assessment form marking the criteria was due to be sent to DfT at the end of January 2016.

Alongside the new strategy document the proposed HAMP included thoroughly reviewed and revised inspection and maintenance standards and intervention levels. If the HAMP was not adopted the council was unlikely to be in the most robust position to defend claims.

The investment modelling undertaken for the road network used historical data regarding capital spend, reactive maintenance costs and trends in the condition of roads to produce a range of options. The recommendation in the strategy was to increase spend to £2.372m per year in order to maintain current road condition across all classification of roads.

If the HAMP was approved and adopted:

·        Responses on the DfT self-assessment form could be confirmed and sent. This would enable the council to obtain all available grant funding indicated for 2016/17.

·        The adopted HAMP would be published to the RBWM website.

·        Activities would be undertaken so that RBWM could meet the higher criteria set by the DfT and optimise grant funding in future years  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6b

Members considered an update following completion of the joint feasibility study between Thames Valley Police (TVP) and the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead (RBWM) to consider a shared office and police station site in Windsor.

The Lead Member for Finance explained that significant work had been undertaken to optimise the council offices in Windsor. There was a clear requirement to continue to have a viable front office and staff space in the town. At its 30 January 2014 meeting, Cabinet authorised a joint feasibility study with Thames Valley Police (TVP) to explore a Windsor office accommodation strategy for both public bodies. Three options had been identified: York House, the Tinkers Lane depot and the Bachelors Acre library site. consultants had determined that the wholesale redevelopment of the site would not be cost effective. However, adding a further floor to the existing building would provide significant additional value of £3-3.5m at a cost of £1.5m. A lot of office accommodation in the town had in recent years been converted to residential therefore there was a demand for office accommodation.

The cost to reconfigure the council office space in the building would be £1.8m but this would increase the capital value by an additional £1m. TVP were due to meet on 29 January 2016 to agree to proceed with the proposals. A secure police pound would be included on site with a front counter service. TVP would pay for the costs of construction of their facility and make a contribution to the refurbishment of the original building. The council was also in discussions with the Crown Estate about extending the car park at the back of the site.

The Lead Member for Education commented that they key was partnership working with TVP. The Principal Member for Policy highlighted that the council worked in partnership with a number of blue-light services, for example the fire station at Tinkers Lane and the Multi-agency Safeguarding hub. Retailers in Windsor had reported a fall in lunchtime trade with the loss of office accommodation and it was therefore good t see the council investing in office accommodation in the town. The Principal Member for Transformation and Performance commented that an exhaustive review of multiple options  had been undertaken. The proposals added value in three ways: a capital increase, services offered and a legacy site. the chief whip  supported the proposals on behalf of the residents in the south of the borough who usually accessed services in Windsor, given the distance to Maidenhead.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cabinet:

i)             Notes the conclusion of the joint TVP/RBWM feasibility study confirming that there is sufficient synergy between the public bodies to underpin further collaborative work for the York House site.

ii)            Agrees to negotiations being explored and concluded with third party land owners/potential tenants as detailed in Appendix D (Part II).

iii)           Delegates authority to the Strategic Director of Corporate and Community Services in consultation with the Lead Member for Education (including Windsor) to negotiate an agreement with TVP, including  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6c

Members considered the proposed process for a revised Conservation Area Appraisal for Holyport. The Lead Member explained that the conservation area had been designated in 1968 and amended in 1994. Conservation areas required revision on a regular basis. The draft had been consulted on with ward councillors and parish councillors representing the Holyport ward of Bray Parish Council.

The report proposed the removal of area CA4 which included two farms. Some of the buildings were listed and as such had greater protection that provided by a conservation area. An area to be added was located at the end of Holyport Street that was an archaeological monument site including a medieval moat.

A report would come back to Cabinet in May 2016 following public consultation on the proposals. The six week consultation period would include displays in libraries and details on the borough website.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cabinet:

(i)            Notes the revised appraisal and agrees that it should go out for public consultation

(ii)          Delegates authority to the Strategic Director of Corporate and Community Services to launch the consultation in conjunction with the Lead Member for Planning, and following consultation, to bring revised conservation area proposals (including boundary changes) back to Cabinet for approval.

Members considered the proposed process for a reviewed Conservation Area Appraisal for Maidenhead Town Centre. The Lead Member explained the conservation area had been first prepared in 1995. There were no proposals to amend the boundaries. A huge amount of work and research had gone into the preparation of the document by the Conservation Officer and the Lead Member placed on record his thanks for this. It was proposed that the consultation period would take place in March and April 2016, with a report back to Cabinet in May 2016. The consultation documents would be available in libraries and on the borough website.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cabinet:

(i)    Notes that the appraisal has been reviewed and updated and agrees that that it should go out for public consultation

(ii)  Delegates authority to the Strategic Director of Corporate and Community Services to launch the consultation in conjunction with the Lead Member for Planning, and following consultation, to bring the conservation area appraisal back to Cabinet for approval.

Members noted that the item had been withdrawn from the agenda and deferred to the meeting to be held on 25 February 2016.

Members considered the latest financial update. The Lead Member reported a projected underspend of £454,000, which was in addition to the £2m addition to funds for adult social care. The council’s reserves remained healthy at £6.9m including just over £1m in the Development Fund. Appendix D included a reconciliation of the Development Fund.

The Lead Member talked Cabinet through the numerous recommendations in the report:

·         An additional S106 contribution of £250,000 for the Devenish Road/Bagshot Road roundabout, in addition to the previous allocation of £120,000 of corporate funding.

·         An additional £80,000 of corporate funds to upgrade wi-fi facilities

·         Additional capital funding for regeneration: £200,000 for development options at St Clouds Way; £50,000 for the Nicholsons Centre car park; £25,000 for brownfield sites analysis of land outside the council’s ownership; and £150,000 on the development potential of the Maidenhead golf club site

·         Additional funding from the Development Fund for resources to bring about the completion of the Borough Local Plan.

·         The Care Act 2014 provided revised guidance for councils in respect of the treatment of higher rates of the Disability Living Allowance and Attendance Allowance.  The guidance allowed councils to include these higher rate payments, which residents receive, within financial assessments for establishing how much a resident can afford to contribute towards the costs of their non-residential social care. The proposal was to consult on the issue.

·         Extension of two DAAT contracts to March 2017 to enable future contracts to be informed by the review of the service.

The Lead Member highlighted that Appendix E provided details of the council’s augmentation of the scheme to provide discounted business rate relief. The scheme had slow traction at the start but was now picking up; 14 premises had benefited to date.

The Lead Member for Adult Services and Health commented that an Opposition councillor had been quoted in the press that the council would be taking £500,000 from the DAAT budget as part of council tax and the precept for Adult Services. He stated that the council would not be taking £500,000 out of the contract for the next year.

The Principal Member for Transformation and Performance welcomed the improvements to wi-fi. Paragraph 4.10 was indicative of the journey the council had been on during the previous four years including the move to digital, which was one of the objectives of the Transformation programme. The Principal Member for Culture and Communities  commented that the wi-fi system in the libraries would be of benefit to residents.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Cabinet:

i)             Notes the report and the projected outturn position.

ii)            Approves the addition of a £250k S106 funded budget to the capital programme in respect of the Devenish Road / Bagshot Road roundabout (see paragraph 4.9).

iii)           Approves the addition of an £80k corporately funded capital budget in respect of replacement Wi-Fi infrastructure (see paragraph 4.10).

iv)          Approves the addition of additional capital budget funded by the Development Fund  in respect of the following development projects (see paragraph 4.11):

·         St Cloud Way  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6g

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 items 8-9 on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1-7 of part I of Schedule 12A of the Act"

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: 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 items 8-9 on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1-7 of part I of Schedule 12A of the Act

To consider the Part II minutes of the meeting of Cabinet held on 17 December 2015

To note the Part II minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet Regeneration Sub Committee held on 16 December 2015.