To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Jesse Grey.

To receive any Declarations of Interest.

Councillor Sharma declared a personal interest as he works for First Group.

To confirm the Part I Minutes of the previous meeting.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Part I minutes of the meetings held on 20 July 2017 and 29 August 2017 be approved.

To consider the above report

Gordon Oliver, Principal Transport Officer explained to the Panel the Cycling Strategy was a 10 year plan which had been developed over time with the Cycle Forum. An extensive consultation had taken place which involved the Cycle Forum, the public and the Area Action Plan. The Cycle Forum was keen to have the plan adopted and the Lead Member wanted to set up a Task and Finish Group for the strategy.

The Chairman stated the UK was lagging behind other countries in promoting cycling. Bradley Wiggins winning the Tour de France had put the spotlight on the sport and so the country should be building on from that success. Councillor Dudley referred to paragraph 4.2 of the report stating the Borough had been provisionally awarded funding from the LEP and there was significant work going on in the Borough with a focus on regeneration. The Task and Finish Group should invite a dialogue with Countryside to ensure there was a joined up approach to cycling provision. Councillor Sharma stated that with the Borough Local Plan (BLP) and the Station Opportunity Area, now was the right time to discuss cycling policy. The focus should be on transport, infrastructure and cycling.

Councillor Hunt said she had read the comments in the report and congratulated Gordon Oliver on the work he had carried out. However, she did not feel people would want to travel to work by bike if the roads remained dangerous. Businesses would step in to provide cycling facilities in the work place but, safe routes needed to be found and seriously considered and not be a token effort. Councillor Dudley stated the A4 Cycle Way was not something the borough was progressing but, Bucks were progressing their side of the route; when the Task and Finish group was established, it would need to form a dialogue with other local authorities for a joined up approach.

Councillor Story said there was an Ascot and Sunnings Area Action Plan and a cycle route from Ascot through to Windsor should be included in the Task and Finish Group’s work. Gordon Oliver confirmed there had been extensive work carried out to establish such a route but, there were too many challenges to overcome with landownership issues and lots of ditches. It had got to the stage where it was costing an enormous amount of money with major resistance from third parties. Due to those obstacles, the Crown Estate had agreed to allow cycling through Windsor Great park at night. Councillor Grey suggested leaving the possibility of the Ascot to Windsor route in the strategy as it was a 10 year plan and things changed over time so it may be explored again in the future.

Councillor Sharma said the financial implications were £75k and £30k for 2017 but there was an awful lot more investment going into other areas. Ben Smith, Head of Highways and Transport confirmed there was direct Capital funding and investment from developers and a further bid to the LEP being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

To consider the above report

Councillor Dudley introduced the report and explained that the Jubilee River costs were covered by the EA. Following the 2014 dreadful flooding in Datchet and Wraysbury, lots of work had been carried out by the EA on flood prevention. Page 189 of the agenda pack showed the areas that will be protected by the RTS and those areas included Datchet and Wraysbury.

There were several local authorities that the scheme covered, including Surrey and Councillor Dudley had attended meetings regularly on advancing the project. It was a major undertaking to protect 15k homes, with 2,300 of those homes in the Royal Borough. Councillor Dudley stated that during the flooding event of 2014, he was told that if it had rained for one more day, the situation would have been significantly worse than it was.

Councillor Dudley explained that there were several manmade channels that linked with lakes and other channels. Costs identified for the scheme came to £476m and funding of £240m had been sought from central government but, there was a significant shortfall. The Borough was committed to protecting homes and businesses; and there was a checkpoint meeting which will discuss if the scheme was viable to continue with. Each local authority was asked for support to try and plug the funding gap and the Borough should show very clearly, its commitment to the scheme.

The EA had no budget for the operation and maintenance of the scheme so that had to be paid for and there was potential for a flood levy on local authority residents to pay for the operation and maintenance of the flood scheme. That could equate to 1% for each resident of the Borough.

Councillor Dudley stated the report would be going to Cabinet Regeneration Sub-Committee before going to Full Council; he proposed composing a letter of support to go to the Treasury; all local authorities were going forward with the maximum amount of money they could offer. He added that both Windsor and Maidenhead MPs were hugely supportive of the scheme and the EA had confirmed that the flooding seen in 2014 had a high chance of returning again.

The Chairman stated the scheme had been discussed before and had been supported. He added there was a risk element in the form of a funding gap of £208m and that costs could go up. As a Council, he was happy to contribute towards the scheme but queried what other local authorities were doing to support the scheme. Councillor Dudley stated that was a good question for the other local authorities to answer but, he did not want it to be see that the Royal Borough was not supporting the scheme to protect residents. Councillor Hunt agreed and hoped the scheme would go ahead. She noted the £2.5m per year for four years and stated the Borough only had a small limited area of the Thames but, the Council were offering £10m; whereas other local authorities were only paying £6m each. Councillor  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86.

To consider the above report.

Ben Smith, Head of Highways and Transport stated the report was initially presented to Panel back in April 2017 where a number of issues were talked through. Cabinet made some amendments and this was the update following on from that. The report looked at the size of fleet, whether or not it was appropriate and if there were other uses for the fleet.

The contract would reduce the number of cars from 13 down to 10 and with the pool car fleet not used at weekends, there was potential to work with partners and introduce a car club scheme. The third element of the report was to install 10 or more electric vehicle charging points on street to encourage electric vehicles.

The Chairman stated the Panel discussed the report in April 2017 and a few concerns were addressed. He really welcomed the reduction in the fleet from 13 cars to 10. The Chairman said a policy was needed for officers to use pool cars instead of their own cars and he was pleased that was in the process of being produced to reflect that.

The Chairman directed the Panel to page 200 of the agenda pack as that gave a flavour of how to register in order to use the cars. The current system was very complicated to use and staff will have to confirm if there were not pool cars available when they make a journey in their own cars and claimed mileage. Councillor Hunt stated she was pleased to see there was a government grant available for residents to install charging points for their cars. Ben Smith explained there were locations where residents had requested charging points so the Council would start with those. He was happy for Councillors to email him with request for their own wards.

The Chairman said he was concerned during the last meeting regarding the termination of the lease; but the new lease would be for two years so there was no early termination fee. He felt the scheme was good value for money. Ben Smith confirmed no decision had been made as to what cars would be leased, but the figures in the report were based on the BMW i3 and were indicative. Councillor Lion did not feel it was the right time to go fully electric as the technology was still quite new. The Chairman said by 2020 London would only have electric buses and the Council needed to think about this and should order vehicles for the future.

Councillor Da Costa said there were no uniform charging points and there would be restrictions for employees regarding which cars they used for business trips. The cost – benefit analysis was not clear and did not include fuel and electric costs and savings. He queried who paid for residents to charge their cars and if there was government support available for the charging points. Ben Smith stated the staff policy tried to encourage staff to use pool cars and that was being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 87.

To consider the following resolution:-

“That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public  an be excluded from the remainder of the meeting whilst discussion takes place on item 8 on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1 – 7 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act”.

RESOLVED UNAIMOUSLY: 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 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.

The Panel approved the Part II minutes of the previous meeting.

To confirm the Part II minutes of the previous meeting.