To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors Marius Gilmore and Maureen Hunt.

To receive any Declarations of Interest.

Cllr Beer -  Declared a personal interest in item 4, Flooding Monitoring as he attends the Old Windsor Parish Council Flood Forum,

Terry Baldwin – Declared an interest in item 11, Strategic Leadership Changes as some officers will be affected; David Perkins would be leaving the room during the discussion of this item as the changes could directly affect him.

To confirm the Part I Minutes of the previous meeting.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 14 September 2015 be approved.

To receive the above report.

Ben Smith, Head of Highways and Transport explained that the report was a bi annual update on flooding. The first part of the report is the update and the second part of the report relates to the Lower Thames Scheme.

One of the recommendations was to set up a more formal Member/Officer team to work on the Lower Thames Scheme in collaboration with other formal groups to make sure the right Members and Officers were involved. Councillor Beer stated that in the report summary, the second paragraph should mention Thames Water specifically and they should play a part in the partnership.

In response to whether the SUDS service was a new service or not, Ben Smith confirmed the service would be a statutory consultee on planning applications and would have a larger impact on them. He added that on page 13 of the report, point (ii) which read a ‘River Thames Scheme’ Member / Officer project team be established to support, develop and maximise benefits to residents, businesses and visitors’, should be a matter of priority, should mention Old Windsor and should also include Ward Councillors and Parish Councillors. Ben Smith confirmed that the SUDS Service should cause no delays to planning applications.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That

      i.        The positive progress in delivering the manifesto commitment (‘… Ensure flood schemes and maintenance are delivered on time to better protect homes and highways…’) be noted.

    ii.        A ‘River Thames Scheme’ Member / Officer project team be established to support, develop and maximise benefits to residents, business and visitors and should include Ward and Parish Councillors and should also include Old Windsor.

To receive the above report.

Chris Wheeler, Highways & Transport Business Manager, stated the report was an update on the previous paper brought to the Overview and Scrutiny Panel. There had been a lot of change with funding criteria and funding would now be based on good practice. Some of the other key points of the revised paper included:

Ø  A strategy document had been produced

Ø  The strategy document explained the different ways to invest funding.

Ø  There was a longer term programme which offered better value for money.

Ø  The paper discussed different types of treatments used in the Borough.

Ø  The Highways Inspection Guide was included in the paper.

Ø  There was a strong asset management approach.

Ø  As there were policy elements it was recommended that the report was added to the forward plan for Cabinet.

Councillor Sharma stated the document was very detailed and he found it interesting that the borough was able to provide an affordable level of service that residents trust. He felt the document provides reliable roadwork information and was acting on customer feedback. He added the report supported economic growth and sustainability within the borough and that he was pleased it was easy to do business with suppliers and providers ensuring there was better value for money.

Chris Wheeler confirmed that the strategy within the report was about understanding resources that were available; looking at outcomes; customer satisfaction and aligning the borough’s plans with that. Funding from central government was scored against the following list:

Ø  Key stakeholder agreement

Ø  Taking into account best practice documents

Ø  Carrying out gap analysis on potholes and drainage.

Ø  Three quarters of the items are in the green with a quarter of the items in amber so the borough was in a good position

Ø  The borough would be measured on resilienceAll the information on how the borough would be scored for funding was on the DfT website.

Ø  The finance section of the report explained what the different bands meant financially.

The website address for the information on incentive funding was: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/highways-maintenance-funding-incentive-element

the borough would be audited on performance.

Councillor Beer suggested that the Cycle Forum should be a key consultee regarding highway maintenance and that cyclists should be highlighted in the stakeholders section of the report. Chris Wheeler confirmed that officers attended the Cycle Forum regularly so any feedback from the Forum would be fed back and reviewed. There were also cycle audits where the borough’s roads were looked at through the eyes of a cyclist.

David Perkins, Head of Neighbourhood & Streetscene Delivery confirmed there was an increase in the amount of activity by utility companies digging up the roads in the borough. It was something the borough was aware of as there had been lots of feedback and comments from Members and residents. It was fair to say that some utility companies tended to work at their own pace. His team had been looking at introducing a permit based scheme which would tell the utility companies what  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To receive the above report

Terry Baldwin, Head of HR explained the report proposed a four year strategic plan which was looking at doing things differently; It was a draft plan and a work in progress. There had been requests to amend the draft and those requests were likely to continue; Terry Baldwin welcomed any feedback.

The Chairman stated he thought it was a good plan and would make the Council even better. The Vice-Chairman suggested the two local MPs should be informed about the plan. It used simple language and was simple to understand. He added he was happy with the report.

Terry Baldwin confirmed the report would go to Cabinet in December 2015 and that Members were invited to continue providing comments and feedback on the plan.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That Members recommend that Cabinet:

      i.        Approve the draft Council Strategic Plan 2016-2020 and recommends it proceed to Council for their consideration on 15 December 2015.

    ii.        Delegate authority to the Managing Director and Leader of the Council in consultation with the Principal Member for Policy to make alterations to the proposed plan ahead of its submission to Council.

To receive the above report.

Ben Smith, Head of Highways and Transport introduced the report and explained to Members the report was the result of a petition that received over 1,000 signatures requesting a reduction in weight limit from 18T to 7.5T on Chobham Road railway bridge.

Ben Smith explained the consultation process to Members to reassure the Panel that if Surrey Council objected to the change in weight limit on Chobham Road railway bridge, the borough would still be able to implement the change in weight limit

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That:

      i.        Consultation be undertaken (including residents in the Royal Borough and Surrey; Parish Councils; Surrey County Council; Thames Valley and Surrey Police), in response to the request to reduce the weight limit of Chobham Road railway bridge, Sunningdale.

    ii.        The results of the consultation be reported to Cabinet for further consideration in February 2016.

To receive the above report.

Ben Smith, Head of Highways and Transport gave a brief verbal update on Heathfield Avenue. He stated there was piece of land where residents were disputing ownership but the developer needed the land to discharge conditions on their planning application. Cabinet had deferred the decision to November 2015 to allow information to be submitted by the developer following that, more information was provided by the residents. The decision was then put back further till December 2015.

To receive the above report.

Brian Martin, Community Safety Manager introduced the report and explained that Cabinet had agreed to run the Night Time Economy Pilot and the pilot was due to end in December 2015. Community Wardens had been acting as first responders in enforcement issues such as taxi’s, noise and businesses depositing rubbish early. Brian Martin stressed that the pilot was not about wardens acting as proxy police.

The wardens covered three main areas which were Windsor and Eton, Maidenhead and Ascot; a lot of the patrolling was done in cars with approximately 30% of patrols carried out on foot. The rest of the time wardens were covering the Night Time Economy, they were writing reports.

Brian Martin informed the Panel that all call out’s or checks carried out by the wardens were detailed in Appendix one;  and some of them resulted in further action. The report also showed that over six months of the pilot running, noise nuisance was down by over 40%; there was a 27% reduction in antisocial behaviour and a 12% reduction in taxi related incidents. Brian Martin clarified that there were various factors that had contributed to the reduction in incidents and not all reductions were due to the pilot.

Brian Martin stated the pilot fulfilled a manifesto commitment of providing an extended service to residents but, there was a loss of 4% of warden’s daytime working by having them fulfil the out of hours role. Six options were considered going forward which included stopping the service altogether. There were benefits to having the Night Time Economy service but there were also risks associated with it and continuing the service may affect officer morale. There may be a need to enforce the flexibility clause contracts which could potentially involve a 12 week consultation.

The Chairman stated the pilot had been a resounding success as the majority of complaints from residents came in after midnight. The Vice-Chairman commented the borough had been trying to create an economy that flourished in the Town Centres; the Night Time Economy Pilot used a holistic framework and improved the quality of life in the Town Centres. It was a necessary tool for Town Centre managers and encouraged more visitors. It would be interesting to see the full report in February 2016. The Vice-Chairman fully endorsed the scheme.

RESOLVED:  The Panel recommend that Cabinet:

1. Approves the continuation of the Night Time Economy service until the conclusion of the pilot period in December 2015;
2. Requests that a further report be presented to Cabinet in February 2016 to determine whether the Night Time Economy service is continued as a permanent arrangement including confirmation of the final service configuration if it is to continue;
3. Delegate authority to the Strategic Director of Operations in conjunction with the Lead Member for Environment Services and the Head of Service for Community Protection and Enforcement to continue to operate a service if it is deemed a success at the end of the Pilot until Cabinet finalises the service configuration in February  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

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 10 on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1 and 4 of part I of Schedule 12A of the Act".

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 6 on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 1 and 3 of part I of Schedule 12A of the Act".

To receive the above presentation.