To receive any apologies for absence.

The Chair, Councillor G. Singh, welcomed everyone to the meeting. Forum members then introduced themselves.

No apologies for absence were received.

To receive any declarations of interest.

No declarations of interests were received.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 1^st June 2023.

Laurence Ellis, Democratic Services Officer, went through the actionsthe previous meeting:

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the minutes of the meeting held on 1^st June 2023 were approved as a true and accurate record.

To receive an verbal report on parking at Maidenhead Train Station.

Ed Goose, Regional Growth Manager at Great Western Railway (GWR), gave a brief overview on the situation with parking at Maidenhead Train Station. A number of actions had taken place around the Station which had influenced how people access it, including the Forecourt Scheme led by RBWM and backed by GWR. He stated that he met up with Huw Jones, Traffic Safety Manager (RBWM), a couple of months ago to develop an action plan to mitigate the challenges with drop-offs and any other concerns. He mentioned that he was aware of concerns and challenges with the operation but hoped that the scheme would improve accessibility to the Station. He also added that as the drop-off was driven by RBWM as they led the scheme.

On parking, Ed Goose informed that Silco Drive had been reopened since around January and February 2023 for Station users. In addition, Shoppenhangers Road and the ground floor of Stafferton Way car parks was also being utilised.

Councillor Baskerville asked about a drop off point, namely what happened to the original idea of it. Ed Goose replied that this was being considered, and he welcomed feedback and the desire for a drop off point to be reinstated. He mentioned that he was going to meet with the Station Team to assess the possibility of a drop-off in a few weeks’ time.

Councillor Reynolds commented that it was potentially a dangerous situation for residents to access the drop off points at the Station forecourts as the amount of parking could build back to the dual carriageway road and thus potentially causing residents to enter and exit their cars near the main road. He suggested that there could be some additional drop-off points near the Station. Ed Goose welcomed the feedback, adding that additional drop-off facilities were something worth considering and reiterating that this would be investigated by the Station Team. He also offered to return to the Forum at some point in the future.

Councillor Taylor, Vice-Chair, conveyed to Ed Goose that the current arrangement with drop-off parking was chaotic, with traffic building up on the A308, parking in residential areas and conflicts between taxi drivers. She also highlighted concerns of accessibility for disabled people with parking as well as potential for injury and accidents. She requested for the arrangement with drop-off parking to be re-investigated. Welcoming the feedback, Ed Goose responded that GWR and Network Rail were considering potential solutions to this. He also welcomed collaboration with RBWM.

Councillor Reynolds suggested that a report on the Station Team’s assessment could be forwarded to the Forum, and that RBWM should get involved in the engagement exercise by linking with the relevant individuals within the Council. Ed Goose replied that he would be keen to work with whomever to find the right solution to make station access safe and accessible.

ACTION: Ed Goose to report back on the Maidenhead Station Team’s assessment.

Councillor K. Singh raised some comments. Firstly, he stated that severely disabled residents were unable to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 219.

To receive an update on the Neighbourhood Plan from the Chair of the Neigbourhood Forum.

Andrew Ingram, Co-Chair of the Neighbourhood Forum, gave a presentation on the Maidenhead Neighbourhood Plan. He started off explaining that the Neighbourhood Plan (NP) put in place planning policies to guide future development. NPs set policies to guide developments, decide whether planning applications were approved and propose areas for development. He added that NPs affect development plans as developers looked at NP policy before making planning applications. Andrew Ingram added that an NP was not a talking shop, a complaints procedure, a way of challenging higher-level policy, a way to implement specific projects, or a way to stop development.

Andrew Ingram then explained how NP policies worked. He stated that if someone wanted to build something and it was not permitted development, there was the option of a pre-application discussion with RBWM Planning, then the individual would submit a planning application, and RBWM planning would review whether the application met national, RBWM and NP policies.

Andrew Ingram showed a map which illustrated that Maidenhead was the only area in the Borough which was neither a designated area or an area which had an adopted plan, and therefore it was the focus of development. Because of this, an NP was needed. An application for Maidenhead to be a designated area in 2019 was rejected.

With the refusal of the application, Andrew Ingram then informed that the Neighbourhood Forum had two main objectives: further dialogue with RBWM Planning to formulate an application; and engage with Maidenhead residents. He stated that RBWM Planning were concerned that Maidenhead was not a “logical or appropriate” area for a Neighbourhood Plan. He stated that he asked the Neighbourhood Forum’s 500+ social media followers whether a plan was appropriate for Maidenhead, to which an overwhelming majority said ‘yes’. After some time, Maidenhead was given designated status.

The Neighbourhood Forum then sought to obtain feedback from residents. One approach was through a public workshop in March 2023 to allow residents to convey ideas. From this, Climate Change and Biodiversity had become a primary area of concern, followed by housing and ‘getting about’ being strong areas of interest. Following the workshop, the Neighbourhood Forum collated the ideas and filtered them based on whether they were compatible with the National Policy Framework (NPF) and Borough Local Plan (BLP), and whether they were planning issues.

The topics from the public workshop were also categorised into 6 Topic groups: Biodiversity, Climate, Housing, Bult Heritage, Design and Getting Around. Each of these Topic groups had group leaders and a small number of people working on them.

On the status of the Plan, Andrew Ingram informed that the Neighbourhood Plan was currently developing proposals by making policy proposals and reviewing them. The next steps were to review a draft by publishing the draft policies, consult on them and review the feedback. This would be followed by the submission of a plan with a formal RBWM consultation process, an independent examination and any modifications. After this, a public referendum would take place; and if  ...  view the full minutes text for item 220.

To receive a report from Hub Residential on The Landing site.

Harry Gilham, Instinctive Partners, Victoria Manston, Development Director at HUB Residential, and Jennifer Macro, Development Manager at HUB Residential, introduced the item.

Victoria Manston gave a presentation on Building C, part of the One Maidenhead project (formerly The Landing) since 2018, forming part of Phase 2 of the development. The building was located on the corner of King Street and Queen Street in Maidenhead.

Victoria Manston introduced HUB as a developer focused on creating high quality living spaces for communities, working with the world’s leading architectural practices.

Victoria Manston gave some background to Building C. The site was granted consent in 2019 for a 7-storey office building with floor flexible floorspace for cafes, restaurant or shops at ground floor. HUB sought to redesign Building C with the objectives being:

• Deliver a local landmark building that acted as a gateway to the wider town centre;
• Create a sustainable office building that would be net zero carbon and utilised innovative construction methods, including a timber structure (the first of its kind in Maidenhead and the wider Thames Valley);
• Respect the local context which included providing active ground floor uses and new public realm areas;
• Use a refined material palette and ensure the building was future-proofed.

Jennifer Macro explained the key considerations of the project:

• Aligning with RBWM’s new Local Plan and Sustainability Statement:
  • Seeking to meet BREEAM Outstanding (the top sustainability certification) and WELL Platinum (health and wellbeing of the tenants);
  • Utilising a timber frame and façade system that was easily demountable and suitable for re-use.
• Tying in with the urban fabric of the surrounding area:
  • Taking into consideration of the mix of historic and modern architecture;
  • Looking at proposals for a stone/ brick building utilising a simple material palette that will increase natural daylight and heating.
• Completing the masterplan and developing a vacant site in the town centre:
  • Proposals were lower than the consented office scheme by circa 4 metres;
  • Drops down in height considerably from Phase 1 by circa 10 storeys.
• Addressing the need for high-quality Grade A office space in Maidenhead and providing ground floor active uses and public realm.

Victoria Manston then illustrated some conceptual images for the building, both internal and external viewpoints. She also illustrated the comparison between the consented and proposed schemes, namely the reduction in height. She informed that HUB were exploring on how to bring the timber on the outside of the building while complying with the building regulations.

Victoria Manston then displayed the bird’s eye view design proposals to the building floors.

• The ground floor would have cafes, restaurants and nurseries;
• The upper floors would have maximum efficiency and flexibility;
• The fifth floor would have an external podium garden where tenants could enjoy the views of Maidenhead.
• The public realms (which was mostly delivered under Phase 1) would have tables and chairs as well as a mix of trees and plants (a mix of hard and soft landscaping spaces).

Victoria Manston then listed the benefits to Building C:

• Up to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 221.

To receive a report on the A4 Crossing from Simon Lymn, Interim Infrastructure Delivery Manager.

Simon Lymn, Interim Infrastructure Delivery Manager, gave a presentation on the A4 Crossing at Holmanleaze. Giving an overview, he explained that the Borough was providing a new Toucan crossing along the A4 road, near Holmanleaze and the Sainsbury’s roundabout, which would allow cyclists and pedestrians to cross the road.  This was part of the development of the old Magnet Leisure Centre site, secured through local enterprise funding and Section 106 Developer Contribution funding.

The purpose of the project was to improve travel routes into Maidenhead Town Centre and the surrounding communities, as well as provide vital new connection into the new development on the northern side of the A4.

Simon Lymn then displayed an illustrated plan of the works around the A4. The project was in three phases:

• Phase 1: Toucan Crossing across the A4 road near Holmanleaze for pedestrians and cyclists,
• Phase 2: At-grade crossing onto Holmanleaze to ensure it was accessible,
• Phase 3: Cycle-pedestrian link to Forlease Road roundabout.

Simon Lymn then used Google Maps to show a street view of the road and help further explain the project. As part of Phase 2, a ramp next to some pedestrian steps would be built from the A4 road and Holmanleaze as there was a height difference between them.

With the timeframes:

• Begin on-site work for Phase 1 in late Summer 2023 and complete the works by November 2023.
• Begin on-site work for Phase 2 in the Winter 2023 or Spring 2024, subject to agreement with the nearby Ivy Leaf Club, and complete the works by Spring 2024.
• Start time for Phase 3 was yet to be confirmed and was subject to funding, although the aim was to begin the works in Spring 2024.

The Chair asked for some elaboration about the funding for the phases. Simon Lymn stated that he was confident that there was plenty of funding at the moment and that the Borough was still planning to implement the three phases. It was the case of ensuring that the funding would still be available in spite of inflation in the construction industry. There would be confirmation once there was certainty of the costs for Phase 3.

Councillor Reynolds requested for the presentation slides to be shared amongst the Forum.

ACTION: Simon Lymn to share his presentation slides on the A4 Crossing with the Maidenhead Town Forum.

Councillor Reynolds asked for the reasons to install the crossing near Holmanleaze rather than York Stream. Simon Lymn replied that it would provide a direct route from Holmanleaze and that the project was linked the Magnet Leisure Centre development. He stated he could investigate why York Stream was not the chosen location for the crossing.

Councillor Reynolds then asked if the crossing would be the same design as another nearby staggered crossing. Simon Lymn confirmed this as it was in line with the highway design standards, the road speed limit and the road being a dual carriageway.

Councillor Reynolds then asked if the crossing lights at the staggered crossings  ...  view the full minutes text for item 222.

The Forum is invited to make suggestions for future meetings.

Councillor Reynolds suggested an item from the Maidenhead Town Team on any new retailers coming to Maidenhead in the next few months.

The items suggested for future Forum meetings:

·       New retailers in Maidenhead

The Chair stated that agenda item suggestions could be emailed to him.

All future meetings to be held on the following dates (at 6:30pm):

·       12 September 2023

·       13 November 2023

·       15 January 2024

·       13 March 2024

·       9 May 2024

The Forum noted that the next meeting would be held on 12^th September 2023.