The Panel shall receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Pat McDonald, Councillor Luxton and Councillor Brar. Councillor Baskerville and Councillor Sharpe were attending the meeting as substitutes.

The Panel are asked to declare any interests that they may have.

Councillor Singh declared a personal interest as he owned property close to the proposed site.

Councillor Taylor explained that she was Ward Councillor for Oldfield, she had made her opinion public on the potential move of Maidenhead United into Braywick Park. Her role on the Place Overview and Scrutiny Panel was to scrutinise decisions made. The Panel had not made a decision on the lease and the Panel would also not have the power to reverse or cancel the decision made, any prior opinion did not affect the discussion at the meeting. Councillor Taylor confirmed that she had sought the advice of the Monitoring Officer on this declaration.

1)    After the Chair opens the meeting the Councillors who asked for the decision to be called in will be asked to explain their reasons for the request and what they feel should be reviewed;

2)    On matters of particular relevance to a particular ward, ward division Councillors who are not signatories to a call-in have the opportunity to make comments on the call-in at the meeting, such speeches not to exceed five minutes each. Ward Councillors will take no further part in the discussion or vote. Ward Councillors must register their request to speak by contacting Democratic Services by 12 noon on the day prior to the relevant hearing;

3)    The relevant Cabinet Member for the portfolio (or holders if more than one is relevant) will then be invited to make any comments;

4)    The relevant Executive Director or his representative will advise the Panel on the background and context of the decision and its importance to achieving Service priorities;

5)    Panel Members will ask questions of Councillors and officers in attendance;

6)    The Cabinet Member(s) will be invited to make any final comments on the matter;

7)    The Panel votes on a decision.

The three Councillors who called in the decision, Councillor Davey, Councillor Taylor and Councillor Hill, addressed the Panel.

Councillor Davey highlighted and explained some of the reasons which had been included on the call in form. It was felt that there had been a lack of consultation, particularly with the rugby club. They had been growing in size but were faced with having to lose half of their pitches. Councillor Davey referenced the RBWM Leisure and Sport Strategy, which considered the disparity between rich and poor and the impact on health deprivation which could be felt by residents from deprived areas, like Oldfield. The RBWM Playing Pitch Strategy highlighted that the pitches at Maidenhead Rugby Club were in danger of being developed on and needed to be protected. The football club was a private business and it was suggested that it should support itself. The current ground at York Road had a capacity of around 4,500 but the club were currently averaging around 1,000 fans per game. Councillor Davey therefore suggested that it was ambitious for the football club to think that they could fill a bigger stadium at Braywick. The plans would involve a loss of a significant amount of open space, which was believed to be in contrast to the RBWM Corporate Plan. This said that residents should be more active in open and green spaces, but this proposal would take more green space away from residents. There had been little communication between the parties and this needed to be improved before a decision could be made.

Councillor Davey referenced the objections which had been shared with the Panel ahead of the meeting. If this was a planning application, the objections would need to be considered and responded to. Councillor Davey noted sections of the National Planning Policy Framework, which said that open space should not be built on unless it could be shown to be surplus to requirements. A non-designated heritage asset status could be given to York Road, to protect the football club at its current ground.

Councillor Taylor added that a lack of meaningful consultation with the public could be viewed differently by different people. She was concerned that a number of key stakeholders had not been involved in the process and their points did not appear to have been taken into consideration. It was a big project and Councillor Taylor suggested that fulfilling the statutory duties might not be enough. Consideration had also not been given to local residents in the area. There was no evidence that Maidenhead United would struggle at York Road and a recent planning application had been approved to allow the football club to improve some of the facilities. Part of the business case was the rental office space at the site which would provide the football club with additional income. The loss of open space was a concern, there was a publicly accessible running track, gym and playground on the site which would be lost. Communication with the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.