Agenda item - Public Questions

Public Questions

Meeting of Council, Tuesday 22 November 2022 7.00 pm (Item 105.)

a) David Buckley of Datchet ward will ask the following question of Councillor Rayner, Cabinet Member for Business, Corporate & Residents Services, Culture & Heritage, & Windsor

Windsor being one of the largest tourist locations in the UK. I understand there is an ongoing shortage of hotel rooms for both the tourism and business sector. Have the Council considered restricting local hotel use to tourists, business visitors using any laws or regulations available. This would increase income for the local economy and support the growing tourism sector.

b) Ed Wilson of Clewer and Dedworth West ward will ask the following question of Councillor Hilton, Cabinet Member for Asset Management & Commercialisation, Finance, & Ascot:

Why is the Council's medium term financial plan showing a need for £7M+ savings in 2023/24?

c) Ed Wilson of Clewer and Dedworth West ward will ask the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

Noting that Maidenhead now has a new £12m car park, what improvements are being made to existing car parks in the Royal Borough?

d) Mohammed Ilyas of Belmont ward will ask the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

Well done RBWM for listening to local residents and putting forward steps to improve safety of the highway in Ellington Park, Belmont. What Highways budget will be set aside for safety improvements such as this, over the next year? In particular addition of zebra crossings outside schools for example as the one already outside St Luke’s School in Belmont.

e) Mohammed Ilyas of Belmont ward will ask the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

Will the Cabinet member for Highways and Transport indicate as to why a bus service route has not yet been approved nor is one in service now for the residents and Community groups in Holmanleaze following the removal of public parking in the area due the start of development on St Cloud Way?

f) Hari Sharma of Furze Platt ward will ask the following question of Councillor Bhangra, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services, Parks and Countryside:

Furze Platt Conservatives in 2014-2016 set up two play areas called Moffy Hill & Shifford Crescent in the ward. These play areas are very popular and well used by our children. It’s been a while now since it was installed.

Can you assure residents these rides and furniture fitted in there have been inspected regularly and safety checks conducted recently?

g) Hari Sharma of Furze Platt ward will ask the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

Central Government is to provide £60m to help bus operators cap single adult fare at £2 / child at £1 per journey. As I understand, most cities outside London are bringing these fares in to help residents during this cost-of-living crisis. When will residents of the Royal Borough get a reduction of their bus fare and start paying £2?

h) Jack Douglas of Pinkneys Green ward will ask the following question of Councillor Bhangra, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services, Parks and Countryside:

Regarding the proposed agreement with the Lawn Tennis Association for investment in the hard courts at Kidwell's Park, and other parks in the borough, what is the current utilisation of courts by residents, what is the expected utilisation after the scheme is in place, and how is usage measured?

i) Sajid Khan of Furze Platt ward will ask the following question of Councillor Bhangra, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services, Parks and Countryside:

Could the Council inform as to whether the budget funds have been allocated for works for a path between the Christian and Muslim burial areas at Braywick Cemetery. If not, for what reason has this not been completed, as this had been discussed with the Council over the past year?

j) Question withdrawn.

k) Debbie Ludford of Oldfield ward will ask the following question of Councillor Cannon, Cabinet Member for Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime, and Public Protection:

Ozone is a gas which is damaging to human health and can trigger asthma attacks and inflammation of the respiratory tract, eyes, nose and throat. Ozone can also damage crops. RBWM doesn’t currently measure Ozone, but at nearby Hillingdon and Harlington, ozone levels consistently exceeded the WHO limit during the July heatwave. Why isn’t RBWM measuring ozone levels?

l) Michael Young of Oldfieldward will ask the following question of Councillor Cannon, Cabinet Member for Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime, and Public Protection:

CALA Homes Environmental Impact Assessment for the golf course refers to traffic volume monitoring. The M4 motorway now has 33% additional capacity since it was upgraded to be a ‘Smart’ motorway. Will this be taken into account when assessing the potential increases in air pollution in the borough?

m) Tara Crist of Riverside wardwill ask the following question of Councillor Cannon, Cabinet Member for Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime, and Public Protection:

Recent studies have linked air pollution to dementia, irregular heartbeats in teenagers and toxic air pollution particles have been found in the lungs and brains of unborn babies. How is it possible for RBWM to achieve National Air Quality Objectives by 2025 when it doesn’t measure 90 per cent of pollutants which have National Air Quality Objectives?

n) Tina Quadrino of Pinkneys Green ward will ask the following question of Councillor Carroll, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, Education, Health, Mental Health, & Transformation:

This council says it recognises air pollution as a major health risk, ranking alongside cancer, heart disease and obesity. It shortens lives and damages quality of life. How can this council take the appropriate steps to protect the health of residents if it doesn’t monitor air pollution properly?

o) Will Scawn of Belmontward will ask the following question of Councillor Cannon, Cabinet Member for Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime, and Public Protection:

Having spoken to residents in my local area of Belmont, I understand there may be increased levels of anti-social behaviour on the footpath/alleyways that connect roads in Belmont. What measures is the Council taking in order to tackle anti-social behaviour on these important paths and to ensure the safety of residents?

p) John Hudson of Oldfield ward will ask the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

RBWM's Environment & Climate Strategy states 'The role of the natural environment in creating great places is critical to the success of the borough economy & to our residents' health & wellbeing, therefore it is important we take steps to protect it.’

How is the proposed development of the golf course remotely compatible with your environmental and climate strategy statement?

q) Claire Huntley of Belmont ward will ask the following question of Councillor Carroll, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, Education, Health, Mental Health, & Transformation:

Particulate Matter is microscopic pieces of solids or liquids suspended in the air we breathe. Particulate air pollution is toxic and scientific research has consistently demonstrated adverse health effects including asthma, lung and throat cancers, and premature death. How will this council protect residents from the harmful effects of the extra particulates generated by the development planned for our greenbelt?

r) Hilary Su of Oldfield ward will ask the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

Please could we get an update on the footpath and cycle path in the Maidenhead Town Moor area? It's frustrating to residents so it would be great to know when it can be completed.

(The Council will set aside a period of 30 minutes to deal with public questions, which may be extended at the discretion of the Mayor in exceptional circumstances. The Member who provides the initial response will do so in writing. The written response will be published as a supplement to the agenda by 5pm one working day before the meeting. The questioner shall be allowed up to one minute to put a supplementary question at the meeting. The supplementary question must arise directly out of the reply provided and shall not have the effect of introducing any new subject matter. A Member responding to a supplementary question will have two minutes to respond).

Minutes:

a) David Buckley of Datchet ward asked the following question of Councillor Rayner, Cabinet Member for Business, Corporate & Residents Services, Culture & Heritage, & Windsor

Written response: Hotels fall within Use Class C1 of the Use Classes Order which includes hotels boarding and guest houses where no significant element of care is provided and must be used for these purposes. There are a variety of reasons why people may legitimately stay in a hotel and there are no laws or regulations which would enable a Local Authority to prevent certain types of guests.

It may be of interest that there is currently a planning application under consideration in respect of Windsor Yards (Ref: 22/02893/FULL) which seeks to provide additional hotel and apart-hotel accommodation for visitors. The application is currently undergoing public consultation and the Council would welcome any comments on the proposals.

By way of a supplementary question, David Buckley explained that his question had been about whether the council would introduce some supplementary planning guidance as introduced by many other councils in terms of protecting the local hotel capacity in the borough. Over 8.5 million people visited the borough but only half a million stayed because of a lack of capacity. He asked if the council would show some commitment to protect the local economy.

Councillor Rayner responded that she agreed Windsor was an incredibly important visitor site for the UK. There were a number of new hotels coming online, for example additional holiday home units at Legoland and a new hotel in Peascod Street. She agreed with the proposal, and she was sure that officers would look into it.

b) Ed Wilson of Clewer and Dedworth West ward asked the following question of Councillor Hilton, Cabinet Member for Asset Management & Commercialisation, Finance, & Ascot:

Why is the Council's medium term financial plan showing a need for £7M+ savings in 2023/24?

Written response: The medium term financial plan published as part of the budget papers in February 2022 already included a shortfall of £4.883m for 2023/24. This was mainly caused by inflation assumptions (£2m), demographic growth (£1.5m) and reduced NNDR funding (£708k). Further details are shown in Appendix 1, Annex A of the February Budget Report to Full Council. The updated MTFP presented to Cabinet in July and Full Council in September included revised assumptions for increases in inflation and interest rates that increased the potential shortfall to over £7m.

The Mayor read out the following supplementary question on behalf of Ed Wilson who was unable to attend the meeting:

Thank you for answering my question. Does the shortfall mean that you will be charging residents the maximum increase allowed by government despite the cost of living crisis?

Councillor Hilton responded that as the draft budget had not yet been published, it would be inappropriate for him to say more on the issue at that stage.

c) Ed Wilson of Clewer and Dedworth West ward asked the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

Noting that Maidenhead now has a new £12m car park, what improvements are being made to existing car parks in the Royal Borough?

Written response: Approximately £150k will be spent on car park improvements throughout the borough in 2022/23 including resurfacing of Windsor Leisure Centre, lighting improvements in Multi Storey Car Parks as well as general repairs. Currently there is a £200k capital bid for 2023/24 for car park improvements and the draft budget will be considered by Cabinet on 1st December.

The Mayor read out the following supplementary question on behalf of Ed Wilson who was unable to attend the meeting:

Alma Rd and Victoria Street car parks in Windsor are a disgrace. Will you meet with myself and other residents to discuss how these car parks can be improved?

Councillor Haseler responded that he had visited both car parks because he was aware of reports in the media highlighting issues. He would be more than happy to meet and discuss the issue.

d) Mohammed Ilyas of Belmont ward asked the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

Well done RBWM for listening to local residents and putting forward steps to improve safety of the highway in Ellington Park, Belmont.

What Highways budget will be set aside for safety improvements such as this, over the next year. In particular addition of zebra crossings outside schools for example as the one already outside St Luke’s School in Belmont.

Written response: The draft budget will be considered by Cabinet on 1^st December which will include a draft capital programme for next year. The papers for that meeting will be published shortly so it would be inappropriate to comment on the detail at this stage. All residents and stakeholders will have the chance to comment on the proposals and. I can reassure you that road safety is a high priority for the borough. Our intention is to bring forward appropriate budgets to enable delivery of capital projects to tackle road safety issues and delivery of our Local Walking and Cycling Infrastructure Plan.

By way of a supplementary question, Mohammed Ilyas commented that there were pedestrian crossings outside two schools on Cookham Road providing excellent safety options for all, including pupils. He asked if it would be possible for a feasibility study for a crossing to be approved for Riverside School on the same road in Belmont.

Councillor Haseler responded that such a request could eb made via the ‘Report It’ form on the borough website. Once submitted, Highways Officers would assess the proposal.

e) Mohammed Ilyas of Belmont ward asked the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

Written response: Whilst the start of the St Cloud Way development has seen a reduction of available car parking at the former Magnet Leisure Centre, part of the car park is still available for use with other options nearby. I would be happy to engage with any residents or community groups with concerns to help understand the problem we are trying to solve and what appropriate solutions might be.

By way of a supplementary question, Mohammed Ilyas commented that with the development of more than 400 units on the St Cloud Way site the addition of a bus service for residents in the area and the community facilities in Holmanleaze would be hugely beneficial for sustainability and combatting climate change. He asked if the area could be considered in the next transport review.

Councillor Haseler responded that a bus service review had just taken place as a result of covid pressures. He suggested that the council could speak to the community groups asking for the proposal and also Thames Valley buses who had to devise the routes. He could not promise anything in the short term and further work was needed, but it could be considered going forward.

f) Hari Sharma of Furze Platt ward asked the following question of Councillor Bhangra, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services, Parks and Countryside:

Can you assure residents these rides and furniture fitted in there have been inspected regularly and safety checks conducted recently?

Written response: All play areas that the borough has responsibility for are inspected regularly, including those at Moffy Hill and Shifford Crescent Open Spaces, which are inspected three times a week. In addition a more detailed monthly and annual inspection of all play areas is undertaken by independent play inspection companies to ensure that the play areas are safe to use. Health and Safety inspections also take place regularly for our nature reserves, parks and open spaces.

By way of a supplementary question, Hari Sharma commented that the number of children using the play areas had increased considerably since the installation. There was a need for more rides, bins, and seating benches. He asked if the Lead Member would assure Furze Platt children if the issue would be considered without delay.

Councillor Bhangra responded that he would be happy to look into the issue. He commented that the top two answers in the recent resident survey had been parks and open spaces.

g) Hari Sharma of Furze Platt ward asked the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

Written response: The scheme has been set up such that the bus operators have to apply directly to Government for the grant to support the offer. We are working closely with operators through the Borough’s Enhanced Partnership to try and take advantage of this opportunity. From our discussion I can confirm that several are actively looking at this. Further detail will be available from the Department for Transport in Mid-December on the details of the grant and therefore we will continue to work with them to try and bring this forward for the benefit of residents.

In addition to this, as part of our plans in the run up to Christmas there will be further offers on public transport. In partnership with operators, we will be offering free travel on supported bus services on selected Saturdays leading up to Christmas, including the days of the Windsor and Maidenhead switch-on events. You can travel for free when you board within the borough on 19 November, 26 November, 3 December and 10 December on the following services: Thames Valley Buses routes 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 15, 16, 53, 127, 234/235 and 238/239, and White Bus route 01.

By way of a supplementary question, Hari Sharma commented that residents and businesses had to pay twice and wait longer to travel because bus companies would not accept tickets from other operators. He asked when multi-operator tickets or ‘any bus’ tickets would be introduced in the borough.

Councillor Haseler responded that it had already been identified as an issue and he was looking to see how it could be brought forward.

h) Jack Douglas of Pinkneys Green ward asked the following question of Councillor Bhangra, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services, Parks and Countryside:

Written response: The current usage is not monitored due to the open access currently available at the sites within the proposal.

Future demand/use is derived by using the following information / expected to be as follows:

The LTA use a penetration number as a measure of confidence that a park tennis site will attract sufficient player numbers to be sustainable. Where it is around or above 1000, they have high confidence that this will be the case and therefore look to invest in those facilities.

The LTA get the penetration figures using Periscope mapping software which contains demographic data based on postcode locations. Using this demographic data they divide the population into different tennis market segments i.e. predicting what sort of tennis offer will be most attractive to people in each segment. They then look at those segments most likely to be casual players who would choose to play in a park setting (compared to e.g. a more formal tennis club setting) and take a percentage of those populations to make a prediction about the number of people we can realistically expect to come and play tennis at each of the venues.

The penetration figures and available court hours for the RBWM sites are as follows:

Goswells Park – 965 penetration figure, 10,512 court hours.

Desborough Park – 1,124 penetration, 7,008 hours

Kidwells Park – 1,167 penetration, 13,104 hours

Usage based on LTA data is projected to be made up of 7% of court hours booked via pay as you go, and 23% of the target households purchasing an annual membership (number of households is penetration figure divided by 2.4) utilising courts in addition to pay as you go. Pricing and charging options have yet to be confirmed, and some free sessions are also required under the terms of the funding agreement which will provide additional usage.

Future usage will be monitored via the LTA’s ClubSpark booking platform and the use of access control gates.

By way of a supplementary question, Jack Douglas commented that, if he understood correctly, the Cabinet Member believed monitoring existing usage was not possible because of open access. However, he felt this was easy to do using sensors that did not collect personal data. As the borough had no data on existing usage, he asked how it could judge if the scheme was a success or a failure.

Councillor Bhangra responded that he would ask officers to look into the specifics of the question and provide a written answer.

i) Sajid Khan of Furze Platt ward asked the following question of Councillor Bhangra, Cabinet Member for Environmental Services, Parks and Countryside:

Written response: There are a number of works that are being priced to be completed this financial year in Braywick Cemetery including works to extend the Muslim and Church of England sections to allow more grave space. It is not currently feasible to implement the works for the path as this would reduce the available burial plots.

By way of a supplementary question, Sajid Khan commented that he was delighted to hear there would be funds in the next year’s budget. He requested a path for access between the sections be provided and asked if the Cabinet Member would attend a site visit with representatives of both faiths before the works began.

Councillor Bhangra responded that he would be happy to attend and look at further options.

Members noted that question j) had been withdrawn

k) Debbie Ludford of Oldfield ward asked the following question of Councillor Cannon, Cabinet Member for Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime, and Public Protection:

Written response: Ozone is not currently incorporated into the Local Authority Air Quality Management (LAQM) Regulations. The responsibility for assessing and achieving this objective sits with Central Government and the Department for Food, Environment and Rural Affairs (DEFRA).

There are no direct sources of emissions for ground-level ozone. The formation of ozone is complex and depends on meteorological conditions. Ozone can form hundreds of kilometres away and then travel throughout the atmosphere. Unlike nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) and Particulate Matter 10 (PM₁₀) pollutants, ozone cannot be managed locally but forecasting services (the same for ultraviolet radiation) can help alert vulnerable individuals.

The two mentioned monitoring sites are part of DEFRA’s national Automatic Urban and Rural Network (AURN) which is used for compliance reporting against the Ambient Air Quality Directives and forecasting services.

By way of a supplementary question, Debbie Ludford commented that from the monitoring already in place it was known that the air was polluted. The borough already had Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) in Maidenhead and in Bray and Holyport. The South West Maidenhead Development Area would join up and amplify the areas. The council had said it recognised air pollution as a major health risk. Given there were no safe pollution limits and there were government guidelines on development in polluted areas, she asked how it was right to build thousands of new homes in an area already suffering from pollution.

Councillor Cannon responded that it was more of a planning issue than an air quality issue. He accepted that air quality was important, and it was in the Corporate Plan. Defined data was needed to measure it; what was alluded to was speculation on the impacts of the development. With officers he would look into what could be done to minimise impacts.

l) Michael Young of Oldfieldward asked the following question of Councillor Cannon, Cabinet Member for Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime, and Public Protection:

Written response: Yes. Development proposals need to assess the potential air quality impact because of traffic generated by the proposed development. Traffic data is used in the air quality models to predict future pollution levels. Traffic data from RBWM’s Strategic Transport Model factors in the cumulative impact from other planned developments and future traffic growth.

The Mayor read out the following supplementary question on behalf of Michael Young who was unable to attend the meeting:

Let’s be honest, with over 2,000 new flats and houses planned, two schools, roads and other infrastructure, there really won’t be much greenspace left for a park. And what you create will be significantly degraded in terms of wildlife habitat once it’s surrounded by a concrete jungle. Where do you expect all these people to go for amenity? Do you want them to drive to reach places like Cliveden, Hurley and Windsor Great Park. It’s not sustainable - and if you want to reduce emissions and promote active travel – which you say you do, people need access to town centre greenspace

Councillor Cannon responded by referring to his earlier answer. He hoped that people would be able to use sustainable transport, including electric vehicles and public transport, to get around and visit green spaces.

m) Tara Crist of Riverside wardasked the following question of Councillor Cannon, Cabinet Member for Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime, and Public Protection:

Written response: The current air quality objectives incorporated into Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) Regulations in England include nitrogen dioxide, PM10 and sulphur dioxide. RBWM are currently meeting the objectives.

The national air quality objectives for Benzene, 1,3-Butadiene, Carbon Monoxide and Lead have been met nationally for several years. There are no Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA) for these pollutants across the UK so local authorities do not have to report on these pollutants. Moreover, there are no significant sources (for example, heavy industry) of emission for these pollutants (and for sulphur dioxide) within the borough so there is little justification for these pollutants to be measured locally.

By way of a supplementary question, Tara Crist commented that the borough’s Health and Wellbeing Strategy for 2021-25 set a vision for everyone in the borough to live a healthy, safe and independent life. Yet the CALA homes environmental impact assessment for the golf course admitted that the development would impact air quality during construction for at least ten years. She asked how this was consistent with the Health and Wellbeing Strategy, given most people in the borough would not have electric cars and the construction vehicles would eb diesel powered.

Councillor Cannon responded that the construction would have an impact, but it would be minimised by arrangements with the contractors and there would be air monitoring.

n) Tina Quadrino of Pinkneys Green ward asked the following question of Councillor Carroll, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, Education, Health, Mental Health, & Transformation:

Written response: The current air quality objectives incorporated into Local Air Quality Management (LAQM) Regulations in England include nitrogen dioxide, particular matter 10 (PM10) and sulphur dioxide. The Council are currently meeting the objectives.

The Council has an extensive monitoring network including 40 diffusion tubes and 3 monitoring stations all monitoring nitrogen dioxide and the monitoring station at Frascati Way also monitors PM10 - road traffic is main source of pollution. The Council publishes an air quality Annual Status Report (ASR) that is also appraised by DEFRA. Air quality in the Borough is generally good and in recent years has markedly improved. Current nitrogen dioxide and PM10 levels are well below the national air quality objectives.

The national air quality objectives for Benzene, 1,3-Butadiene, Carbon Monoxide and Lead have been met nationally for several years. There are no Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA) for these pollutants across the UK so local authorities do not have to report on these pollutants. Moreover, there are no significant source (for example, heavy industry) of emission for these pollutants (and for sulphur dioxide) within the borough so there is little justification for these pollutants to be measured locally.

By way of a supplementary question, Tina Quadrino reiterated the answer to her previous question that referred to an ‘extensive monitoring network’ which comprised 40 diffusion tubes and three monitoring stations. The station on Frascati Way was the only one that measured PM₁₀. PM_2.5 was not measured at all. She was not sure that experts in the field would consider that to be an extensive monitoring network especially given the location of the borough in relation to the M4, M25 and Heathrow airport. The report recommended that the council should do nothing and that there were currently no concerns about PM₁₀ and PM_2.5 and yet the extensive monitoring network only assessed one of them in one location. She asked how the council take the appropriate steps to protect the health of residents if it did not monitor air pollution properly, particularly given the proposals for development on Green Belt land.

Councillor Carroll responded that monitoring was taking place as Councillor Cannon had referred earlier. In addition, DEFRA provided guidance about using modelling to complement monitoring. He knew that council officers continued to look at that to support the monitoring. He had discussed the issue with the Director of Public Health and would continue to seek advice from him as to what more could be done including speaking to the UK Health Security Agency.

o) Will Scawn of Belmontward asked the following question of Councillor Cannon, Cabinet Member for Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime, and Public Protection:

Written response: Our reported incidents and data into our Anti-Social Behaviour inbox does not show any increase in levels of ASB in the Belmont area. We would encourage residents to report incidents through the ASB inbox highlighting the type of ASB, location and time; this will help us build and accurate picture of activity and enable us to direct our resources accordingly. The Community Wardens have been asked to conduct various Environmental Visual Audits to assess our alleyways and pathways as part of our safety drive to help women and girls feel safer. We would be happy to include locations within Belmont if more information could be supplied to anti.social@rbwm.gov.uk

Will Scawn was not present at the meeting and had indicated he did not wish to ask a supplementary question.

p) John Hudson of Oldfield wardasked the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport:

How is the proposed development of the golf course remotely compatible with your environmental and climate strategy statement?

Written response: The site was allocated within the Borough Local Plan which promotes a sustainable pattern of development for the Borough until 2033. The plan aims to provide for high quality new housing in the right places, including affordable housing, family housing and accessible housing, whilst at the same time meeting employment needs and protecting our valued natural and built historic environment and assets. During the plans evolution it was strengthened by increasing the emphasis on placemaking and tackling climate change, recognising that the Royal Borough declared an environment and climate emergency in 2019.

The council is in the process of finalising a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for South-West Maidenhead which is scheduled to be discussed at Cabinet in December for adoption. This will set out our expectations on the development across a wide range of issues including delivery on biodiversity net gain and low carbon development. This will help to ensure that the development is consistent with our Environment and Climate Strategy, while also contributing to other essential sustainable development goals. In addition, the council expects to be in position to adopt a new Environment and Climate SPD next year which will support delivery of the Environment and Climate Strategy through the planning process, building on our current interim sustainability statement.

By way of a supplementary question, John Hudson commented that petrol, diesel and electric cars all caused pollution from braking and tyre wear. Electric vehicles produced more particulates because the weight of the battery meant there was more tyre wear. When modelling the health impacts of the development that was planned for the borough, he asked if the council would use robustly and accurately quantified data about the number of lorry, van and car journeys including electric vehicles that would be on the roads during the construction and operation phase of the development. He also asked if the council would agree that if this was not done effectively and accurately, it would be impossible to monitor the health impacts from the proposed development.

Councillor Haseler responded that each application would have a transport assessment to identify the number of vehicle movements. A Transport Plan would be in place for the construction, set by the authority, to direct routes and vehicle numbers during specific times of the day.

q) Claire Huntley of Belmont ward asked the following question of Councillor Carroll, Cabinet Member for Children’s Services, Education, Health, Mental Health, & Transformation:

Written response: PM10 is monitored at Frascati Way, Maidenhead. The recorded annual mean concentration decreased from 25 ?g/m3 (micrograms per cubic meter air) in 2016 to 19 ?g/m3 in 2021. These levels are well below the national air quality objective of 40 ?g/m3.

Within the development of Local Borough Plan the council has undertaken a detailed air quality assessment across the borough. The dispersion modelling study shows low level concentrations for PM10 and PM2.5 within the five AQMAs. The predicted levels show full compliance with the air quality objectives and there is no identified risk that the objective may be exceeded in the future.

Development proposals would need to assess the potential air quality impact during both the operational and construction phases and demonstrate that these impacts can be sufficiently mitigated to prevent dust nuisance and/or the risk of exceeding the air quality objectives.

By way of a supplementary question, Claire Huntley commented that PM₁₀ levels to date for 2022 had returned to the 2016 values mentioned in the response. It was disappointing that the borough consistently stated its belief that simply being below air quality objectives was ok, but it was not. Other local authorities had already acknowledged this; there were no safe pollution levels. Trees absorbed particulates. Around 40% of Maidenhead golf course was woodland and it had 10,000 mature trees. Under development plans most of the trees were not protected therefore the development would remove the vital mitigant of particulate pollution that the community was dependent upon. The loss, increased with increased road traffic associated with the thousands more residents and 10 years of major construction traffic, would significantly worsen air pollution in Maidenhead. She asked how the council would properly monitor all recommended environmental pollutants and protect residents from the harmful effects of the development planned for the Green Belt.

Councillor Carroll responded that as part of any planning process there was an environmental impact assessment. At the moment there was only speculation. He would certainly be looking at the environmental impact assessment in terms of his portfolio. He would continue to work with Councillor Cannon and the Director of Public Health to ensure the council was appropriately focussing on the issue of air pollution and what it meant for the community.

r) Hilary Su of Oldfield wardasked the following question of Councillor Haseler, Cabinet Member for Planning, Parking, Highways & Transport

Please could we get an update on the footpath and cycle path in the Maidenhead Town Moor area? It's frustrating to residents so it would be great to know when it can be completed.

Written response: I appreciate the frustration of residents as we complete the final phase of this important project and thank you for your patience. The main bridge construction works are now complete and the project team are working hard to complete the remaining elements so that the Town Moor can be reopened, with the target to provide public access again by Christmas.

Hillary Su did not wish to ask a supplementary question.

Supporting documents:

Public Questions_Written responses, item 105. PDF 122 KB