a)    Question submitted by Councillor E Wilson to Councillor Dudley, Leader of the Council.

Will the Lead Member for Housing consider housing options for service personnel based in Windsor when they leave our armed forces?

b)   Question submitted by Councillor E Wilson to Councillor S Rayner Lead Member for Culture and Communities

Will the council take steps to provide community facilities for former service personnel following the closure of ex-servicemen’s clubs in Eton and Windsor?

c)    Question submitted by Councillor Beer to Councillor D. Wilson. Lead Member for Planning

Some householders, paving contractors, concrete and tarmac suppliers involved in paving gardens unaware of or ignoring the legal requirements not to lay impervious surfacing are contributing to flooding.   Please could this be publicised and removal and penalties be considered.

(The Member responding has up to 5 minutes to address Council. The Member asking the question has up to 1 minute to submit a supplementary question. The Member responding then has a further 2 minutes to respond.)

a)    Question submitted by Councillor E Wilson (asked by Councillor N. Airey in the absence of Councillor E. Wilson) to Councillor Dudley, Leader of the Council.

Will the Lead Member for Housing consider housing options for service personnel based in Windsor when they leave our armed forces?

Councillor Dudley responded that he was delighted to receive the question ahead of Armed Forces Day on 24 June 2016. He confirmed that the service personnel based in Windsor would be supported to access a full range of housing options to meet their needs, ranging from affordable housing; private rented accommodation and shared ownership options. This would be achieved by the Housing Options team working alongside the Army welfare service to provide advice and practical assistance such as interest free loans to ensure that service personnel could have a well planned transition into suitable accommodation. The council was working to secure more affordable housing options across the Royal Borough through the Borough Local Plan, which were approved by Cabinet in April 2016.   Specifically in this area, officers would be working closely with Haig Housing, who were the housing provider for ex service personnel, to bring forward potential sites for development in the borough.

Councillor N. Airey confirmed that there was no supplementary question.

 b)  Question submitted by Councillor E Wilson (asked by Councillor N. Airey in the absence of Councillor E. Wilson) to Councillor S Rayner Lead Member for Culture and Communities

Will the council take steps to provide community facilities for former service personnel following the closure of ex-servicemen’s clubs in Eton and Windsor?

Councillor S Rayner responded that the ex-serviceman’s club closed because of low attendance and financial difficulties. The borough had signed the Armed Forces Covenant in May 2014. The council was currently looking to extend the facilities at Broome Farm in conjunction with the Royal British Legion and the Army. The council was due to meet with the Royal British Legion the following month to discuss options.

Councillor N. Airey confirmed that there was no supplementary question.

c)   Question submitted by Councillor Beer to Councillor D. Wilson. Lead Member for Planning

Some householders, paving contractors, concrete and tarmac suppliers involved in paving gardens unaware of or ignoring the legal requirements not to lay impervious surfacing are contributing to flooding.   Please could this be publicised and removal and penalties be considered.

Councillor D Wilson responded that specific rules applied for householders wanting to pave over their front gardens. Planning permission was not needed if a new or replacement driveway of any size used permeable or porous surfacing which allowed water to drain through, such as gravel, permeable concrete block paving or porous asphalt, or if the rainwater was directed to a lawn or border to drain naturally.

If the surface to be covered was more than five square metres, planning permission would be needed for laying traditional, impermeable driveways that did not provide for the water to run to a permeable area.

The planning service was currently reviewing the content of its webpages on the Council website and could publicise this, although information was readily available on the Government’s Planning Portal.  The Environment Agency had also produced guidance which was on-line and specifically addressed paving front gardens.

In terms of enforcement, this would rely on residents bringing the matter to the council’s attention by contacting planning enforcement.  The Council has recently adopted a Local Enforcement Plan and this type of breach would be considered low priority; this did not mean that the council would not investigate it but that more priority would be given to breaches causing serious harm.

By way of a supplementary, Councillor Beer commented that the question had been prompted after he had seen a lorry on the A308 pouring concrete onto a front garden.  Some contractors seemed to be using a cement bed rather than course sand. He asked if the LGA could be asked to seek a national by-law and licensing policy on the issue in light of the increased incidents of local flooding.

Councillor D Wilson responded that if Councillor Beer gave him details of the particular property he had referred to he would ask planning enforcement to investigate.  The council was covered by planning legislation which was constantly changing, therefore he did not wish to progress the issue through the LGA as planning legislation was the more up to date regulation.