Agenda item

Matters Arising (other than those on the agenda)

Minutes:

FP35a High Street to Herschel Street-

 

JW confirmed the application for the stopping up of this alleyway has now been received and is due to be processed.  The site adjacent to the narrow section is still hoarded off with no development forthcoming.  WS stated that there are various sites in central Slough where development is not progressing which are being chased with a view to possible CPO. 

 

FP35b Herschel Street to Alpha and Hencroft Streets North-

 

JW tabled usage survey results and photos.  All agreed the path is not used very much.  A permanent stopping up of this section of path would mean a problem with the lighting columns which are maintained by Highways.  The columns would probably have to be removed with a permanent closure.  Alternatively, if a PSPO was made the path would remain Highway responsibility. 

 

JW suggested a door knocking exercise to gauge local reaction to a potential closure.  Members were concerned about the lack of enforcement in general being undertaken by the Council.

 

Ditton Park Cycle Path –

 

Members approved the draft joint LAF letter to try to get a response from CA Technologies in view of the inability to contact Fiona Kincaid, the Facilities Manager over the last few months. 

 

DM has visited the route recently both on the Ditton Park side and on the Linear Park in Slough noting that the condition of the surface has deteriorated and encroaching vegetation is has obstructed the useable width.  He specifically mentioned the Southfield path surface has worsened.

 

Resolved - JW to send the letter to CA Technologies. 

 

Linear Park cycle path in Slough

 

The Council’s legal team responded to the LAF’s email saying that the Council is equitable landowner regardless of whether it is under Parks or Transport and is therefore responsible to repair and maintain.  There is an impasse as Parks aren’t willing to take on the path for programmed maintenance unless Transport has a budget available to transfer it over with; meanwhile the path continues to deteriorate with only ad hoc maintenance.  JW suggested a possible solution could be that Highways take on the path and that it is dedicated as a PRoW.  However, the problem remains there being no budget, with the length and width of the route requiring substantial investment to sort out and maintain.

 

JW has asked RBWM for the Ditton Park S106 agreement to check that the permissive path through the CA Technologies site has to be open to the public in perpetuity.  The section in Slough cannot be dedicated as a PRoW unless it links to a public highway at both ends.

 

DM asked if this path could just be absorbed into the general PRoW budget.  JW felt unsure that expectations for the paths condition could be met within available budget.  Members felt the path does not get the recognition it deserves as a major leisure off road route and that the Council should give it priority when considering improvements to cycling routes for 15/16 financial year.  DM reiterated that the condition of the path is plainly deteriorating. 

 

WS stated that it’s likely that the field next to the current Castleview housing development may be developed as well which would undoubtedly result in increased use of this route.  He wondered if some funding could be gained through the planning process should this go ahead.  There is potential for a LAF recommendation that the Council place a planning condition on any new development at this location for a contribution towards the up keep of the Linear Park. 

 

The consensus was that a letter be drafted to the Chief Executive of the Council and copied to Ward councillors strongly recommending this case for funding, highlighting the importance of the route, its inclusion in Slough’s Local Plan and particularly the Council’s investment in buying the land specifically to provide it and now allowing it to de-grade.

 

SWY explained the Community Investment Fund which is divided up between the wards each year, could provide the avenue for a one-off investment if requested by the appropriate councillors.  Though not an annual budget, a one–off amount would mean sufficient repairs could be made which would last several years while the issue of a regular maintenance budget is sorted out. 

 

Resolved – That the LAF strongly advises the Council takes responsibility for the Linear Park wholly in Council ownership and that the Council provides funds for proper programmed maintenance of this strategically important local walking and cycling route.  The Council must be seen to be upholding their obligation to this route particularly from the perspective of gaining continued investment from CA Technologies.  JW to draft letter as detailed above and circulate for members’ approval.

 

Audible Beepers at Pedestrian Crossings

 

JW reported back that the Council uses the audible beep at pedestrian crossings on single crossings, however if there’s another unsynchronised crossing close by then the audible beeps will not be used to avoid confusion for users.  This is the position at the Salt Hill crossing.

 

Bloom Park Integration with the Canal

 

JW to chase up the Parks department to find out how the S106 money will be spent and push the LAF’s view that integration with the canal needs to be prioritised.

 

Canal Basin

 

TH summarised the meetings that have happened with CRT and the Council and asked if the LAF’s recommendations are still under consideration.  JW explained that the planning application for the Basin development has still not been submitted to the Council, though she has had sight of some concept drawings from the Slough Regeneration Partnership who are working on the planning application with CRT and the development company.

 

JW confirmed that she has been liaising with Housing about removing the concrete fencing on the north side of the basin with a view to continuing with trying to get interim improvements prior to any major development.  The preliminary quote from the Council’s contractors is approx. £6K for removing the concrete fence and erecting a weld mesh fence along the alternative alignment which would open up a wide corridor.  This does not include the clearance of trees/vegetation on the northern bank of the canal which belongs to CRT or construction of a new path on the bank.

 

JW agreed to the following; contact SRP to confirm that the realignment of this fence line does not compromise the long terms plans; ask CRT for approval and part funding of clearance of northern bank and ask Housing to agree new fence line on their land and removal of concrete fencing.  Housing may also have money available to help with this work.  In the LAF’s view moving the path onto the bank at this location will not compromise, but will enhance any future development plans.

 

WS intimated that the Council is looking at development opportunities at the green space land owned by Housing behind Kendal Close.  SWY suggested things are happening with plans for this area which have not been released yet and that we can try to find out. 

 

TH is not convinced that CRT will go ahead with any development at the Basin as this issue has been in the Local Plan for 30 years. 

 

Resolved – Actions to be taken as detailed above and item to be on next agenda.

Supporting documents: