Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Hughes, Lal and Vaught.

Councillors Mohinder Gill and Amrit Mann declared an interest in the Small Grant Application from the Retired Members’ Association (Asian Elders) Heston.

The minutes of the meeting held on 1 December 2011 were agreed as an accurate record subject to the following amendment:

Page 8, paragraphs 5 and 6 each contain a mention of “Compton Way.” This should read “Convent Way.”

Matters arising from the previous minutes.

There were no matters arising.

Please see the report by Jermaine Thomas (Agenda Item 4)

The report was presented to the Committee by Robert Coomber, Area Planning Manager. He stated that officers welcomed the proposed development and did not believe that any material harm would be caused to neighbours by it.

Cllr Shantanu Rajawat asked the name of the company that had made the application and also why the scheme granted consent on 21 December 2010 had not been implemented. Mr Coomber advised that he did not know the name of the company, being solely concerned with use of the site and that he believed the scheme granted consent in 2010 and had either been purely speculative or that it had proved unsuitable following a change in market conditions.

Cllr Rajawat asked why paragraph 7.31 (page 21 of the agenda) of the report stated that the implementation of the development would put pressure on public transport when it was only proposed to create around 15 jobs, and what proposals had been made regarding spending of S106 money on transport improvements. Robert Coomber replied that whilst the expected 15 employees would not place a strain on public transport, the overall development would, as the area had weak transport links with only the E6 and 195 buses running along the north of the site. He advised that negotiations were under way with Transport for London (TfL) regarding bus route provision. Finally, Cllr Rajawat asked for an update on the proposed contribution towards sustainable development. Mr Coomber advised that the developers proposed to make use of maximum sustainable energy generation and use of renewable energy, and also not to significantly increase either the requirement for water or surface water drainage.

Cllr Amrit Mann asked how the £300,000 the developer was obliged to pay for Green Belt improvements was to be spent, and if it was to be ringfenced for the immediate area or pooled for Borough wide use. Robert Coomber advised that the money was specific to the development and that the report specified improvements in CPA 4, which was the area of open space in which the development was to be located. He stated that the money was for the reinstatement of the area immediately to the south as a soft landscaped area and to improve access and nature conservation and management. 

Cllr Mann expressed disapproval of the proposal, stating that returning land to the Green Belt was part of the development application but that traffic volumes would inevitably rise, referring to the earlier reference to the overall developments placing a strain on transport. He advised that it would have been preferable to spend the S106 money on addressing the traffic issues that would arise from the development.  Robert Coomber advised that not all of the money was intended to compensate for the loss of Green Belt caused by the development and that in addition to the public transport improvements that were being sought, there were also a series of improvements to be completed for better  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.

An opportunity for members of the public to address the meeting on general issues relating to the Monitoring items on the agenda.

Protocol:

•        Questions will be allowed at the Chair’s discretion.

•        The Chair will normally only allow one question per item.

•        Items on the main agenda should not be raised in the open forum.

•        Individual cases cannot be discussed.

•        Items submitted to the Chair in advance of the meeting are welcomed.

Ms Margaret Bull asked if a full record of the state of the Hermitage, 17 Upper Sutton Lane, Heston, had been made in accordance with the minutes of the meeting held on 22 September 2011. Heidi Shearn advised that Maggie Urquhart, Historic Conservation and Urban Design Officer, had been unaware of the decision by Members to make such a record, and that Ms Urquhart had advised  that there was no agreed funding nor had any such assessment been carried out or record made by the Council.

Ms Bull asked if Ms Urquhart’s advice as stated in the minutes of the 28 July meeting had been sent to the owner of the Hermitage. Ms Shearn confirmed that it had been sent to the owning company by both post and email. Ms Bull then asked if the Committee could help local residents in Upper Sutton Lane, Camborne Way and Sutton Road to deal with what she described as a plague of vermin, which she attributed to empty properties and unauthorised use of buildings behind houses. Ms Bull asked if it would be helpful to prosecute for violation of S215 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Ms Shearn advised that pest control was a service that would normally be paid for by residents and that there was a need to establish the source of the vermin. She stated that she would contact Ms Bull in writing regarding the issue.

Mr David Blackett advised that there had been relatively little fly-tipping in Osterley Lane recently. He stated that he had no knowledge of any recent anti-social behaviour, but there had been a serious car fire involving a death two weeks previously. He asked if progress had been made regarding a meeting between Satnam Sahota and Nick Wood with officers at Ealing Council about the issues in the area and if the National Trust report would be included. Satnam Sahota responded that Mr Woods had only recently returned to work and the meeting had yet to be arranged. Mr Sahota advised that he had spoken to his counterpart at Ealing who had informed him that they were waiting for action from Hounslow. Another local resident, Mr Patrick Howard, agreed with Mr Blackett’s comments.

Mr Blackett asked if any progress had been made with regard to the installation of CCTV in Osterley Lane. Mr Sahota advised that a decision had been made to install CCTV cameras and that a suitable electricity source had now been identified beside the M4. He added that he had contacted an officer of the Highways Agency and would discuss the installation and electricity use. Mr Sahota also advised that Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras were planned for the site to monitor vehicles entering Osterley Lane in order to pass information on fly-tippers to the police.

Mr Blackett stated that he had made a request twelve months previously for signage warning of a sharp left-hand bend following a number of accidents and asked for information on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

Verbal Update by Satnam Sahota

Satnam Sahota advised members that no action had taken place due to lack of resources. He stated that he had spoken to the Head of Traffic and Road Safety, who had lost staff members and been unable to assign another.  Mr Sahota advised that the issue was one of several that could not be currently pursued, but added that resources would be freed in the new financial year to give priority. He advised that statutory consultations would then begin in April, with restrictions in place by June.

Cllr Rajinder Bath stressed that he made no criticism of any individual officer but expressed frustration that no action had been taken in nine months. He stated that he was aware of staff shortages, but added that members had been assured that progress would be made. Cllr Bath asked for written assurances of a time frame for action to be taken, which Mr Sahota agreed.

Heidi Shearn advised that due to a communication failure the police had received meeting agendas late and unfortunately, due to operational commitments, no police officers were able to attend. Members expressed regret and assurances were given that officers would attend the next meeting.

Cllr John Chatt advised that domestic burglaries had increased in Heston and Cranford, and that his neighbour had recently been a victim. He said that police had been very well organised and had arrived quickly but unfortunately too late to catch the culprits. Cllr Chatt stated that he made no criticism of the police but that more needed to be done and issued a plea to the police to do all possible to combat what he described as an epidemic of these crimes.

Update by Gurpreet Thethy.

Heidi Shearn advised that Gurpreet Thethy had spoken to Councillor Amrit Mann and several public health and housing needs organisations as well as charities in order to help resolve this issue. A successful rubbish clearance had taken place on 12 January 2012 with Operation Payback, the Community Safety Team and the Community Environment Team when a ten square metre skip had been filled. This had been preceded by a visit from the Community Environment Enforcement Officer before Christmas when the homeless people on the site had filled around sixty green rubbish bags for collection by the Council.

Ms Shearn stated that Ms Thethy had arranged a meeting on 18 January with the police, UKBA, London Street Rescue, CRI, the Mayor, the Homeless Persons Unit, the Sikh Welfare Awareness Team and the Community Safety Team to discuss the health concerns of people living under the bridge as well as immigration cases. Ms Shearn advised that a press release was to be produced in the near future.

Cllr Mann stated that although some people had left the site, others had continued to arrive and there were now over 30 people living there. He described some of the individuals as having problems besides homelessness such as drug and/or alcohol addiction. Cllr Mann advised that some of the people needed to be returned to India, and some had requested help to do so; this required money. He stated that with the current very cold weather he had been asked to see if any of the people could be placed in temporary shelter, adding that there were issues regarding contagious diseases and it would take too long to clear the individuals to use shelters.

Cllr Mann advised that a collective effort was needed as no one organisation could provide all the answers. He described the problems that arose from the inability (to date) to discover the ownership of the land which prevented the clearance and sealing off of the area. Cllr Mann stated that the Sikh Welfare Awareness Team possessed the most up to date information on the homeless people, but said that data gathering was severely hampered by the fact that many had not given their real names, and that some appeared on lists three or four times under different names. He said that the Indian High Commission had been contacted to assist with paperwork and it was essential that all available information was put in place.

David Blackett stated that he had visited the site on several occasions and said that whilst most of the people living under the bridge had his full sympathy, he described a group among the occupants as presenting problems through alcohol and drug use. Noting that although some had moved on more people had since arrived, Mr Blackett advised that it was essential to close off access to the site to have any hope of solving the problem. He expressed the hope that some progress would have been made by the time of the Committee’s next meeting  ...  view the full minutes text for item 55.

Verbal Presentation by Councillor Jagdish Sharma

See Budget Presentation Document (attached).

Cllr Sharma presented the budget slides. He advised that he would not be discussing business rates at the meeting as this was a matter for officers; to date there had been two meetings with members of the business community on this issue.

Cllr Sharma stated that the Council wished to consult members and residents about the budget. He described the Council’s five pledges and seven priorities and advised that a mid-term progress report on the five pledges would be presented at the Committee’s next meeting. Cllr Sharma said that the current administration had known that life would not be easy since the Government had announced difficult times following the last general election. He stated that members had thought it wrong to stop all the projects that had been started but had had to make in-year savings in order to achieve the required £18 million saving over the financial year, which they had succeeded in doing.

A budget including an unprecedented level of cuts had been set in February and March 2011, in which £26 million of savings had been presented to Cabinet. Some of these cuts had been rejected, and finally £18 million of savings had been achieved. This would now have to be repeated.

Cllr Sharma presented slides showing the breakdown of expenditure and of funding sources. On the subject of addressing the challenge of making the savings, he stated that some savings would impact on services, some on staff and some on neither. The Leader told members that the Council had asked for residents’ opinions on the budget setting process last year and a very good response had been received. He advised that although Council Tax levels were frozen the tax base had risen due to an increase in the number of properties; the tax base helped the authority to calculate its income and also gave the Government the formula for calculating the annual grant.

Cllr Sharma stated that Tranche 2 of the savings plan had now been agreed, bringing the total for the year to over £10 million, with around £4 million to be identified. This was to be determined on 28 February. The Leader advised that this year the Council had consulted only with those groups to be affected by savings proposals, which he described as a very successful approach. Currently consultations were being conducted on savings worth over £16 million; the rest of the savings were to be found by officers.

Cllr Sharma guided members through Slide 11, outlining savings areas for 2012/13. He advised that improved contract terms were to be negotiated with all outside contractors and that all Departments across the Council needed to increase efficiency. The increase in Council Tax revenue was explained as being down to an increase in the number of taxable properties, and fees and charges were to be increased in line with inflation. Non-salary cost reductions were to be achieved by asking all departments to ensure that nothing was purchased unless absolutely essential.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

See the report by Uttam Gujral. (Agenda Item 10)

Integrated Neurological Services:

Following a presentation of the report by Heidi Shearn, Cllr Kamaljit Kaur moved approval, seconded by Cllr Poonam Dhillon. The vote was carried as follows:

Retired Members’ Association (Asian Elders) Heston:

Councillors Rajinder Bath and Amrit Mann declared an interest and left the Committee Room during the discussion and decision on this item. The meeting remained quorate. 

Following a presentation of the report by Heidi Shearn, Cllr Kamaljit Kaur moved approval, seconded by Cllr John Chatt. The vote was carried as follows:

The Gurseva Project:

Following a presentation of the report by Heidi Shearn, Cllr Amrit Mann moved approval, seconded by Cllr Kamaljit Kaur. The vote was carried as follows:

Resolved :

a)     That Members agreed the following applications:

The next scheduled meeting will take place on 22 March 2012.

The next scheduled meeting will take place on 22 March 2012.

Any other items which the Chair accepts for consideration on grounds of urgency.

The Chair kindly agreed to accept a report on the redevelopment of Heston Leisure Centre under Urgent Business on the grounds that it was in the public interest to hear the report as soon as possible and not delay until the next meeting of the Committee on 22 March.

Mr Bob Seera, Head of Project Coordination, Environmental Department, presented the report (attached).

Mr Seera advised that Option 1, agreed by the Cabinet on 8 November 2011, involved working with Fusion Leisure Services, and that the reports were available on the website. He talked the Members through slides 3 (Current position), 4 (Proposed facilities) and 5 (Existing Site Plan). Referring to slide 6 (preferred Option) Mr Seera advised that the Centre would have to close for 18 months during redevelopment and would retain the same footprint as the existing Leisure Centre. He described the reasons for preference:

the Centre would stay within the community;

it would connect with the Library;

it would connect with the park; and

it would retain the Village Hall.

Mr Seera advised that the Scout Hut, however, may have to be removed and the Council was in discussion with the Scouts regarding a possible new location as they would prefer to remain on site. There was a need to fund the redevelopment and sale of land was the only way available to raise the money. Due to the downturn in commercial requirements residential development was seen as more appropriate. The two sites outlined in orange in slide 6 were earmarked for residential development but Bob Seera advised that this would not be sufficient to raise the funding needed and further savings proposals were required. He stated that money would be borrowed against the revenue savings the new venue would generate. Residents were being consulted and their views taken into account. Mr Seera advised that developers would need to obtain planning permission for residential developments but would buy the land first. 

Questions:

Cllr John Chatt commented that the swimming pool was proposed as 25 m by 13 m, and expressed the hope that it would not be too shallow. Bob Seera replied that the pool would be at least 1.2 metres deep.

Cllr Rajinder Bath commented that the entire project depended on the sale of land for development and asked what would happen if insufficient funds were generated as a result of the poor economic climate, if there was any scope to fill gaps and if any safeguards had been put in place.

Cllr Amrit Mann asked if the intention was to sell one or both plots outlined in slide 6. Bob Seera replied that both were to be sold separately for the best bid and could be used for two separate developments or one larger one. Cllr Mann stated that the original intention had been to sell the existing site and build a new Centre on the funfair site. It now appeared that the Council intended to sell off two plots to fund a smaller development.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.