COOKHAM PARISH COUNCIL

Minutes of a Meeting of the PLANNING COMMITTEE held at the

PRESENT:            Cllr H.J. Woodbridge (Chairman), Cllr M. Wellman (Vice Chairman)

      Cllrs M. Brar, P. Brockwell, D. Fry, G. Harris, M. Innes, M.L. Kellaway,

      R. Piercey, D. Ricardo.

Also present:            Inspector John Macdonald and PC Val de Haan (Thames Valley Police), Lucy Clapham (Marlow Free Press) and two members of the public.

_________________________________________________________________________

OPEN FORUM – Inspector Macdonald began by answering the letter received from Cookham Parish Council asking for the part funded PCSO to spend a guaranteed 80% of time employed in Cookham parish. The Inspector acknowledged that the original offer from Mike Ismay was for the PCSO to be ring-fenced to Cookham for 100% of the time. Acting Chief Inspector Jim Templer had only been able to offer the Council a Cookham-based PCSO for 50 % of the time. The 50% funding equating to 50% of time in Cookham. However, Inspector Macdonald said that verbally he could promise that our PCSO would spend more than 80% of time in Cookham. It was a matter of trusting him! The Clerk queried the fact that initially the deal had been “buy one, get one free” – which meant that the parish paid for one but got another for all of the time free. With this offer we were only getting an extra PCSO for a guaranteed half of the time – it seemed a “watered down” version of the original. The Councillors then asked various questions. Cllr Wellman queried what would happen if Inspector Macdonald was to leave or move posts after the Council trusted him on the hours spent in Cookham. He agreed that this may continue but it would be at the discretion of his replacement. The Council were also informed that the two existing PCSO’s had secured £4,000 sponsorship which meant they could lease a van for two years. The van would be used to keep their bikes in the back. The Inspector also said that with the present PCSO’s covering extra weekends above their contractual arrangements, a Cookham PCSO should see most weekends covered. The Police were also keen to see the PCSO’s and civilian volunteers trained to use the speed gun to help monitor speed throughout the parish. The Council were left with some paperwork to be distributed to every Councillor.

            The two members of the public were also invited to offer questions. The lady asked whether Cookham had any Community Wardens. Inspector said that there were none for Cookham at present and only two in the Maidenhead area. The lady also said that there were a lot of elderly folk in Cookham who did not want to pay the extra tax. She asked why there was no public consultation on this and mentioned a Borough Councillor who had been heard on radio saying that the people of Cookham would be happy to pay the extra.            

The Chairman said that there had been plenty of public consultation but not in the form of individual correspondence. He said that the Parish Council had been debating this issue for the last five months in addition to the special Crime Forum held by the police in July where questionnaires had been circulated to some parts of Cookham Rise. Cllr Brar was keen to see a full consultation to everyone in Cookham but the Chairman rejected this by saying that it would be very expensive. Cllr Fry was keen to make a decision, he felt that the Council had debated this issue for long enough. He also reminded everyone that the Councillors had been elected specifically to make these difficult decisions.

1.                  APOLOGIES AND DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST: Apologies were received from Cllr John Stretton who was on Borough business; Cllr Jean Stretton who was unwell and Cllr Barnes who was at a meeting of the Parish Plan Steering Group. It was assumed that Cllr Coker was also at this meeting because no apologies were received. No apologies were received from Cllr Hewitt. There were no Declarations of Interest.

2.                  PLANS CONSIDERED & DISCUSSED:

Cllr Wellman commented that there seems to be a trend for more and more planning applications for properties in the Green Belt. The trend could place the Green Belt in Cookham at risk if properties were allowed to continue to enlarge either by extensions or by demolition and rebuild.

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR THE PLANNING MEETINGS HELD ON 6^TH AND 20^TH NOVEMBER 2007: The Minutes of both Planning Meetings were circulated with the agenda and approved with no amendments.

The Meeting closed at 8.50pm.