with Parish Council

Parish Council’s Response to Boundary Commission’s Draft

Recommendation

Mill Street Colnbrook – at the heart of our conservation area

Compiled & presented by:

Cllr. Mike Nye January 2012

1

Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council

Response to Draft Recommendations – Boundary Changes.

The Parish Council does not agree with the Local Government Boundary Commission’s Draft Recommendation presented at Stage 3, and respectfully asks the LGBC to re- think its proposals. In particular, we believe that the LGCB too readily dismisses the option of their being a mix of three-member and two-member wards within the Borough of as is presently the case and that it acknowledges is permissible under the 2009 Local Democracy Act. Also, we profoundly disagree with the statement in paragraph 63 that “the roundabout between Langley and Colnbrook provides good access between the two conurbations for both vehicles and pedestrians. A warding arrangement which crosses the motorway would not undermine effective and convenient local government.”

Presumption of Three-member Ward

The 2009 Local Democracy Act, as stated in paragraph 15 of the draft recommendations, includes a “presumption” towards a local authority having a “uniform pattern of three-member and two- member wards respectively”, but it does not exclude the possibility of a mix three-member and two-member wards, as are found in many local authorities, including Slough at present or our neighbours, the Royal Borough of Windsor and . Paragraph 15 refers to the need to provide “compelling evidence....that an alternative warding pattern will better reflect our statutory criteria”; the Parish Council understands these statutory criteria include community cohesion, distinctive and separate community identity, strong natural boundaries, electoral equality and minimum change to existing warding arrangements and historical identifiers. The Parish Council had assumed that the previous ruling of the LGBC in 2002 - that the ward of Colnbrook with Poyle should remain unchanged as a two-member ward rather than be enlarged because of its distinctive community identity, unique history, and strong natural boundaries – was evidence enough but it is happy to expand upon these issues, and has done so in the remainder of the response below. If, however, still further evidence is needed to clarify or explain points, then the Parish Council is ready and willing to provide whatever is necessary or host a Commissioners’ site visit.

Regarding electoral equality, the Parish Council recognises that the present and projected figures for the electorate of the ward of Colnbrook with Poyle are slightly below that necessary for a two- member ward if is going to comprise 42 councillors. However, we note that the percentage of electoral registrations in the Colnbrook with Poyle ward is particularly low compared to the rest of Slough, and the negligible growth in this number reflects an unacceptable unwillingness on the part of Slough Borough Council to address this problem and an electoral registration drive within the ward – this, it seems to us would make the difference, and produce the desired “electoral equality”.

Failing this, the Parish Council notes that the Slough Conservatives put forward a proposal to make one minor change to the boundary of the Colnbrook with Poyle Ward, extending up the remainder of Sutton Lane, to achieve electoral equality for a two-member ward here. Of all the changes that

2

Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council variously were proposed with regard to the boundaries of the Colnbrook with Poyle Ward, this it seems to the Parish Council would have the least of all of the negative impacts we foresee – we can see that Sutton Lane does have good vehicular and pedestrian access across the M4, and has the same semi-rural character as the rest of Colnbrook with Poyle, bordering the Colne Valley Park which runs through about 80% of the present ward, and has no strong ties to Langley; indeed we would note that the entire length of Sutton Lane is linked by good public transport links running into Colnbrook. The Parish Council even recognises the possibility of extending its parish boundaries to incorporate the northern end of Sutton Lane – this it believes could be achieved without too much difficulty over time with the residents both there and in the parish recognising commonality of interests and identity; the Parish Council is of the opinion that this could not be said of the option being proposed in the LGBC’s first draft recommendations – it cannot envisage the residents of that part of Foxborough agreeing to pay a parish precept that would be used as at present on paying for extra Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs) and for enhancements to the Colnbrook Conservation Area, including hanging-basket planters, and supporting our community- building “Love Where You Live Initiative”, including “Colnbrook in Bloom”, our “Apple Fair” and our membership of the Colne Valley Park Partnership.

The Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council believes that the 2009 Local Democracy Act and the present Government’s Localism Agenda are intended to encourage this sort of local choice and community-building, whereas it cannot agree with the LGBC argument in paragraph 63 of its first draft recommendation that the joining of Colnbrook and Langley across the M4 Junction 5 roundabout “would not undermine effective and convenient local government”.

To conclude the issue of electoral equality, the Parish Council recognises that the LGBC must come up with comprehensive proposals for the whole of the Borough of Slough, and that if Colnbrook with Poyle Ward remains a two-member ward, and SBC increases to 42 members, a minimum of at least two other wards within the Borough of Slough need also to be two-member wards, if the bulk are remaining as three-member wards. We note that the Slough Conservatives proposal proposed not only a two-member ward in the case of Colnbrook with Poyle but also proposed two-member wards for a slightly shrunken Foxborough Ward and the recreation of the old Baylis Ward, again slightly shrunken (while keeping the remainder of the newish Baylis and Stoke Ward as a three- member enlarged Stoke Ward). In paragraph 35, the LGBC said of these proposals from the Slough Conservatives that they “broadly provided for good levels of electoral equality”. This suggests that the issue of electoral equality for a two-member Colnbrook with Poyle Ward can be overcome.

The Miss-Match Between Colnbrook and Langley Across the M4 Junction 5 Roundabout

Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council does not agree with the LGBC perception expressed in paragraph 63 that “we perceive that the roundabout between Colnbrook and Langley provides good access between the two conurbations for both vehicles and pedestrians”; a perception that suggests to the LGBC that an acceptable enlargement of Colnbrook with Poyle Ward boundaries would be to extend into Foxborough, north of the A4 Road between the M4 Junction 5 roundabout and the Langley High Street, up Langley High Street to just before the Memorial

3

Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council

Recreation Grounds where the Langley Carnival is held annually, and taking in some large areas off to the East of Langley High Street, such as the Common Road estates, including the high-rise flats, which could not be more dissimilar from any of the residential properties in Colnbrook.

The LGBC perceives that there is good pedestrian access across to M4 Junction 5 roundabout into Foxborough; the Parish Council disputes this – crossing at surface-level is impractical because it requires running across motorway access slip-roads with no stopping traffic; the only pedestrian access is via a spiral bridge that rises up from the South-side of the London Road Colnbrook (and cannot be accessed from the north side there), it goes over the roundabout but under the through a tunnel to emerge on the other side of the roundabout descending via a second spiral that comes out at a gap in a high brick wall (obviously built as a sound deflector) behind which are the Common Road estates. No landmarks or pedestrian signage are visible, possibly due to so few residents that use it. Living close to this “hole in the wall” is a Labour councillor, currently Deputy Mayor of Slough, and has been appointed SBC’s Observer attached to Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council. She recently told us that she welcomed the opportunity because she knew so little about Colnbrook despite living so near for many years! Few pedestrians avail themselves of this route due to the environment being oppressive and slightly threatening. There is no direct bus service from Foxborough into Colnbrook centre, adding to the ‘disconnection’ between the areas.

The picture above shows the start of the walkway at the bottom of the spiral ramp. On entering the gap, (hole in the wall) the pedestrian is presented with passageway of about 1½ metres wide, as shown in the next picture, (Below) and a steel gate, in the open position, as shown on the left hand

4

Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council side, giving rise to the possibility that this access point may, on some occasions be closed. The passageway has ‘chicane’ style barriers erected to prohibit cycling at the section close to the “hole in the wall” but the majority of the remaining length is relatively unimpeded and is joined from the garage and parking section leading off the residential roads, in particular Grampian Way.

The third picture in the “Good pedestrian access” clearly depicts the isolated nature of the access route. Showing the level of ASB that exists, namely illegal dumping and fly-tipping, this, by any stretch of the imagination, cannot be classed either acceptable or safe as pedestrian access to the enlargement of the Colnbrook with Poyle ward.

5

Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council

As for this roundabout across the M4 providing good access for vehicles, it does not provide any direct access to any of the residential areas in Foxborough that the LGBC is now proposing should be joined to the ward of Colnbrook with Poyle. It is one mile by car in a great big 180-degree arc from the last bus stop on the London Road, Colnbrook, at , to the first bus stop in Common Road, via the M4 Junction 5 roundabout, (not that there is a bus that goes that route). On average it takes upwards of 10 minutes to drive this route on busy often congested roads, not least because of having to negotiate three traffic-light junctions and two traffic-light controlled pedestrian crossings. If someone wanted to go from the Brands Hill area to Common Road by public transport, they can only do it from the West, up Sutton Lane, again in a big 180-degree arc; again taking upwards of 10 minutes.

Aside from there not actually being good vehicular and pedestrian access across the M4 Junction 5 roundabout, most of the people of Colnbrook with Poyle are affected by issues that do not affect the people of Langley/Foxborough; these include: Colnbrook By-pass issues such as poor air quality (having an Air Quality Management Area), traffic congestion, major development proposals and fly- tipping; being under the flight path; rat-running traffic in residential areas; neighbouring large industrial estates.

Issues affecting Colnbrook with Poyle ward that identify differences with Foxborough:

1. Aircraft noise (Colnbrook resides under Heathrow flight path) Foxborough is not affected.

2. Rat-running traffic; hence Colnbrook High Street is an access-only area, with a 3.5 Tonne weight restricted section. Foxborough is on or adjacent to a main thoroughfare and as such has more conventional urban traffic problems.

3. Colnbrook has 35 Heritage Listed Buildings (32% of all Listings in the borough) and is a semi- rural or urban-fringe community, with a long and distinguished history. Foxborough mainly comprises 1950s and ‘60s urban development style residential properties and arterial roads, including high-rise flats and garage courts.

4. A large proportion of Colnbrook is classified as a conservation area. Foxborough is densely urbanised with few distinctive architectural or historical features.

5. Colnbrook endure quite specific problems associated with traffic and air quality management issues around the Colnbrook Bypass, accompanied by fly tipping due to the open and rural nature of the northern side of the bypass.

6. Most of the ward is situated within the Colne Valley Regional Park, thus making it unique and setting it aside, not only from Foxborough, but all of the remaining wards within the

6

Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council

borough for its rural nature. The Colne Valley Way runs through Colnbrook High Street, along Drift Way and on toward Staines Moor.

7. Colnbrook forms the majority of the Green Belt ‘Buffer Zone’ between and Slough, highlighted in the Spatial Development Plan of 2008. Any additional ‘urbanisation’ to our ward would dramatically weaken the status of that policy in the future.

8. Colnbrook with Poyle ward is the only ward in the borough that self-finance, (from the Parish Council precept) 1.5 dedicated PCSOs under a contractual agreement with . One officer cannot be abstracted from our ward whilst the second has to be within ward boundary 50% of the time.

9. Crime statistics (reported crime) for Colnbrook is currently returning an above national average ratio of 17.46 crimes per thousand residents, whilst Foxborough returns the national average ratio of 12.0 crimes per thousand residents. (November 2011). Possibly attributed to the more open and rural setting of Colnbrook giving more opportunity for those disposed to criminality than the greater density of population that is a feature of Foxborough. Collectively, the preceding nine points effectively highlight the basic differences that separate the communities of both areas. Whether this can be deemed to be significant enough to actually impact on community cohesion and identity or outweighing the three member warding doctrine or not, is very much a subjective appraisal.

If the doctrine of three member wards is to be maintained and thus requiring Colnbrook with Poyle Ward to enlarge, then there was a more sympathetic recommendation from Slough Borough Council, which interesting the Labour Group who are in the majority on the Council accepted, it extends along Sutton Lane taking in Blunden Drive and the included housing estate as well as households at the North end of Sutton Lane and along part of Parlaunt Road but not all the way into central Langley.

This arrangement gives a far more accessible ‘extension’ to the ward by extending the ward profile to the northern boundary rather than the adopted proposal which extends to the west. The profile of the ward is already far greater in an east / west aspect than it is north / south. Both Sutton Lane and Parlaunt Road give an equally firm demarcation boundary to the extended area. The benefit of this extended ward area is demonstrated by access via Sutton Lane from the A4 gyratory network, crossing the M4 by road-bridge affording access by foot, motor vehicle or public transport, but most importantly negating the barrier effect that the M4 motorway presents in the proposed plan. It also conforms to a similarity of environment by maintaining a semi-rural aspect with the section of Green Belt to the east of Sutton Lane which is similarly within the Colne Valley Regional Park.

7

Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council

We would also argue the point regarding the accessibility of the western enlargement into Foxborough, although is accessible by road, indirectly by public transport (two buses required from centre of Colnbrook) and by far worse pedestrian access. An elevated walkway accessed by a spiral

circular ramp, one adjacent to the Honda European HQ with the other on the on the opposite side of the motorway adjacent to London Road and Foxborough Close. The time taken to walk the entire crossing at a steady pace is 3 minutes.

8

Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council

The general condition and cleanliness of the tunnel is good, with obvious evidence of recently painted out graffiti. However as shown below evidence of more graffiti is appearing once again, and containing reference to drug use.

The surrounding area especially on the Foxborough side is littered with evidence of drinking (vodka bottles beer cans etc.)

This level of littering is apparent on the Foxborough side as one exits the down ramp. Although the Colnbrook side of the walkway ramp is extremely clean and litter free, possibly due to the efforts of Honda and the need for their particular area to be conducive to the status of their operation.

Unfortunately the spiral ramp on the Foxborough side has no close business interest and is not visible except by users of the walkway.

For this facility to be classed as a suitable pedestrian access to link the extended ward boundary is wrong, most pedestrians travelling from Foxborough area toward Westfield or Brands Hill and vice

9

Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council

versa, will cross the junction at ground level, timing their crossing of the motorway access / exit ramps to coincide with the traffic light ‘overlap period’ when traffic is temporally halted. Some residents have expressed concern with the crossing in-so-much that it is too isolated once that a commitment has been made to use it, there is no escape route should a challenging situation present itself. It is a similar scenario that happened to some pedestrian under-passes in town areas that for public safety have been closed due to the attraction of the criminal element of society.

Community Identity

Although the first section of this submission deals with Differences between both communities and our perception of what problems exist, it is only right that we should identify that our submission is weighted toward the Colnbrook with Poyle, as that is where our knowledge and experience lay.

Our identity as a community is more tangible. Colnbrook has in recent years had to battle to form a unified identity, from the days when we were split between three administrative districts, then in 1995 we were absorbed into Slough, now under a single Unitary Authority and the Colnbrook with Poyle Parish Council was formed. However before ward identity was fully assimilated by all residents, we had a change in Parliamentary Boundary and Colnbrook with Poyle moved into Windsor and we became the only ward in Slough not to be represented by the Slough M.P. If that fact does not confuse some of electorate enough, it is now proposed to add another boundary area different from the Parish boundary. This proposed new sector has no direct public transport network to connect Colnbrook with it, even though with the advent of Heathrow Terminal 5 opening, three new bus routes commenced which serve the area of Foxborough which you propose be attached to Colnbrook, but all three buses are routed along the bypass, missing Colnbrook residents completely. Please be sympathetic to our case and do not proceed with proposals that would considerably set back what we have strived so hard and so long to achieve.

10