Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence as reported at the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from County Councillors Davies and King.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in items on the agenda. For any advice on declarations of interest, please contact the Monitoring Officer before the meeting.

There were no disclosable pecuniary or other significant interests declared at the meeting.

Members should indicate which item(s) they wish to speak on and the nature of their comments no later than 4pm on the working day before the meeting.

(Pursuant to Cabinet Procedure Rule 27.4)

Councillor Tracy Moore had registered as wishing to speak on minute TB30/16.

The Chairman will move that the minutes be signed as a correct record. The only issue relating to the minutes that can be discussed is their accuracy.

Members reviewed the minutes. No amendments were proposed.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting dated 17 October 2016 be approved as a correct record.

The Board considered the Tunbridge Wells Tracker for January 2017. Comments were made in respect of the Tracker Items as follows:

Tracker Item 1 – Grosvenor Bridge Tunbridge Wells:

Earl Bourner, District Manager for Tunbridge Wells, KCC, confirmed that works were underway and the flyer attached at appendix A to the Tracker had been distributed. Congestion, as a result of the works, appeared to be light but KCC continued to monitor the situation. In response to a question from County Councillor Hoare, Mr Bourner advised that the works were due to be completed in Autumn 2017 and progress would be reported via the Tracker. County Councillor Hoare commented that he had been advised that only two of the four piers were being replaced, but it was anticipated that the remaining two would need work within the next 3 years. He added that he would like to see all work completed as quickly as possible and that LGF funding could be diverted to expedite the work. Mr Bourner was not aware of any additional work on the piers but agreed to make enquiries and provide feedback.

Councillor Backhouse commented that the area around the bridge appeared to be prone to problems requiring remedial works, but that these were essential and people would have to manage the delays. Councillor Bulman added that where works were essential they would have to be completed but Members and the public would need to know if there were further works known to need doing.

Mr Bourner clarified that the bridge consisted of two concrete and two brick piers, but only the concrete piers required replacing at this time. County Councillor Hoare reiterated that he believed that the two brick piers and other parts of the bridge would need work in the near future. He added that it would be unfair to residents to hold back any information. Councillor Bulman confirmed that the officers had agreed to investigate and report back. Mr Bourner commented that the work at the bridge had originally been planned as two separate jobs but it had subsequently been decided to undertake the work at the same time and he wondered if this is was a cause of any confusion.

Councillor Backhouse commented that during a Planning Committee site visit to a nearby site in 2015 it had been explained that the concrete was affected by ‘cement rot’ which did not affect the bricks.

Tracker Item 2 – A21 and Capel Parish Council:

Councillor Bulman commented that work on the A21 was ongoing and causing the expected level of disruption. He understood that work had been delayed on several occasions due to particular issues on site.

Michael Hardy, Schemes Project Engineer, KCC, commented that following receipt of the letter from Capel Parish Council a formal response had been sent and both were attached at appendix B and C to the Tracker. He added that KCC were unable to implement temporary restrictions in response to the increased traffic caused by the works by Highways  ...  view the full minutes text for item TB30/16

The Chairman, Councillor Bulman, advised that the item was withdrawn from the agenda. The associated public consultation had been held over the Christmas period and was being extended. Consequently, the results were not ready for reporting.

County Councillor Scholes highlighted the concerns of Claremont School and asked that they be included in the consultation. Nick Baldwin, Traffic Engineer, TWBC confirmed that it was a public consultation and as such Claremont School was welcome to submit its representations, he added that a number of representations had been received from parents about Claremont School. All comments received would be taken into consideration.

Nick Baldwin, Traffic Engineer, TWBC, introduced the report which included the following comments:

·         A year ago, a report detailed the results of a parking survey in Hawkenbury.

·         The views expressed had informed proposals for new parking restrictions, some of which have already been implemented, namely Camden Park and the two adjoining cul-de-sacs plus Forest Road.

·         A further informal consultation was held in October 2016, which set out specific proposals and invited comment. The response rate was disappointing, but provided sufficient material to further refine the proposals ready for formal consultation.

·         The revised proposals were set out in the report.

·         If Members endorsed the proposals, a Traffic Regulation Order would be drafted and put to public consultation.

·         The results of the consultation would be reported to a future meeting for a final recommendation, if necessary. There would be no need to return if the consultation produced fewer than five objections.

Mrs Jane Fenwick had registered to speak on behalf of Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Forum.

Mrs Fenwick thanked Parking Services for engaging with the community who were being inconvenienced by indiscriminate parking. AXA were an inconsiderate neighbour in terms of the impact its staff were having on the area. Although AXA contributed to the cost of the survey to help resolve the issue they had created, they should not be absolved from responsibility if the problem of parking was moved from one area to another. Councillors and officers were asked to work with AXA to encourage them to produce a transport strategy, as many large companies did, to reduce the impact of their staff on the local community. Measures including understanding where staff live and how they travel, car share schemes, cycling schemes should be considered to ensure other residents of Hawkenbury do not need to address concerns caused by the displacement of parking in the future.

Councillor Bulman commented that AXA had made an attempt to address the problems but had largely been unsuccessful as they had not provided sufficient parking as had been proposed when they originally occupied the site.

County Councillor Scholes supported the recommendation and added that the parking problem should not be allowed to move to other areas such as Farmcome Road. There were already reports of AXA staff parking in outlying areas including Dunorlan Park which effectively denied the use of the park to others. Councillor Bulman commented that the car park was intended solely for users of Dunorlan Park and he sought clarification on the restrictions in force in the car park.

Rosemarie Bennett, Parking Manager, TWBC, commented that survey work was ongoing in Dunorlan Park car park to understand the scale of inappropriate parking with a view to implementing restrictions to prevent all-day parking.

The Chairman, Councillor Bulman, invited further questions and comments. There being none, Members were asked whether the resolution was agreed.

RESOLVED – That the proposed parking restrictions as set out in the report be endorsed and that if more than five objections were received in the consultation these  ...  view the full minutes text for item TB32/16

Hilary Smith, Economic Development Manager, TWBC, introduced the report which included the following comments:

·         At the previous meeting in October 2016, detailed design proposals were agreed for consultation. The report set out the responses to the consultation.

·         The consultation included:

o   Having the proposals and a questionnaire on the Kent County Council website;

o   Two drop-in evenings held at Tunbridge Wells Grammar School for Boys which combined attracted in excess of 90 people;

o   Raising awareness via social media;

o   A leaflet drop along the entire length of A26 through St. Johns and Southborough; and

o   Signage on lamp columns.

·         Over 200 responses were received of which the majority were positive. 67 per cent agreed or strongly agreed with the proposals.

·         A number of specific issues were raised and these had been addressed in the report.

·         Paul Lulham from DHA Consultations, who had worked on the design proposals, was in attendance to answer any questions.

·         The proposed next steps we set out in the report.

County Councillor Oakford commented that he supported improving safety for all road users, but not at the expense of any particular user. The proposals overall were supported but there was concern about the section between the Hand and Sceptre Pub and Mabledon Farm where the proposals stated that it was impossible to have a cycle lane. He felt that this was the most dangerous section of the route and cyclists could often be seen with vehicles on both sides, either turning left to join the A21 or continuing on to Tonbridge. It was unsatisfactory to have a route that was not continuous and stopped at the most critical point. Although full details of the speed survey were expected at a future meeting, initial figures showed that more than 1,000 drivers per day exceed the 40mph speed limit. More needed to be done to make that section of road safer. He added that a short section of 20mph limit in Southborough was likely to cause confusion.

Councillor Bulman commented that he was aware of several accidents recently on that section of road.

Mr Lulham confirmed that the brief was to provide so far as possible a continuous route from Tunbridge Wells to Tonbridge and it was frustrating that there was no easy answer to the stretch of route in question. The nature of the road changed from urban to rural with fewer accesses and frontages onto the road and there was a resulting change in driver behaviour. The width of road was inconsistent and narrow in places and to provide extra width would be significantly more expensive. Whilst not impossible it would be disproportionately expensive, at this point in time given, the low usage. However, there would be a review to determine further improvements that could be made if the funding was available in the future.

Councillor Bulman commented that on the approach to the A26/A21 junction a significant proportion of vehicles would be splitting off to the A21 whereas most cyclists would want to continue  ...  view the full minutes text for item TB33/16

Carol Valentine, West Kent Highway Manager, KCC, introduced the report which included the following comments:

·         The county-wide plan had been updated, the report set out the plan for Tunbridge Wells with links to the full document.

·         Focus would be on salting the primary routes and salt bins were also provided for secondary and rural routes.

·         Tunbridge Wells Borough Council and Parish Councils had supplies of a salt/sand mix.

·         Current projections were for a mild winter.

In response to a question from Councillor Backhouse, Ms Valentine clarified that primary routes did not necessarily include bus routes. In the event of snow the plan set out those secondary routes that would be cleared, these were prioritised around bus routes.

Parish Councillor Mackonochie noted that salt/sand mix was gratefully received by the Parish Councils.

The Chairman, Councillor Bulman, invited further questions and comments. There being none, Members were asked whether the resolution was agreed.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

Earl Bourner, District Manager for Tunbridge Wells, KCC, introduced the report for information and invited questions.

Councillor Woodward commented that he had a number of issues he was expecting to be included in the programme in the near future and asked when the plan would be updated with next year’s works. Mr Bourner requested that details of the expected works be forwarded to him and he would report back. The programme for next year was being prepared. It was expected that budgets would be confirmed in February 2017 and the programme would be finalised shortly after.

The Chairman, Councillor Bulman, invited further questions and comments. There being none, Members were asked whether the resolution was agreed.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

Prior notice of the topic must be sent to the Chairman and Democratic Services Officer no later than 4pm on the working day before the meeting. There can not be any substantial debate/discussion or any decision on any topics raised, but the agreement of the Board that the topic may come forward in future would be required.

The Board considered items for future meetings and comments were made in respect of the proposals as follows:

Speeding on the A26:

The Chairman, Councillor Bulman, noted that Speeding on the A26 was due to return following the speed survey.

Concerns raised by Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Forum:

Councillor Bulman drew Members’ attention to a list of concerns raised by the Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Forum and suggested that he work with the officers to determine an effective method for addressing the points made in the list.

Councillor Woodward commented that many of the issues would be affected by the completion of the A21. Earl Bourner, District Manager for Tunbridge Wells, KCC, added that it would be difficult to anticipate the precise implications of completing the A21 and that any long-term plans would need to be reviewed once the actual situation had been established.

Councillor Bulman commented that to pick individual items from the list would be difficult at this time and reiterated his suggestion that he work with officers to propose a way forward for the next meeting. Councillor Lidstone supported the establishment of a working group to tackle to concerns raised and proposed that such a working group be considered at the next meeting. Councillor Backhouse commented that the potential implications of dualling the A21 had been considered in the past and agreed that to make policy on conjecture could result in incorrect policy. Consequently, it would be prudent to wait for the works to be completed. Councillor Bulman sought to confirm that the idea of a working party to consider transport matters was supported but that its priorities may need to be dynamic.

Hilary Smith, Economic Development Manager, TWBC, noted that Planning Policy was in the process of reviewing the Local Plan and, alongside this, there would be a review of the Transport Strategy. It may be advantageous to have a working party to look as transport issues as part of the Local Plan review. A proposal would be put forward at the next meeting following consultation with colleagues and stakeholders. Members agreed.

The date of the next scheduled meeting is Monday 24 April 2017 at 6.00pm.

The next meeting of the Joint Transportation Board would be held on Monday 24 April 2017 commencing at 6pm.