Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies for Absence were received from Councillors Dr Hall and Simmons and County Councillors Barrington-King, Oakford and Rankin.

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.

To note any members of the Council wishing to speak, of which due notice has been given in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 18, and which items they wish to speak on.

Councillor Moore had registered to speak on items TB40/18 and TN43/18.

The Chairman noted that there were 6 members of the public registered on various items.

To approve the minutes of a previous meeting 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 21 January 2019 be approved as a correct record.

Parish Councillor Chris Ducklin, for Rusthall Parish Council, John Barber, local resident, and Jane Fenwick, for Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Forum, had registered to speak in respect of the pedestrian crossing on Langton Road.

Jane Fenwick, for Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Forum, had registered to speak in respect of St John’s 20mph zone (including Currie Road).

Nick Sturcke, local resident, had registered to speak in respect of the Feeder Lane at Kipping’s Cross.

Comments were made in respect of the following items (other items were taken as read):

Pedestrian Crossing on Langton Road

·         The surveys had been undertaken as a particularly quiet time.

·         A single day of data collection was standard and the time of year was in response to an urgent request.

·         It was mentioned at a previous meeting that one purpose of the traffic surveys was to see if 40mph was the correct speed for the area yet the survey made no mention of this.

·         The number of pedestrians on the survey day was relatively low and did not justify further surveys.

·         The threshold to justify a pedestrian crossing using the standard calculation based on current usage was 3,500 vehicles per hour or an additional 36 pedestrians per hour.

·         Speed surveys were not undertaken as part of the recent count surveys.

·         Records indicated that all relevant land was already in KCC’s ownership.

·         If funding could be found elsewhere then a refuge island could be considered but at present it was cost prohibitive for KCC given the aforementioned thresholds and potential impact on moving utility provisions.

Feeder Lane at Kippings’s Cross

·         There will be continued liaison with residents, councillors and Highways England to find a solution.

·         Residents had recorded 64 heavy vehicles (Lorries, Vans) in 40 minutes.

·         Additional concerns with regards to the proposed Burger King, which will exacerbate the situation, were being looked at by the Planning Department.

Currie Road

·         A suggested one-way system may have some merit due to the narrowness of the road.

·         The ‘intervention threshold’ in an urban area for crash remediation measures was 6 incidents (collisions, personal injury) in the last 3 year period.

·         Residents’ primary concerns was with regards to cars mounting the pavement. 1 injury was too many despite the need for objective measures.

·         The matter to be kept on the agenda for the next meeting.

RESOLVED – That, subject to the comments made in the debate, the Update Report be noted.

Nick Baldwin, Senior Engineer, TWBC, introduced the report set out in the agenda.

Jane Fenwick, for Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Forum, had registered to speak, which included the following comments:

·         The Town Forum welcomed the proposals but felt that changes should go further. Crossing points for pedestrians at the several places where footpaths met the road and a 20mph limit would help maintain low speeds.

·         This was an opportunity to improve an entry point to the town.

Discussion included the following additional matters:

·         The proposal was to introduce double yellow lines on both sides from the junction of Hungershall Park to Langton Road. Parking at The Pantiles end would be unaffected.

·         Parking was damaging verges and endangering other road users.

·         Physical barriers, such as large rocks, at the side of roads to prevent verge parking had to be sufficiently far enough away from the edge, so as they were not hazards themselves, that they would be rendered ineffective.

·         Further improvements may have merits but these were not within the remit of the proposals under consideration.

RESOLVED – That the Board endorses the proposed amendments to parking restrictions in Major York’s Road, Tunbridge Wells.

Nick Peeters, Scrutiny and Engagement Officer, TWBC, introduced the report set out in the agenda.

Discussion included the following additional matters:

·         The proposal undermined the 50/50 dynamic between KCC and TWBC.

·         There are inconsistencies with existing TWBC policies.

·         Parish Council representatives should have the right to vote given the benefit of their local knowledge.

RESOLVED – That the Revised JTB Agreement not be supported.

Hilary Smith, Economic Development Manager, TWBC, introduced the report set out in the agenda which was illustrated by a video presentation of a recent visit by officers and members to the London Borough of Waltham Forest.

Paul Mason, for Tunbridge Wells Bicycle Users Group, had registered to speak which included the following comments:

·         Most roads were 20mph limit, including A-roads and most residential roads had been closed off to through traffic.

·         There had been significant investment in segregated cycle paths and cycle storage.

·         The cost had been £45m which was a relatively small amount in highways terms (duelling of the A21 had cost three-times as much)

·         Benefits of the scheme included:

o   Congestion had reduced by 40 per cent, mostly by changing to cycling or public transport;

o   Pollution down by 90 per cent (90k down to 9k people at risk);

o   Revived local businesses; and

o   Positive impact on community spirit.

·         Officers should be challenged to prepare a plan to make Tunbridge Wells like Waltham Forest.

Jane Fenwick, for Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Forum, had registered to speak which included the following comments:

·         The Town Forum was fully supportive of the LCWIP proposal and would be assisting in survey work.

·         Walking routes were already in place but lacked maintenance and route-finding which dissuaded people from using them as an alternative to car journeys.

·         The potential demonstrated by Waltham Forest was transformative but the current car-bias was counterproductive.

Councillor Tracy Moore, member for Park ward, had registered to speak which included the following comments:

·         The number of road accidents was troubling but the visit to Waltham Forest had been inspirational, investment and a change in mind-set was needed.

·         A recent incidents on Forest Road, had highlighted the need for improvements to crossings and speed restrictions.

·         Road safety was a key priority for the Community Safety Partnership and this shoud be reflected in the plans and policies.

Discussion included the following additional matters:

·         The Waltham Forest example was a step in the right direction.

·         An objective assessment of the conditions and costs of such a plan would be needed.

·         Waltham Forest started with a £100k feasibility study as part of a masterplan for the area which put them in the position of bidding for funding when available, the whole scheme was delivered over 6 years.

·         The majority of the budget had been spent on widening a major fly-over. Road closures, which had the most significant effect on a day-to-day basis, cost £500k.

·         The LCWIP needed to be ambitious but also make compromises to get the best possible outcome.

·         A further report would be brought back to the Board.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

Vicki Hubert, Principal Transport Planner, KCC, introduced the report set out in the agenda.

Jane Fenwick, for Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Forum, had registered to speak which included the following comments:

·         The Town Forum requested to be involved in the meeting with consultants on 13 May 2019 as they had been with other meetings related to the Local Plan.

Discussion included the following additional matters:

·         Town Forum participation would be discussed with the relevant officers.

RESOLVED –

1.    That the report be noted;

2.    That a briefing on the Transport Strategy for JTB Members to be held on 13 May 2019 at 6pm be noted.

Lisa Gillham, District Manager for Tunbridge Wells KCC, introduced the report set out in the agenda.

Discussion included the following additional matters:

·         There appeared to be an abnormal number of road closures.

·         The Street Works team were responsible for liaising with contractors to minimise disruption and closure of the road was the last resort. Specific issues should be referred to the Street Works team.

·         The next phase of the ‘pothole-blitz’ was about to start. Potholes were generally not reported at the JTB due to their reactionary nature but updates would be provided to County members as appropriate.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

To agree any topics for future meetings, of which prior notice 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 substantive debate/discussion or any decision on any topics raised, except to agree whether the topic may come forward in future.

Comments were made in respect of the following matters:

Pedestrian crossing on Forest Road

·         Road lines and lights would be refreshed.

·         Potential improvements to the crossing on Forest Road and the junction with Halls Hole Road were under consideration.

·         A report was agreed for a future meeting.

Pavement Parking

·         Increasing problem, damaging the pavements and hazardous for pedestrians. There was wide support for a ban.

·         Work had previously been done on this and the reports would be made available.

·         Specific areas of concern, following consideration of the existing reports, could be raised as topics for a future meeting as appropriate.

KCC’s Role in Determining Planning Applications

·         KCC acknowledged that the traffic lights in Hawkhurst were over capacity. Planning applications in the area had to be considered on their individual merits and therefore the cumulative effect was often not taken into consideration.

·         Consideraton of how KCC respond to planning applications was requested.

·         A report was agreed for a future meeting.

Hawkhurst Pedestrian Crossing

·         A recent planning application provided funding for a pedestrian crossing in Hawkhurst and a light controlled crossing was being proposed. This would add to the congestion in the area and a Zebra crossing would be preferable.

·         A report was agreed for a future meeting.

HGV Working Group Progress Report

·         Working to reduce the blight of HGV’s on rural communities.

·         Care would be taken to avoid harmful vehicle displacement.

·         KCC was unable to divert traffic to the motorway as this impinged the responsibility of Highways England. The working Groups was working to remove such barriers.

·         A report from the Working Groups may be brought to a future meeting.

To note that the next scheduled meeting will be held on Monday 15 July 2019 at 6.00pm.

The next meeting was scheduled for Monday 15 July 2019 at 6.00pm