Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were reported from Councillors Backhouse, Bland, Elliott and Hills.

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.

There were no declarations of interest made within the provisions of the Code of Conduct for Members.

Members of the Council should indicate which item(s) they wish to speak on and the nature of their concern/question/request for clarification (in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 18).

There were no other members of the Council who had registered their wish to address the Board within the provisions of Council Meetings Procedure Rule 18.

The Chairman will move that the minutes of the previous meeting, dated 19 September 2016, be signed as a correct record. The only issue relating to the minutes that can be discussed is their accuracy.

In accordance with Council Meetings Procedure Rule 16.1, the Chairman will sign the minutes of today’s proceedings at the next scheduled meeting.

The minutes of the Board meeting dated 19 September 2016 were submitted.

The Democratic Services Officer advised that the Vice-Chairman, Councillor Elliott, had asked for the following correction to be made to the first bullet point made under minute PT28/16 (Draft parking charges review): the last part of the sentence stated that the GP surgery would be “…moving back to St Andrew’s Court in two years’ time”. This should be amended to “…in a few weeks when repairs to the building have been completed”.

RESOLVED – That, with the above amendment, the minutes of the Board meeting dated 19 September 2016 be agreed.

The Board received its work programme for the period up to 31 March 2017, which was based on the issues set out in the Council’s Forward Plan.

RESOLVED – That the work programme be noted.

Councillor Dawlings introduced a report on the work and findings of an Overview and Scrutiny task and finish group, of which he had been a member, which had studied the issue of infrastructure provision in the Borough.

Councillor Dawlings explained how the task and finish group had approached its work, focusing on interviews of the following infrastructure providers: Southern Water; South East Water; KCC Highways Planning and Transportation; and KCC Flood Risk Management. He added that (a) questions had been submitted by e-mail to the Environment Agency and responses given and (b) OFWAT had also been consulted on the issue of charges for sewerage infrastructure.

Councillor Dawlings drew attention to the conclusions of the task and finish group, which had been submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee at their meeting held on 20 June. It was noted that, from their study, the task and finish group had concluded that there appeared to be little co-ordination of infrastructure provision between the providers. Councillor Dawlings added that infrastructure provision appeared to be a reactive process to particular planning applications, rather than being carried out at the point when land for housing or commercial development was allocated.

Councillor Dawlings said that a number of recommendations had been made by the task and finish group, as set out in the agenda, which had been endorsed by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. These were presented within their respective provider headings, namely: foul water drainage, surface water drainage, highways, and Environment Agency, as well elements covering all infrastructure providers collectively.

Councillor Dawlings advised that, throughout the task and finish group’s work, they had been supported by the Planning Policy team within the Planning Service, adding that the report had already been viewed by the member Planning Policy Working Group.

Ellouisa McGuckin, the Graduate Planning Officer, said that the timing of the study and its recommendations meant that the findings could be fed into the review process for the authority’s Local Plan.

Members of the Advisory Board considered the report and its recommendations and raised the following issues:

·         Councillor Stanyer assumed that the position in Tunbridge Wells was similar to problems being experienced across the country. He felt therefore that there would be merit in pressing for action at a Local Government Association level, to try and achieve a more strategic, co-ordinated and inclusive approach by the infrastructure providers. He felt that the task and finish group had also shown the value of involving local communities in achieving an improved approach.

Councillor Dawlings felt that the nub of the issue was the existing set of problems (of inadequate drainage for example) made worse by further development.

·         Councillor Hamilton said that Paddock Wood was a prime example of this. She advised that the town had been built largely on a clay base, which did not drain well. As a result, she advised, the town had suffered the occasional ingress of surface water into foul water drainage systems. Councillor Hamilton reported that Paddock Wood Town Council had managed  ...  view the full minutes text for item PT36/16

The Democratic Services Officer will advise if there have been any urgent items of business which have arisen for the Board’s consideration since publication of the agenda.

The Democratic Services Officer advised that there were no additional items for the Board’s consideration which had arisen since publication of the agenda.

The date of the next meeting is Monday 14 November, at 6.30pm in Committee Room A, at the Town Hall, Tunbridge Wells.

The following items are scheduled on the Forward Plan (which is subject to change) to be discussed:

·         Parking charges review – results of consultation

·         Draft Hawkhurst Neighbourhood Plan

It was noted that the next meeting of the Board was scheduled to take place on Monday 14 November, when the following items would be discussed (based on the Forward Plan):

·         Parking charges review – results of consultation

·         Draft Hawkhurst Neighbourhood Plan