Agenda and draft minutes

Planning and Transportation Cabinet Advisory Board - Monday, 22nd January, 2024 6.30 pm

Download documents using the MOD.GOV app

Venue: Council Chamber, Town Hall, Royal Tunbridge Wells, TN1 1RS

Contact: Julie Reynolds  Democratic Services Officer

Media

Items
No. Item

PT28/23

Apologies pdf icon PDF 28 KB

The receive any apologies for absence.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

No apologies were received.

Councillor Opara was not present at the meeting.

 

PT29/23

Declarations of Interests pdf icon PDF 66 KB

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

Additional documents:

Minutes:

No declarations of interest were made.

PT30/23

Notification of Persons Registered to Speak pdf icon PDF 29 KB

To note any Visiting Members or members of the public wishing to speak, of which due notice has been given in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rules 18 and 19, and which items they wish to speak on.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councillor Lidstone was registered to speak on Agenda item 7.

PT31/23

Minutes of the meeting dated 13 November 2023 pdf icon PDF 203 KB

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.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members reviewed the minutes. No amendments were proposed.

 

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting dated 13 November 2023 be approved as a correct record.

 

PT32/23

Forward Plan as at 11 January 2024 pdf icon PDF 274 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members considered the Forward Plan. No amendments were proposed.

 

RESOLVED – The Forward Plan as at 11 January 2024 be noted.

 

PT33/23

Plan for RTW Town Centre Draft Vision pdf icon PDF 227 KB

To consider and provide a recommendation to Cabinet on the proposals set out in the attached report.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Sharon Evans, Planning Policy Team Leader, and Ellen Gilbert, Planning Policy Manager,  presented  the report as set out in the Agenda.

 

Members’ questions, discussion and Officer clarification included:

·         Inconsistencies within the document with reference to ‘Grove Park’ rather than The Grove’ were noted.

·         Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) opportunities were missing from the plan. Officers noted that this was an early stage consultation; there would be the opportunity for comments through the public consultation which might reflect a need for STEM opportunities to be incorporated into the Plan.

·         A STEM hub, offering both educational and employment opportunities, was highlighted as being key for Research and Development (R&D) and would ensure Tunbridge Wells was aligned with how the country was progressing.

·         A fully inclusive approach to the Town Centre Plan from the outset was requested.

·         Officers clarified that timings in wording of recommendation 2 would be adjusted to allow for bank holidays across the Easter break.

 

RESOLVED – That the recommendations to Cabinet would be supported, subject to the issues that have been identified being taken into account by Cabinet:

 

·         That accuracy of location wording be addressed.

·         That opportunities for STEM be explored.

·         That inclusion of disability and access matters be considered from the outset.

·         That the consultation period be extended to allow for Easter Bank Holidays.

 

 

PT34/23

Agreement with Kent County Council to Enforce Public Realm 2 pdf icon PDF 119 KB

To consider and provide a recommendation to Cabinet on the proposals set out in the attached report.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Jane Fineman, Head of Finance, Procurement & Parking, presented the report as set out in the Agenda.

 

Discussion and questions from Members included the following:

·         The residents had put across their view that the scheme should be withdrawn at the most recent Joint Transportation Board (JTB) meeting.  Counter evidence, referred to in the report, supporting continuation of the scheme should be in the public domain.

·         It was clarified that the reintroduction of the scheme was at the request of the Members of TWBC. In addition, members of the public had contacted the Council by email to support enforcement of the scheme post-Covid. Increased traffic flow as a result on non-enforcement resulted in Health and Safety concerns.  The ambition of the project was also to improve the street scene which necessitated reintroduction of the scheme.

·         TWBC had thought that KCC would be taking over the enforcement per their new tender. The tender process was delayed and it was at that point that KCC  requested that TWBC continued with the enforcement on their behalf. It was acknowledged that the process had not been straightforward.

 

Cllr. Peter Lidstone was registered to speak. Points included:

·         The JTB had unanimously agreed to continue enforcing the PR2 scheme with some minor visual improvements.

·         There was unanimous agreement to work with residents of York and Dudley Road to resolve the issues they face as a result of the scheme.  

·         Officers would continue to seek potential solutions and seek agreement with residents on these.

·         Costs would depend on option selected as the solution. 

·         Reaching a consensus was acknowledged as a challenge but strength of collaboration between the 2 authorities to achieve a solution for the residents was noted.

·         It was proposed that PR2 surplus funds should first be spent on PR2 improvements rather than allocated to any other transport projects. An additional recommendation was suggested with the following wording:

‘Any PR2 surplus is only spent on other areas once we are satisfied that the issues with PR2 have been resolved.’

 

Discussion and questions from Members included the following:

·         The terminology ‘in consultation with’ was clarified as meaning agreement would need to be reached. It was agreed that the report wording would be amended to reflect this.

·         It was likely that there was the potential for several rounds of changes needed to reach a solution and that funds would likely need to be set aside to allow for this.

·         It was noted that, the challenge of reaching a consensus for resolution along with  being highly prescriptive in the re-wording of recommendations regarding spending funds, might mean that the money could never be spent. 

·         The report presented at JTB was regarding signage and road markings and it was felt that unanimous agreement to continue  the enforcement did not form  part of the discussion. The local MP had been in contact with the Chair of JTB regarding unresolved issues. It was suggested that any consideration should be suspended until outstanding issues had been resolved at the next JTB.

·         KCC had clarified at  ...  view the full minutes text for item PT34/23

PT35/23

Urgent Business pdf icon PDF 28 KB

To consider any other items which the Chairman decides are urgent, for the reasons to be stated, in accordance with Section 100B(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

There was no urgent business.

PT36/23

Date of the Next Meeting pdf icon PDF 28 KB

To note that the date of the next scheduled meeting is Monday 4 March 2024, at 6.30pm in the Council Chamber, Town Hall, Tunbridge Wells.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The next meeting is scheduled for Monday 4 March 2024 at 6:30pm.