Joint Transportation Board - Monday 15 January 2024, 6:00pm - Feedback Tab - Tunbridge Wells Borough Council Webcasting
Agenda
Slides
Transcript
Map
Resources
Forums
Speakers
Feedback
Votes
Speaking:
Agenda item :
Start of webcast
Share this agenda point
Disclaimer: This transcript was automatically generated, so it may contain errors. Please view the webcast to confirm whether the content is accurate.
thank you for your patients, everybody, yes, absolutely, I totally accurate thank you to the officers who are sourcing a sports and you're on livestream now Sara, thank you OK, thank you very much, good evening everybody, I asked Sarah Hamilton, chairman of the joint transportation board, welcomed this evening's meeting and before we start the meeting there are a number of PR seizure issues. We need to go through.
we will try and be very grateful for your attention and are now pass out to the clerk Julian Reynolds, thank you, thank you Chairman good evening everybody, this meeting is being held remotely via Zoom and webcast live online a recording will also be available for playback on the Council's website afterwards all participants of the meeting should meet themselves were not speaking to reduce background noise which will help the meeting run smoothly Members using Zoom will have access to the chat function.
if you wish to speak, please type S in the chat, and the Chairman will invite you to speak if you are joining by telephone, you should be able to mute and or mute yourself by typing six on your keypad.
but you will not have access to the chat, the chairman will periodically ask whether you wish to speak, whereupon you commute.
sorry, you can unmet. However, if there is any excessive noise on the line, the organisers may have to mute you, whilst the chat can be used to indicate that you wish to speak. This facility should not be used to discuss the business of the meeting. All comments must be made verbally for the benefit of all participants of the meeting and the audio recording. It is very important that the outcomes of the meeting are clear. We are dependent on the technology for this meeting, so if you are experiencing any issues, for example, you drop out of the meeting and are unable to reconnect, you can seek assistance by e-mailing the Committee inbox, which we are monitoring during this meeting.
the meeting will continue as normal. If we are experiencing minor connection issues. Providing the meeting remains corporate. However, if we have major issues such as total loss of the conference call all loss of the webcast, the meeting will be adjourned for up to 15 minutes. If the meeting cannot be restarted within 15 minutes it will be adjourned for another date or time. Persons who have registered to speak at this meeting have been admitted to the meeting in advance to avoid technical issues where possible. Just before the beginning of each item on which there are speakers, there might be a short pause while I ensure all relevant parties are on the call, members must remain muted during this time and should not speak until the meeting resumes. After any statements have been made, the speakers may leave the meeting and follow the rest of the proceedings.
via the live webcast. Thank you Chairman.
thank you very much, may I just interrupted by saying that Charlesworth Carnegie has had difficulties getting in Charles McDonagh, Hawaii, where he will just pick all of those people up for you now there's a whole batch of people who have just opened their other e-mail from the looks of it now and they're on as Charles Murray did just it's just telephoned me yeah.
all joining in now.
OK.
shall, of course, or are they there safely there, I think they're all safely in the meeting now chair okay, and that includes Charles.
Charles McConnachie.
and go down the list, not yet it might be a good idea at this point, chairman, to do our roll-call, and we can just double check, who's in and who's not yeah yeah, Councillor McKenna must have been having problems too, yeah, OK, for the benefit of recording, we're going to take a roll call the clerk to call your name additional present, please introduce yourself. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. Councillor Munday, present
Councillor Roberts,
Councillor Pope President, thank you, Councillor, I was present, thank you, Councillor Atkin.
yeah, at present.
Councillor Lewis present, Councillor Barrett and King.
Councillor Holton
Kay would double check Councillor Holton, Councillor McInroy.
he had problems with the telephone, but that's OK, we'll double check on Councillor McInroy, Councillor Oakford.
I saw him 17 times here, yes, I'm here there, he is sorry that's all right, Councillor Brunei, thank you.
yeah at present I've got no camera because I'm on my phone rather than my laptop because I can't get in not to worry, thank you very much for joining, and thank you for making the effort to come in by phone appreciated Councillor McConnachie.
note will double check on Councillor McConnachie, Councillor Lidstone, I've seen Councillor Lizzie, so you're still connected yeah, Councillor Hamilton, yes, I'm here, thank you visiting Members.
chairman just for your reference, who are speaking this evening, are Councillors, Osborne, Price and Rutland, and are the present Councillor Osborne are you have you joined us on present? Thank you, Councillor Brice, thank you and Councillor Rutland, yes, present, thank you very much. So now are we going to check the officers we are indeed Julian? Have you managed to join his Julian Cook, present, Jamie Watson present, thank you. Jamie and Jane Fineman present. Thank you, John Strachan,
present and Hilary Smith, yes, on present, thank you, and Charles McConnachie has just arrived in the meeting rate.
Councillor Roberts and Councillor McEvoy, to deny I on my list.
no one here, Councillor Robert Hare yeah, it was Councillor McInroy and Councillor Holton.
no, no kept so, Councillor Holton is not here at the start of the meeting, but I will keep an eye on the waiting room for you, Chairman.
thank you very much and I do apologise for the slight disruptions, and I have I have my phone here in case anyone for any work that might have changed McIlroy.
thank you, Members of the members of committee should be familiar with the process, but for the benefit of any members of the public who may be watching. I'd like to explain a couple of things committee members have had their agendas for over a week and have had the opportunity to ask any factual questions of the officers ahead of the meeting, and I know that has happened when we come to the substantive items on the agenda. Those who have registered to speak will be asked in turn, to read their statement. They will have a maximum of three minutes each after the speakers. The relevant officer will set out the report if present
and as far as I'm aware, all our our officers, our presence will move will then move into member discussion at the end of the debate, I'll try and summarise the Committee's view, and members should ensure that any proposals or actions are correctly captured things.
pre-K do we have any apologies for absence?
thank you, Chairman, no apologies received, OK, thank you.
declarations of interest, thank you Chairman, we have none received via e-mail to me, I'm not sure about members within the meeting, so could we ask, does anybody have any declaration of interest in items on the agenda that they wish to declare?
I hear now.
thank you Chair, so we'll move on notification to persons wishing to speak.
agenda. Item 3 is to note any members of the public or visiting members of the Council who have registered to speak. Do we have any such persons, please, guest chairman, the following people have all registered to speak on agenda item 5, we have Mr. Jim Kay Mr. Adrian parent and Pippa Collard and Councillors, Brice, Rutland and Osborne, and all those three visiting speakers safely in the meeting or will they come in later? Jim Kay is in the meeting, Pippa Collard is in the meeting atrium. Could you confirm that you are also in the meeting? I mean the reason thank you Chair, thank you. Thank you OK, minutes of the meeting dated the 22 of October 23. Now I know Councillor Atkins has a query on that. Councillor Kinch, would you like to explain your concerns about that? They mean a minute, please
thank you Chair, it's TB 19 such tweaks.
I spoke really about the Basel Road junction.
not about the damp is roundabouts and the way the Ministry at the moment.
I have asked my that's been outstanding, I didn't approve with a road layout but agreed that mounted and improved with both those frontiers, it's only right that I comes to lengthen the period which so it didn't just be amended, and also my name is actually spoken again there.
my apologies, Councillor Atkinson, toilets, not like a pure name, I apologise, I will of course ensure that is corrected without delay, subject to that amendment.
you would be satisfied, yes, there will be a thank you, thank you Chairman, should I make that note, please, and as anybody else got any comments or concerns about the minutes.
I hear none, and therefore the motion is to agree the minutes are we agreed?
the same silent, thank you, thank you.
Surrey high, it's it's it's Becky here, I've got a quote from James, you're saying he's having a problem getting it, and is there a number he can dial in on?
and if this is possible, could someone texts it to him, is it James McInroy, yeah, yeah yeah, I will get Eleanor to contact him.
OK great, thank you, thank you Becky, thank you for that.
so we're happy with the minutes.
and we can move forward now actually try to support petition press and the presentation by the lead petitioner, Sally actions, very warm welcome, Sally and you now have a Max or help I can call you Sally I mean you now have a maximum of 10 minutes to present your petition, thank you.
thank you good evening. Everyone and redouble UPC decided to adopt PR, too, citing aims during 2017 20 of a greener and more prosperous borough, I believe neither of these aims have been achieved. The highest polluters buses continue to have unfettered use of Mount Pleasant, any environmental benefit to Mount Pleasant has been at the expense of Calverley Newton and Crescent, Road and cars Corner where two traffic has been forcibly displaced. These streets now enduring higher volumes of congested traffic with commensurate noise and air pollutants to procure parking. Between 9 and 6 permit holders on Dudley and York need to undertake the same around the town route. Monson one to two changes to the traffic lights, Calverley Concorde round cars, Corner roundabout Crescent Road, two to three changes the traffic lights. It adds to point 7 5 of a mile and at least 10 minutes per loop, during which emissions continue throughout before resuming their previous round, the blocked newt via Church Road. The circuit is often repeated, with an average of 2 to 3 loops, monson, traders have suffered in significant inconvenience to the execution of VED rates, especially in relation to essential deliveries and customer footfall. Since adoption of the scheme Council Committee minutes demonstrate mutation of the aims, including one enhancement of the pedestrian experience, I argue that the PR to works included pavement, widening and carriageway narrowing, which already provides a much welcomed and sufficient improvement to the pedestrian experience. This stretch at Mount Pleasant is not part of the main shopping area, providing three charity shops whose donations have declined since PR 2 was started, Starbucks and a takeaway restaurant, nor is it an access route from the car parks of Crescent Road or the RVP PR free has been abandoned along a stretch of road and which comprises many more shopping and hospitality outlets.
buses and taxis preventable, pedestrianised experienced tier 1 and 2 do not provide a continuous traffic restricted area, it is broken by traffic exiting from Newton Dudley and York roads onto Mount Pleasant.
the issue of pedestrians of Surrey. The second item that has been raised as a name was pedestrian safety. The issue of pedestrian safety was raised by various Councillors at the planning stage but not addressed the resulting lack of obvious road markings or signage to indicate safe crossing points and the removal of the island for months and road crossing point rendered the same the scheme confusing to pedestrians and drivers alike. Confusion creates safety issues previously absent, the councils now perversely rely on the safety issues to justify its enforcement. An alternative view would be to abandoned P or 2 and reinstate its previous layouts.
the third mutation is the creation of a distinct community space for residents and visitors.
I ask the Council to explain the need and purpose of a distinct community space in this specific area.
do we not already have a hub around the Millennium Clock, what type of community space do the Council perceive can be achieved here, while buses and taxis continue to have unfettered access,
isolated events such as Remembrance Day still require closure of pr 2 and additional roads from all traffic, including buses. Is the Council suggesting this stretch of Mount Pleasant needs to be semi closed 365 days a year as a result of a handful of events which still require the roads to be cordoned off? The minutes of various Council Committees spanning the last seven to eight years contained the need to undertake public consultation
none have been conducted at any time before, during or after adoption of PR 2, it was presented as part of a generic five-year plan absences specific detail.
the Council is required to publicise the scheme using local media and using signage on the expected streets, this was not done either, the views of residents and traders in the immediately impacted streets was completely overlooked and when justifiable concerns arose subsequent to its adoption was ignored.
I have own businesses and resided on Dudley and Newton Road since 1989, the only information I received at either address was written confirmation as to how and when PR to works would commence and complete and when enforcement would start, the Department for Transport requires councils to have sufficient information to justify the need to restrict traffic Barn, means of a traffic order and separately for its enforcement with MPR cameras for example issues of speed, safety, congestion, air quality,
this quantifiable baseline data informs the Council of a specific risk, it seeks to mitigate, to consider all available measures at its disposal, and whether or not a traffic order is the most appropriate solution and to quantify the percentage risk reduction it intends to achieve, and within what timescale.
air quality at Mount Pleasant has never been measured. Profit council being conducted by the Town Forum after P or T was executed. Reducing the full carriageways to two, encourages drivers to take alternative routes in any case, while decreasing opportunities to speed. In other words, no relevant baseline data was or is currently being collated for the PR to area. In absence of identifying and mitigating a specific risk, it is difficult to understand any justification for introducing traffic enforcement for this short stretch of road. In the alternative, this was a voluntary scheme devoid of a statutory purpose. It cannot achieve its community purpose either, as it's not traffic free. Perhaps air quality traffic counts and congestion data should now be collected for cars, Corner and Crescent Road. In light of the displaced traffic flows, these roads now enjoy. The d f t also requires councils to issue warning letters to first-time offenders for six months after enforcement commences
Tunbridge Wells Borough Council chose to send such warning letters for 6 weeks to measure the proportionate effect of a traffic order the day f t requires its ongoing review rather than expected. Non-compliance should indicate that the signage and or road markings are insufficient and or inadequate, and these create disproportionate unfairness to drivers. Between the 13th of March and the 19th of November, a total of 57,559 P C N S have been issued, of which 5 3 4 6 9% was successfully appealed. Awareness of PR to restrictions has increased locally following substantial local and national media attention, yet 150 vehicles still enter this affected area every day.
this should have already triggered an urgent review of the adequacy of the scheme signage it's evident from these numbers signage has to be inadequate and therefore penalties have and continue to be unfairly procured, previous committed in D F T guidance recommend use of signage at the outer perimeters of and enforced areas to provide drivers with an advance warning of the existence of a restricted area to prepare a menu to enable them to choose a different route non exist.
Dudley and York, roads have no signage at their entry from London Road Dudley, how no-notice likes it either when exiting Dudley or deriving negotiates. A pedestrian crossing at its exit onto Mount Pleasant to wait traffic, another pedestrian crossing on Mount Pleasant, where the first pr to signage is placed 20 yards before the restricted area begins and is perpendicular to the Dudley Road exit and which may be blocked by a double decker bus at Mount Pleasant junction with Mommsen Road, there is another sign, but by then a driver may have already committed to crossing into the restricted area with no ability to undertake a safe manoeuvre to avoid it on Calverley Road the sign is on the right side of the road, not the driver's side, it is often at an angle away from you.
I think we've lost your sound.
and back on board now, yes, I can hear you, I think everyone else can okay and I was talking about the sign on Calverley Road, which is often at an angle can you hear me, is this pair of his name moment, Julius is somebody trying to dial in?
what is what's causing this interference, do we know?
hello, can anyone hear me, yes, we can hear you.
surely can you hear me, as I say, I think it was a telephone number yeah, I can hear yours, it's Councillor McInroy has just been muted, there was interference from his phone, apologies that took Lesley Watson and came up so camp, and we yes, probably a little bit more time ice. I paused the time before you, Sally and and I'm going to restart your time and now Sally you have one minute and 30 seconds left. OK, thank you. Please see N. Revenue is now in excess of 1.5 million, not a bad owner for nine months. It leaves a bad taste in the mouths of those that have been financially penalised and particularly as those fines have been levied unfairly. This means why consideration should be given to reimbursing this moneys. These monies fines neither welcome or encourage visitors, nor do they build a prosperous town centre. You had intended. However, they do swell the coffers of Tunbridge Wells Borough Council. Who will, unilaterally decide how they want to spend the money.
the d f t makes it clear this is ring fenced for active travel and highways, yet the upcoming planning and transportation board meeting agenda concludes the monies can also be used for climate change projects, notwithstanding the inexplicably huge costs had not been a string pr to 440,000 pounds thus far, there is a significant net profit from which some of the rungs of PR to Hannon should be put right.
the following being suggested by residents, and largely dismissed by several Councillors white listing for permit holders of Dudley and York Road, this will have no or no no cost or negligible cost to introduce and will better achieve the environmental goals by preventing residents from circulating the town allow vehicles to exit mountain road onto Mount Pleasant.
this compromise will enhance pedestrian safety by obviating the need for enlarged sentence. Now, Sally, thank you, OK, I would just like to say we would like to hear very clearly the reasons for pr 2 being in existence, any reasons to not revoked, and thank you that clarity and transparency. Thank you. Thank you Sally. That's time. Thank you very much for your presentation and thank you for your patience and and all your work on this, and it's appreciated and all on our ask each speaker to address the Committee, you will have three minutes. Each could we introduce them, then please do leave. We can first speaker will be Mr. K Mr. Carey still with us there with Sally, can you and mute again? Thank you. You have three minutes, Mr. K
Y Lisa OK, chairman, if that starts up, absolutely thank you.
as part of the community of Dudley New Road who grappled highly with the struggle and frustration as a direct result of having paled through restrictions, forced upon us and here to share the genuine challenges we face, and to urge you to consider the human side of this situation,
the paltry restrictions, but not allowing us to drive down Mount Pleasant Road between the hours of 9 am 6 pm or a daily hassle, which make it difficult for us to go about our lives. We also enjoy lengthy detours just to secure a parking spot near our homes, picture navigating through three traffic lights, a roundabout and heavy traffic, not just once, but potentially five or six times every time you return home, it's just under a mile each time to do one loop. These enforced details are not just about the parking, it's sacrificing hours, creating more traffic, costing us more money, not to mention the mental stress that this creates.
if, as we are told, the Council's aim is to for a greener and more prosperous environment, and it is certainly not true for the Dudley and York Road rises by one in five to six miles per household. Every time we come back to our homes, there are approximately 450 homes on Dublin York Road and that there are approximately 78 parking spaces available between the three roads. The competition for parking spaces is stressful. We are also competing with visitors to the shops and zone see permit holders
let's talk about what listed exemptions are granted to taxi drivers, but not to those most affected, whereas the justice in that picture the frustration of watching the taxis take shortcuts whilst we see that following the rules details aren't mere inconveniences, they are daily drain on our energy and time it's not just an occasional annoyance it's a daily O'Dowd it weighs on our mental wellbeing every day.
it feels like our concerns are falling on deaf ears, we are asking for for your understanding and, more importantly, your action as our representatives as an act of goodwill to the residents by the Council, I urge you to provide special exemptions for those who live in Dundee and your rights exactly as the cast has done for the sexes.
it is the residents necessary who are currently grappling with these owners, vetoes and parking challenges.
play is not only for convenience but for the overall wellbeing of our residents.
the stress and frustration resulting from these details are impacting on our daily lives by granting special exemptions, a councillor has the opportunity to show empathy and show and support for the residents who cut Dudley, an upright day home.
in conclusion, I urge the Council to carefully consider the unique challenges faced by the residents of Dudley in York Road and to grant special exemptions to alleviate the burden in per post, but appeal to restrictions, thank you, thank you very much.
thank you, Chairman, are you ready for Mr Barrons to speak?
Bernice granted yeah, I would say thank you very much. Thank you. You have three minutes to address the committee. Thank you, Adrian thank you very much. It is the one I am speaking as acting. Charity Tom brought up Georgetown for and telephone has been a strong supporter further about the concept of PR 2 and the original design, and we were disappointed when the final design will be so-called finance zones. We expressed that disappointments, and then we have coordinator Cynthia, she for the for the petitioners on the are all but bogus inconveniencing them for in in getting round the town, and one that is worth saying that this couple of things one is the motor vehicle numbers on York, Donnelly and Newton Road are not higher than they were before the before the scheme came in the the the the telephone did actually do account before the schemes implemented and according to our records
the numbers of vehicles using those roads are halved since the schemes implemented, and there is optical scientific because it was taken at 1.00 point during the week, but we have repeated those Councillor 11 times since, and suddenly be the numbers, are they producing those streets are actually lower than they were before the scheme was before schemes implemented?
however, and the telephones made a series of recommendations which have gone to various people in the Borough Council and Kent and Kent County Council and a few of those are included in the report, and we welcome that, but actually, I think quite a number more than need to be considered because the scheme is not perfect and and it needs and needs to make changes as as the petitioners have said they're there and there are a number of things wrong with the scheme and I would urge the current councillors to then officers to to reconsider what else can be done there's one final point and which this is really key actually and is the town centre area plan.
which is currently being developed for the Borough Council, is part of the Local Plan. It is quite well advanced in terms of its thinking and its assumptions, and one of the key assumptions is that schemes like PR to will remain and if, if PR 2 is removed in its entirety, it really pulls the rug from the entire strategy and that in task that strategy is about to get out of the consultation. So if a decision is made to to withdraw the scheme which we which will telephone with no support, then it's gonna also undermine the town centre and which is currently under development and looks actually, to be honest, pretty good
so I think the changes could be made, please please make those additional changes and we look forward to seeing a better PR to thank you, thank you very much.
thank you and pepper coloured Pippa, are you ready to speak, I am thank you Philippa, you have three minutes to address the admitting are you good to go?
it is close.
when you see me and hear me right, we can we have you loud and clear. Thank you paper, unbeknownst, to the colored and as the president of New York, Road and directly affected by a PR to what is transparently obvious is appear to cause a situation where the very opposite valid traffic paper that is being created in York, Dudley and other town centre roads. I shouldn't need to tell you that the aim of the now fashionable all science is to reduce motor traffic in residential areas, thereby decreasing noise pollution, making the characters of residential streets more pleasant, healthier and inviting environments. Instead, York Road narrow is two residential streets is now taking the brunt of cars cutting through town to avoid bus gate, and I would disagree with adrian's recent comments and cited. The steady stream of cards uses our roads as a cut-through, frequently exceeding the 20 miles per hour speed limit and often delivering HC bays unable to do a 3 point turn in once road now belts between the pavements in York Road, as they squeeze themselves towards not the town centre shops, which is only a matter of time before suddenly takes our lives even more miserable.
this rerouting of traffic, where no people live, I am out that road along roads where many people live is completely counter inserted to button the LOTR traffic thinking.
those restaurant seating car park in York, that libraries are frustrated beyond measure by the additional three-quarter, Luke the malign loot that they are forced to drive to find a place to park near their home. Young families are moving onto the roads because they can't cope with stress, restless wishing to access the London Road or quickly net to the station to collect a luggage laden. Child now have to factor up to 10 minutes additional travel time with three to four traffic light changes to reach the same point, and all due to the fact that they can't drive a few hundred yards down Mount Pleasant Road tradesmen are reluctant to work in our roads. No parking extra loop and often, like many people new to the area, unwittingly receive a penalty. Ticket
promise of this scheme has failed, what has it truly and honestly achieved a shared space pedestrians to freely wander now?
less pollution, maybe, but not proven for a few metres, a word when I want less, but not for the residents of the adjacent roads where it must increase and we welcome visitors now we are are alienating them, who wants fish and buy a ticket for bus gate traffic offence. They don't understand the too frightened to return. Signage is confusing and unclear and there is too much information all at once. There's counterintuitive driving to do a 3 point turn at the end of Monks, Road into the paths of buses and pedestrians crossing. Always sporting shopkeepers know the mountain road traders and the charity shops on Mount Pleasant is separated. Access, deliberate issues
to sum up, what should have been an iconic scheme was compromised from the outset, which is widely ridiculed by the majority, and for the reasons I and others are speaking about tonight, just doesn't work, the greater good, so I implore your electorate Council to please do the right thing and sort this out the many town centre residents and shopkeepers whilst it is within your power, thank you.
thank you, Philippa.
thank you Chairman, we're now moving on to councillors who have requested to speak Councillor Brice, if you could start, thank you are tricky, you can hear me OK.
you very faint 0, hang on a minute, got myself up.
whenever you fight to me, I don't know if you're saying to anybody else, does that sound OK, yeah, I can he can everybody here?
but can hey, you're a little quiet Councillor Brice, but we can hear you.
potential for me to require.
anyway, so we told him, Councillors are keen to gauge the views of everyone who lives on the two roads most affected by this scheme. So before Christmas, we produced and paid for ourselves a letter that I delivered on December 15th to all 280 ish letterboxes in two roads. We could not use individually addressed a letter to those on the electoral register because that would exclude many of the people currently living there, as there is such a rapid turnover of people in the rented flats in the two roads. So he used a letter that I put through. Every letterbox residents could circle answers to questions and hand it to the Town Hall addressed to me. It also included our e-mail addresses. I had and my phone number, we had no e-mails and I had no phone calls to that phone number for reasons not fully ascertained. We had a very low response rate, I think we're talking to letters handed into the Town Hall, one for and one against, so it's impossible to draw any conclusions. apart from the fact I would say that there is hardly a vast undercurrent of opposition to that you put out over 500 letters you get to back, however, we will be continuing to ask people for their views.
as a continuation of the ongoing engagement with the residents. It knows two roads, so can't really say one way or the other apart from the fact nobody really seems to care
you do not speak back about that, I think it's an opponent, no, I'm afraid there is no redress on this at all, you're all taking it in turns to speak and then the Councillors will debate, thank you though, for your interjection Julia I would like to just clarify if I may if that's why, in order that this research that was carried out with a resident and submitted to the town hall
I in what way was that
legal into legal sorry.
because I didn't know if it I wasn't told in it and I'm not sure whether or
board members knew of at Kew, may I ask Councillor Brice to just explain how that came about, is that in order, or would you rather, I moved on July.
it's not really in order Sarah, it's something that perhaps we should come to as the matter of debate if that's OK to move it forward for health, and we've had the speakers, thank you, and thank you if I can move that onto the next speaker that'd be Councillor Rutland.
thank you,
thank you, Julie, can you hear me, OK, we can hear you clearly, I'll start the time off for you now, Councillor Rutland, thank you, thank you, I'd like to thank Sally for helping keep this issue live the residents for their patients and also our parking comes and customer services teams for their hard work over the past year. Lastly, Jamie and his officers at KCC for the time they've taken in responding to us and being so willing to meet and discuss the issues and find solutions.
it is always regrettable and personally very disappointing, that we cannot satisfy all of our residents. Regarding the recommendations tonight, as a ward Councillor, I support option B making amendments to help raise further awareness of the restrictions and on what can be done to deter drivers from entering the zone. We are keen to see because we don't want anyone to get a penalty charge. We're anxious. This happens as soon as possible. I am unsure if there is the possibility of pursuing the straight-ahead air at Crescent Road, so that people are not encouraged to turn right at the Town Hall. I also think, like Adrian that further visual cues and adjustments are going to be needed
we appreciate the note that mitigations for York and Dudley Road need to be explored. We know that a lot of preparatory work has been done. May I suggest that the Committee consider amending the recommendation in order to add a commitment to engage with local residents to talk through solutions to the issues raised as an add-on to this, we also feel the local community and the town centre should feel some benefits and to that end, would like to see some of the surplus funds raised by the scheme to be spent on the immediate neighbourhood in ways to be determined. Items that have been suggested include parking priority for local residents, streetscene improvements and enlarged 20 miles per hour zone that would encompass inner London, Road Church, Road and Crescent Road. It is clear to us, as a Council and as Ward Councillors, we have a lot of community engagement to do in order to find out more what residents more widely feel about the scheme and what they would like to happen that can be practically delivered. Thank you
thank you, Councillor Rutland.
and the last speaker we have is Councillor Osborne.
thank you very much, thank you, Councillor Osborne.
recent Councillor Carden, having been elected in May last year.
as a resident of Colborne for over 35 years, I was obviously well aware disquiet, I was the war memorial screen, I would have form, I was a victim of the scheme turning left from Church Road, and my son resident for his entire LA life fell foul, turning left from Manston Road,
when I was campaigning in May, which, supposedly at the same time that the petition was circulating, I was able to elicit the views of well over 1,000 of the residents carpeted beyond the roads directly affected.
I felt that the balance of opinion was that people wanted to see measures that improve the negative consequences of the scheme for local residents and businesses and also improved signage to assist people from out of the town.
despite this, they generally approved of the Council's aspiration to create a cleaner, safer environment in the town centre and one that prioritised people without cars.
I support their views, I'm also, as with Councillor Price and Councillor Rahman, and extremely grateful.
for the engagement of local residents and the work they have undertaken, a salary in particular organised a petition and the other residents of you, Dudley and Inner London Road, who have been active in intensifying post efficiencies in the scheme.
which are outlined in the petition, but have also been very positive in bringing forward solutions to the problems which, many of which I hope will be implemented.
I was fortunate enough to bump into our empty behind the war memorial on Amnesty Stag, one of the occasions for which the scheme was originally designed, he said that the execution of the scheme had failed to live up to the promise of the original design, but then he would support changes to the signage et cetera which would improve the scheme.
and make it better, both for local residents and visitors, I agree with Mr. Clarke and I believe the excellent work undertaken by KCC should allow this to be achieved.
as a Councillor, I will vote in favour of PCM money being spent.
firstly, on improving the scheme for residents and businesses.
and I will also vote against any proposals to create a payout 3.
and, by extension, appear to into.
Mount Pleasant Road, so I support the recommendation, the thank you Chair.
thank you very much, thank you Chairman, that concludes all speakers on this item and just for the benefit of recording two additional Councillors who are in the meeting since the register and McInroy and mechanically, thank you, Malcolm Banks, thank you and can you while you're on that topic is Councillor?
Holden present at all Councillor Golton is not present, OK, thank you me, but we've captured that well, thank you very much for Overview have spoken on the petition, the members of the public in the borough councillors who registered to speak on this matter.
thank you for taking the trouble to do that, and Members should be aware that, Greg Clark MP, we just mentioned, Greg Clark has recently written to me by PR to whilst it's too late to include in this meeting cycle, had three, the points he raised in support of residents will be covered within the discussion this evening. Any outstanding issues can be looked at by officers and providing was passed by response to his letter PR. Members will understand that, and if points are raised, we do need to give a chance to get proper factual information in response, and that is the situation here.
so may I now introduced Jane Simon officer on Borough Council and head of finance, procurement and parking, John Strachan parking manager, and Jenny Watson KCC active travel manager Kent County Council, who will present their joint report, I don't know who's going to go first or,
sheriff, I'll I'll jump in, thank you I may be able to share screamed Jamie.
on my muppet, there is much talk now, I won't share the screen, but you should be able to say hopefully everyone around in the would have had a copy of the report, yeah, without I'll just do a quick summary of the report. Thank you, sir. This joint report is a case you see coming as well as our Council joint report which considers the subject of the
the petition with both KCC and Tunbridge Wells officers and Councillors and members having discussions prior to the report to help guide the contents of the report.
following my quick summary of the report, questions may be best responded to by the myself on some of the highway issues, or John Strachan will Jane Feynman on some of the enforcement issues of the restrictions this report report makes two recommendations option A to do nothing or option B retain.
appear to scheme but incorporate minor amendments to raise further awareness of the restrictions, the report provides an introduction and on Tunbridge Wells five-year plan and its commitment to the project.
and from paragraphs 2.1 to 2.8, responds directly to the issues raised by the petition, it then goes on to identify further relatively quick and low cost additional measures under option B, along with identifying a funding source in paragraph 4.3
within paragraph 3.2 the report suggests that a future GTB receives a further report which could include possible additional measures that at this stage are not considered to be proposals that could readily be implemented without further design work and include views from the UNUM community representatives, discussions have taken place on possible other measures to support the existing restrictions.
but none that will remove the restrictions entirely and revert Mount Pleasant Road back to pre 2019 traffic flows as the petition requests as to date, this has not been considered an option and I can see under paragraph 5.3 the report concludes with KCC officer recommendation to progress option B and informs within paragraphs 5.3 and 5.4 why the removal of the restriction and waving and of fines imposed to date,
would not be a viable option.
thank you Chair.
thank you,
are any of your colleagues going to speak as well?
Lord Morrow and I I don't think they probably need to speak on the summaries, whether there are any questions come from discussions with board members and we'll try yes, please, thank you OK, that's absolutely fine and thank you for that. So are there any questions from Members, please now I can't duly can you, I cannot rely on you to look at hands because I'm not confident I can see everybody on my screen and I don't want to miss anybody in the comments in the chat. By the way, Councillor Atkins's has his hand-raised for you, Sara. Thank you, Councillor Atkinson, please go ahead
no, thank you Chair.
I, I think
having listened to the Minister's in the reports, 32.3, I think, is properly the issue.
and the rest is have most weight, which is the fact that.
latterly, a new West is are forced to make unnecessary lengthy journeys, and we put, as she does say, that.
or acknowledge these facts, and it then says that mitigating this caused further investment for further investigation, sorry, I'm just wondering what further investigation that would actually amount to.
sorry, it was at 2.00.3 or 2.3 per year, thank you.
it's I I guess it would be other all other alternatives to going the wrong way round, threw him out through Motson, Road Calvary and Church and present roads, and so it depends whether in future discussions or any other options that can reduce that lengths, but it's was known at the time of the restrictions that that was pretty much the only direct or only route that would be feasible for York, Road and Dudley Road residents if this scheme was to be implemented which of course it was.
OK, Councillor S, J comebacks, Chair, please, yeah.
say one thing which was mentioned.
slowly
country to reducing the traffic obviously, and they all say, was trapper and allow list of registrations for the vehicles.
I will say there is something that could be looked at.
it associated I don't see it, reducing the the traffic flow in in front of the illegal roads and through chaotic, but that is an option we do not.
Jennifer can come back on that.
there's, of course, it's an option, but I think that's something that we need to think very carefully on, because it may encourage other uses that don't have exemptions to feel that they may go through, that there may be that something for either Jane or John to come back on.
Jane and John both had their hands raised for you Chairman, so thank you Chair I, I would just say that I don't think that any options are off the table, I think that it's it would be helpful to actually engage with the residents in York and Dudley Road.
perhaps Newton wrote to find out what problems actually exists there, because, although we've heard from the petitioners, just the informal consultation that took place just before Christmas or around Christmas seems to be at odds with that in a way, so I think before a lot of work is done we need to actually identify what problems are there and then see what what what measures we could consider,
but I would be concerned about diluting the scheme and
any additional dispensations to other road users would actually dilute the scheme in a way. Thank you Chair, thank you, and may I just champion and ask you, John, and how do you see because I'm very keen that residents go away from this meeting today and will something positive and will be now will engage again and how do you see we could best engage with residents and then we have discussed this briefly? Is there a way that we we, we can do that quite expediently
while we, we do have the ability to consult with residents.
HRA writing to the individual addresses, we certainly have access to everyone, that's or a resident permit holder.
so
yeah, that that that's something that could be looked at because we actually need to identify what the problem is before we can start offering solutions to, then you need some consensus, yes, yes, thank you, thank you, I Robbie Councillor Atkins, is that good? You are going to be quite flexible because this is such an important issue and Councillor Atkins's application
yeah, that's just fine, thank you, thank you, and in China I believe, has a hand up who has your hands up has her and I'm sorry.
yeah, I was just going to reiterate some of the points that John made and I think wow, whatever we do, we have to make sure that we get right yeah, that involves some empirical evidence.
some further surveying, and if we do more than one of these options, we have to understand that option A might impact upon option B and we need to understand the interaction of that, so it's it's why when we came today and we have come with a response to the to the
petition itself and with things that we know that we can deliver quite swiftly and without significant impact on anything else, I think all of the other things that have been discussed require us to do some more work and Jamie has very kindly already done some of that engagement with members and has walked round.
the area and has started that work, but I think we were just too early in the process to establish exactly what we should do, so that's what I would like to do next.
it is is to start looking at these options and whether they are viable owner.
OK OK, thank you, I'm noting the comments in the chat, thank you, let me capture those from July without me protecting the meeting by addressing them all, but thank you I will endeavour to do that for you, thank you, Councillor Liz Thomas next to speak on your list, thank you.
thank you, Lord Mayor, I can't say.
OK, I need to say me, I can sustain thank you.
chair and and thank you to the the residents and be registered to speak,
sorry, the this meeting isn't as online and not in person that would be my preference and.
as Anna and I Oscar, I couldn't spoken to Jim to Sally into to pick them for all before so.
sorry, yeah, so good to see you again, thank you very much for taking the time this evening.
I guess, or I I'd maybe go one one stage further than what John was proposing with a written proposal to the residents, because I think I think this is a a KFC and with the scheme.
and I wonder if it would be possible for us at the right time and if the residents are interested in getting people together in a room, and you know to to have a look at these, these are a potential.
mitigations for the residents to speak to officers, to to, so that the residents are clear about what what is feasible, isn't feasible, and officers are clear about resident views as well, so I I'd ask if you know no, without committing ourselves to anything and necessarily whether it be possible for for some sort of workshop or droppings to be to be run at the right time and together residencies of York and Dudley because I think this is such a critical part of the scheme.
absolutely critical to any such a bounty is very well managed and constructed, and we have discussed this briefly, I think even I and.
if, but the important thing is, as I mentioned, to John earlier, and we, we must engage with all the relevant residents first and ensure that was one voice.
any hands any other hands up, please, yeah, I certainly haven't to write the next one was Councillor Roberts, followed by Councillor Pope.
right thank you, Councillor Rockies, thank you, and thanks to all the residents Shaw and your contribution, obviously it all makes sense to me and.
yeah, in our North South, hard work has gone into the analysis of the data and I can't argue with a lot of what you said.
so the moderator or attribution question face, so in the report I just wanted to highlight some questions I did put back to the officers, but for the broader community to stay and highlight that.
and the in section 3.1 added Rick ask whether the pollution data it says there is no data around pollution, not as clarified was that because no tata been collected, or was it because the data proved that there was which is pollution, and either one is to do with the crash. Data Tunbridge Wells has got a report in a mess web application, and I just wondered whether the crash data had come via that, because there will always be more personally relevant to the pedestrians who reduce our area and give us perhaps more relevant data. I think the answers, but I I feel it's fair that the officers can clarify that at this meeting for the people you know on that, I'd also like to ask, and can we be sure that Councillor Brice's
statement can be disregarded as it wasn't a formal Tunbridge Wells Borough Council consultation and him and Webb form any part of the current review process, even though John many officers did just refer to it and it was a confusing brief because he kindly put 200 letters out and then set out to 500 responses we only got two negatives on both positive and negative back so it was a confusing brief as it was.
so the there are questions, I suppose, are and the key points I suppose I I do support the White listing the vehicles for the residents seem to be a sensible way forward and are obviously reviewing this already signage, but what I've asked for time and,
that that's the question, Mike Jenkins, chair.
thank you.
Chairman John does have his hand raised, possibly in response thanking you.
John
you did say, yes, sorry, I was muted, thank you Chair.
on the air quality information that's not monitored in the town centre in that area.
I did speak to colleagues in Environmental Health to check that specifically.
what I would say is that, when we first looked at the numbers of vehicles passing through PR to area and the cameras were recording for quite a long time prior to the introduction of warnings, and then enforcement, we had a roundabout 1,200 cars thundering through there each day.
so that's 1,200 cars.
going along Mountpleasant Road pass War Memorial then into mountain road.
there are about, and you'd have to understand, that if those vehicles are now around about 100 less than 100 or many days.
then that that is a that is an indicator that the pollution.
noise and fumes would will have reduced.
sorry, Councillor, Councillor Roberts, what was the or what was the other question?
perhaps I can come in with that when it is to do with crashes.
and
yeah, sorry.
the the crashes.
the date of the crashes has come from Kent police, so we didn't I didn't use the crash maps data that.
private websites abuse the which does take Kent police data as well, it can sometimes be a little bit behind the data that's available to KCC, so I used the most up-to-date data, my head, and also I only looked at the Crescent Church and Calvary roads it didn't include all the other roads Mount Pleasant Road Watson Road.
and further beyond you, so I was just focusing on those three roads where the petition highlighted vehicles were being pushed to rather than going through HMO Mount Pleasant Road.
thank you Chair.
thank you.
Councillor Roberts, did you want to come back?
not really, I just wanted to clarify the points or in that report, yeah, there was the response to the residents' permit or petition, sorry, I'd probably only as an observation would suggest that with hybrid electric vehicles, the pollution from vehicles is probably getting lower and lower and which is probably the culprits is gonna be the buses and the bus so I'm not sure how much strength we can put on pollution going forward.
initial debates OK, thank you, and you didn't mention me.
Serena was done, fine Councillor earlier, asking that, and it's always really been in good spirit, that residents are asked for information, but it has caused some confusion, so I think we, I hope we can minute that it is no way an official consultation that took place there and we need to make sure that residents are confused or even are given false hope by some of these attempts to approach them, and I say,
I think it's very important because this is such a wide issue and I know so many people I thank you Chairman. I am terribly sorry to interrupt you just on a matter of minutes and she's mentioned managing that particular item. Yes, I'm jolly just for good order if I can remind everybody within the group currently that anything that goes into the chat won't be monitored, it doesn't form part of the debate, discussion or raising questions, so if there are points that need to be made that need to come into the discussion, that's where they will be monitored. Anything going on in the chat won't be minuted at all. Just for clarification
that's really high, because thank you customer earlier. Councillor Roberts raised that, so maybe I could encourage members to to look at the chat if they want to ask questions based on anything that's putting the chat and the obviously welcome to do that, Councillor Julie Mukaber, the the chai, just to be very, very clear, the chat comments are comments that are being raised. Currently, that would be perhaps including other members who aren't councillors for debate. It's really important that we understand the debate is between all of you within this forum and shouldn't really be influenced by any other external factors. You wouldn't expect somebody in an in-person meeting to get involved within your debate or discussion know that that's really helpful, so thank you I say thank you Jane Fonda and you, you've put a comment in there as well. To clarify
measurements. Thank you.
any more hands can we see please.
I can't yes, I don't know, yes, Councillor pilgrims or like you over to you.
they are just just a question about the proposed amendments and option B. Which addressed a number of the issues that that exist with the current design I just wanted really just for it to be a clear and to clarify that the question is yes, that the
so the proposed changes in option B are not the final options I presume that this could change further before we actually get to make changes to the current design is that correct?
Jamie did you want to come in, yes, okay?
yes, the option B is s not add more a label as a quick way, but it's something that we can do relatively quickly and at military low cost, and I believe we'll have.
Will aid on just highlighting the bus gate way, features a little bit more so with a bit of red, current surfacing and some slow text and few other small changes, I think that would help highlight the gateway to showing the gateway features.
and what I've suggested in her discussions prior to this report with councillors.
and officers is we look at other options that have been discussed, whether they'd been brought forward by councillors or by residents, or businesses is understanding them better to see if that is or if there are any other, viable options, affordable or viable options.
one is welfare or community, want those changes other than remove the restrictions.
as a whole.
so yes, it is just small measures option B.
thank you Chair.
thank you letter, OK, transmit points, yes, I, I guess I do admire my, I guess I am to follow it up, I think that's probably more work that I think needs to be done before we where I'm we we're not agreeing what's gonna happen now, but the because we're really discussing whether it should be suspended or not.
well at that point, and they are there any hands, pressing hands, actually the amendment today we have Councillor Roberts first and then Councillor Whetstone, OK, lovely, can I can I just since Councillor Pope, well it's been mentioned by the what we're actually being asked to do here and there's been a comment in the chat about what option B is.
can I just read out the options for Members just to remind you, and the recommendations are members of the Board, to consider the petition and make a recommendation on how to proceed option A is to do nothing, so there'd be no alterations to the layout in response to this petition.
option B is to retain the public realm to scheme, but incorporate some amendments to help raise further awareness of the restrictions and see table 2 and Appendix A drawings is report, so and clearly there will be more work involved with taking that forward. I think I just wanted to I hope that helps the person put it in the chat and,
who did you say how do you handle Councillor Robert first and then Councillor Robertson, thank you, thank you, Chair I J, can I just clarify, are we gonna move into a discussion place already in the discussion right now?
chairman, you're muted.
my phone is ringing I wearing questions, but I can we can move shortly, you just know it's use a question or debate or debates allocated, are there any more questions or because they have a question time for councillors not to apologise, I just can't see everybody so hard on everybody else one but I'll as brief tonight so teams better I must accept the caution.
yeah, thank you to, so I sort of tend to slightly disagree with Councillor Pope, the the the that we need to or needs a sort of.
spend a lot of time going over the the the visual enhancements, the the the the short term, sort of quick wins, as Jamie refers to them simply because I, I think, one of the issues that we acknowledge with the scheme has been a people's awareness of it and we do know that a number of number of developers have been or have been have been caught out by the scheme without feeling like there was enough.
you know, they weren't made aware enough of of the the enforcements, so those those designs which you can see in Appendix A, to my mind, are all very low cost and very quick resolutions to that problem, some of my questions to Jamie released is sort of how what's what what a rough timescales if if we do want to go ahead and turn off,
improve the just the the the visual cues,
for drivers
thank you the.
option B with this, which is pretty much a very small elements of the red surfacing text, slow texts and a few other additional signs, I would envisage that we could get the detailed designs out within, say a month and then something on the ground within three months, so that's the sort of timescales just for those small additions and filleted and report where that would be to be funded from ending GTB members.
recommendations and then, if part of the recommendation is to have a further workshop and whatever comes from that workshop, then we'd have to look at design time programme time for.
any construction and, again, funding of any of those elements should they be supported. So I would imagine that we could probably be adding to your question, but, saying we, we could probably look to see if a workshop and understand that a few more of the issues being raised fairly quickly. I would hope if the will is there and that's what the JCB wishes officers to focus on, but I would say that we've got our existing workload, so we just need to be mindful of how much officer time and funding would have to go into. Some of these may be slightly larger options that are being discussed, but for option B as it stands, I would say we should be able to within three to four months to have something on the ground. Thank you Chair, thank you, John Key Chairman, you, we have two more hands raised Councillor Atkins and then Councillor Roberts, if you're ready to move on from that, yes, actually Councillor actions
yes, thank you, Chair, I was just seeking clarification because this is a HSC petition.
is here given to KCC, the recommendation is from GCC officers, but this sport is made up of borough and county members and unless them mistaken, apart from Councillor Bruno, I have not heard a KCC councillor speak on this issue at all.
shouldn't the decision here really rest with KCC for who then the borrower?
as is the KCC JSNA petition KCC officer recommendation.
I think that would be good to clarify that contractions.
and you've reminded me, in fact that you know KCC, I think residents get very confused as to what is responsible for what, and so it might be nice to have an office to just explain that, because I am reminded of when you know when these fines were imposed and and I think and it was said a KCC in post and then they didn't so so let's guess I think if officers could comment please and just to the benefit of everyone here as to who is responsible for what is that possible? Jamie,
it is yet one year on thank you.
so the hope is that initially the scheme has been raised by a Tunbridge Wells Borough Council with their five-year plan so that the the fundamental idea of the scheme is Tunbridge Wells scheme.
and KCC as the highway authority was best placed to bring in the implementation and project management of the scheme, and that's what took place, so it was is a joint scheme, but the idea of the scheme is Tunbridge Wells Borough Council's the petition did go as an e petition to KCC and once you receive a thousand British a thousand,
ref responses to the petition. It then needs to go to the appropriate order, which is this cases Tunbridge Wells GTB, and there was confusion at the last JCB as to whether it had got there in time, but I think we've obviously overcome that and we now managing that, but and it is if KCC Members wish to comment, obviously they are able to do that as
accounts member Becky Brunei has already mentioned, but it is a GTB joint decision I would suggest.
joint between KCC and Tunbridge Wells Borough Council, thank you Chair, thank you very much, John, having anything to add to that.
John second, I think thank you, Chair yeah, so I'll just another layer of of the explanation thanks thanks, Jamie it's pretty concise, is that Kent County Council or the highway authority, so they're responsible for all enforcement of yellow lines.
and parking contraventions and they across all the disc boroughs and districts in Kent, they devolve that to the boroughs and districts they they invited many years ago for the boroughs and districts do that work on their behalf and it's done under an agency agreement.
and the same is true of PR and PR to Kent County Council responsible for enforcing those schemes.
and they invited borrow well temperature Wells Borough Council to do that work on their behalf.
and that's what we're doing.
OK, I'm going to teach right now you on the coach, you say please, J, because I know I've packaged you to try and understand their relationship, and could you please add your sources?
as a county in Edinburgh very happy to Sarah I'm learning that my thoughts I I met this way or last week, I should say, with the Corporate Director of Highways, Cabinet Member for Highways and spoken about this in great depth
and, as John quite rightly said, crisis 80 pounds power for on-street parking to the trial district some years ago and I operate under an agency agreement or a licence.
this is purely a Tunbridge Wells Borough Council scheme, all the decisions were made by Tunbridge Wells Borough Council KCC cannot interject into the decision making and tell them that I they must take this down and they can't do what they're doing without taking control for on-street parking and fining back to KCC that may or may not happen in the future, but the decision as we are here today has not been my although there have been conversations with all 12 districts and it has been confirmed within the last couple of weeks that this was a decision to carry on with the fines made by Tunbridge Wells Borough Council.
and to start finding and continue finding was made by Trump, which was Borough Council, all of the revenue that has been generated, while over a million pounds goes to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council, not one single penny of that goes to Kent County Council and, as has been said,
if you look at the legislation that should be spent on Highways related matters, so really I would love to see that money ploughed back into potholes are repairing roads, but that money belongs to Tunbridge Wells Borough Council, therefore, at this moment in time KCC does not have any control over it and as this is a joint board then county councillors are entitled to vote.
for the recommendations at this board, but apart from that, we would not get involved in the decision making at this moment in time, because it is a TW BBC project and TW be say through the Cabinet Executive, are the decision makers?
OK, thank you, they say we, we've never asked the borough to carry out enforcement, for example, we have categorically not done so that was confirmed in the last couple of weeks by not only the corporate director of KCC but by the Executive at Tunbridge Wells Borough Council in a meeting with the Corporate Director of Highways from GCC.
thank you very much, thank you back to you, Councillor Atkinson, at answer your query or happy Ed, does I, I still like probably to obstruct him I want to come in here to speak about the bombing in 30 points.
I think John Strachey might want to come in to follow me at all the points and how that has been allocated, yes, I answered my query that thank you to the allocation via John habit, on your hand.
sorry, I can't see George and I I don't have my hand up, is there a specific question I don't say, Councillor Atkins, do you have a specific question, I I just add that there's possibly well there was a state that said that it expects me to the bar as certain as made 1 million pounds in voids.
and I think that probably should be clarified, but I think John you're probably best placed to say how that has been spent suicide in chasing defiance in turns out for Fine Gael, either the one guy with this, I think, is due to clarify snow because one minute house has gone directly into the into the Torres Bank that's over here.
to
are you clear on that question, is the question so so so the income from the fines I mean as an authority, we we could be happy if we didn't make any money on fines, what we're trying to do is get compliance and we've operated the whole scheme with a very, very sympathetic appeals process, so anyone that drove through PR to and felt that it was unfair that got a penalty charge notice has had the ability to appeal that and it would have been considered
within an appeals framework.
the HRA revenue from those signs has come to the Council and is subject to.
the cost of actually operating, implementing and operating the scheme, which is not cheap undertaking by any means.
and
the money hasn't been allocated or spent on this at this moment in time.
I see that
Jane has got her hand up and she can perhaps explain more and better than I.
thank you, John, thank you.
I'm sure I'm sure not not better but back and at the beginning of 2023, when the amounts of traffic were increasing through the middle of town.
we were asked to start enforcing because the scheme wasn't set up.
to wasn't designed to take the amount of traffic that was going through and subsequent to to COVID, which obviously during during that time there was a lot less traffic going through the middle of town.
we, we knew.
that there was going to be.
a change to moving traffic offences, legislation and that that did come in last year, but but we were therefore under the impression that Kent County Council would be taking responsibility for the enforcement of the bus lane now at that point in time.
TW B C didn't progress with with the enforcement but went to KCC who said that they would really rather we did the enforcement for them, but at that time we didn't know how many vehicles were going to contravene the restriction.
we didn't really know how much it was going to cost, so we, we said to KCC, that was perfectly fine, we would do the enforcement, but if we were to make a loss.
I, the implementation costs and the operational costs were more than the fines we were able to recover, then would they be prepared to underwrite those costs, and they they said that they couldn't underwrite the costs and that it would need to be at Tunbridge Wells's risk.
so therefore not knowing really what the implementation and operational costs would be, and not knowing what the associated income would be.
it was agreed that Tunbridge Wells would do the enforcement.
but
it would take the risk the financial risk, but therefore, if there was any reward that came with it, Tunbridge Wells would benefit from that, and that's where it came from that 212 word would retain any proceeds, it was because we were undertaking the cost risk associated with enforcing the scheme.
now, as it's transpired.
members are quite right there, there has been a lot of people that have infringed the enforcement they they have.
it has generated a million pounds and there has been a considerable amount of cost of implementation and cost of operation and the proceeds
as per the agreement that we have with KCC for the enforcement, they they the decision as to what will happen with those will be determined by the Tunbridge Wells members.
others have said, quite rightly, that you can spend the money on highways improvements, and that's that's absolutely the case.
we can also spend the money on on the enforcement on providing the service, but also we have taken legal advice and we can spend money.
on re reducing environmental pollution, which means that we can spend it on climate change projects, so we have taken legal advice.
and Members have been delivered that advice and they they will therefore be able to determine what happens to that money, so I hope that sort of clears.
queries the background of it for you.
sir, can I just come back on that, please another are the pig with their hands.
chairman, you're a mute.
I'm sorry if thank you Jane and I'll repeat myself again, and I thank you other other hands up as well. I was going to invite Peter back because he you have a sound knowledge of finances and no agreements between us, and are there any other hands up there who haven't spoken Chairman, we have hands up still from Paul Roberts, Peter Lidstone, Alan Lewis and Peter Oakford. Currently that's a hole, Roberts has been waiting for some time, so as Councillor, let's try, and thank you OK, so we'll have the ocean and Peter do you mind coming in after them, it's actually OK, absolutely. I will do it because I'd like to correct some of what ginger said, based on what I'd been told, OK, thank you, OK, OK, right, Councillor Roberts, but says to some degree that the the question was around because of the planning and transport cap, it refers back to this meeting by requiring the vast majority at this meeting about when enforcement was requested, so James explanation carry some way to clarify number it does actually say there were calls to introduce enforcement in January 2023 and requested Cavic see say you start what Jane said or which are lighter to continue the enforcement from March to June, or I've got slightly confused at what her answer, which sort of Tron aside, so that that's the one questioned the lavender and the other question was,
with the option day, can we add to that good the white list in the vehicles for residents as far that could not be a quick win, I probably at nil cost as well, I would have thought, so that there is not two questions and I'll be quiet.
can I quickly ask ask Jamie to talk about the whiteness centre vehicles or our officers and then come back to Cheyne to answer your first question, please?
I think it's probably best actually Shtokman shared, actually that show no trainer, so that okay, okay over TJ.
thank you, so it was early in 2023 that we were being asked to reinstate the public realm to enforcement and therefore.
that was when the agreement was, it was established with KCC they they asked 112 to to carry out the enforcement on their behalf, as we've already explained, in the same way as we have agency and agency agreement for.
on-street enforcement and at the mainland pier 1 was under one agreement and then P or two came along subsequently, and rather than KCC providing the enforcement, they asked us if we could provide the enforcement for them, hence we now have another agreement and 4 p or 1 p to whereby we carry out that enforcement, we retain any revenue but we pay any of the costs associated with it as as well regarding the
the white listing
it is operationally possible, it's not easy, but it's possible.
I think the design of the scheme would need to be checked, and that's not my aisle, that's that's Japanese island, in otherness I cannot, and my understanding is that the tyro would need to be amended in order to be able to do that.
and that's not a quick thing either and again, that's Jamie's aisle rather than mine,
yeah, I come back on that, were the code I mentioned before earlier on the more vehicles we allow through not pleasant road restrictions.
sir goes against the original ideas of reducing the traffic flows I do understand the residents would like that, but that's my put it back to John or Jane to see the implications of White listing 200 300 residents so that there may be some practical issues absolutely a traffic order would need to be altered to allow those to be exempt and that requires a consultation and some costs associated with that, although it's fairly minimal for the consultation.
and
year, which I'd need to think a little bit more about the safety, because we've been pushing for re.
less cars
so we do have more cars going through during those times, I think that needs to be thought about and the implications of that, and does it encourage other vehicles that see residents' cars going through do they think that they may have they are allowed to because they've just seen lots of other cars go through, so I do think we need to think carefully if that's the right way forward to white list next year.
OK, I think I think, Councillor Robert shoe you've proposed, it certainly suggests that it should be part of the of option B, but is there anything else you want to say in light of Jamie's comments?
only the less cousin, it is right that there has to be a cause for celebration, and so the idea of option pay, so it's gonna be further consultation, so the company that is, I 80 now something we are going to consider.
as the additional.
you know thoughts.
highest option bake.
yeah, so basically Jeremy we could bring that into options if option B is adopted by Members of this board, we could bring it in to action day.
perhaps I could just my thoughts on option B were as little state, so everything you see in the plans and on the description was option B. If you're bringing in other things, and there's lots of other discussions taking place in other proposals that could be looked at,
I am suggesting that we can do option B. Everything that's listed in option B, but if a workshop or something is going to be organised, that may be that's the time, so if you hold option B up with other measures, it's not really something that we can quickly get on to its. It's just brings up the whole lot, so I'm probably suggesting, can we keep option B neat and tidy injustice entirety, as shown on the report, and then think about the other suggestions separately, yes, and I think that would be nice to be driven by residents and and yes, so so I am content that that will Councillor Robertson races and you have you happy with that.
yes, I appreciate there has to be some shows.
a review of the risks, and I also think so yeah, I'm happy as long as it's.
you know, it is considered that option.
next weekend, OK, thank you, which we can bring in and who is an exquisite business, it is petty guessing that thank you, Minister, and then Alan Lewis, thank you, thank you Chair 92 outfit, or are I just a little bit confused within in some of the by around the the
the distinction between the scheme and enforcement.
because it is in my mind that creates the the potential scenario that you would introduce a scheme with restrictions, but not enforce it, which it seems quite confusing to me and possibly even dangerous if people then rely on a scheme which isn't being enforced from a kind of pedestrian perspective, so I guess maybe maybe one for Jamie.
it is, you know, all their precedents, where a restrictive scheme might be introduced into an area but not enforced, and if so, with that, you know, why would there be potential risks with that approach?
thank you Chair.
I'm not aware of him that there are lots of traffic regulation orders, you know no entry, no right turn movement orders that rely on people generally following the restriction just re, signing one in a road markings and rely on Kent police to enforce whether it's moving or speeding.
the the waiting restrictions or the the basket restrictions I
all again we have bus lanes that don't always have CCTV cameras on them, so I think it's probably a mixed bag and maybe can put to John Hughes used to the enforcement side of things he may well have some other comments to add, I'm sure in this instance there will wow if we didn't enforce the restrictions, what we've seen, what happens if we don't enforce people don't generally
see follow the signs, don't think no Slint for them, so I think the key to Mount Pleasant Road is the the enforcement.
I don't know whether John or Janet add anything more to that.
year General J
thank you Chair, I am happy to pick that up, I think one of the things that's affected PR too and other restrictions in Tunbridge Wells, and it was, it was not a national sort of trend or decision was the pandemic.
where attitudes changed, I mean I wasn't at Tunbridge Wells at the time when the pandemic struck, but I was in a neighbouring authority and we simply scaled down all of our enforcement operations and actually used our civil enforcement officers to emergency food distribution, which was a worthy task for them.
because there wasn't the work out on the street, but we didn't take up all the yellow lines or the time plates or anything like that the restrictions remained in place and we expected people to abide by them, although many people weren't going out at the time and the same is true of PPE I want to pay our two that we we relaxed the enforcement on PR and PR to as a consequence of the pandemic.
and the signs remained, although they remained with quite a lot of disregard for them, so there was a lot of traffic passing through at the time, and that's why we had quite an extensive communications programme to raise awareness of the scheme we issued warnings for.
a reasonable amount of time and before implementing the they actually enforcement.
so having restrictions that are don't have any teeth is is not really a good idea in any way, shape or form, because the public soon sort of cotton on to it, and then, when you re reintroduce those restrictions or in introduce them in you,
it's a matter of trying to engage with the public to avoid issuing more PCSOs, and he can you really want to say where if we, if we should, none will be more than happy, we'd have to go and find something else to do without eyes but yeah so I don't know if that actually answers your question Councillor but I hope it's helpful to say thank you.
this Jane was coming.
I don't know the inside the children, and I need to add to that OK, thanks to OK and who is next chancellor Councillor Lewis Cheney, Councillor Lewis.
thank you very much.
I think the the Christian.
thought about what we were discussing, is this about the people in it, but we've got people, the New Road in Dudley Road are hanging on by their fingernails, I I, with this issue and to say
with all due respect the allowing them to use
the the p or 2 to drive through increases traffic is a bit spurious because it actually reduces traffic, isn't it?
in the it reduces the journeys and they have to take around the town centre, and we've had we've heard about the circling around I had the misfortune, to try and park in Gravesend once it got stuck in the one-way system and it is, it's not it's no fun to to to do to get home
is even worse, and I don't think we should be penalised in April for living in New Road in Dudley Road just because they're living next to the
the the the past K, and I think we should do everything we can to believe he agrees these poor people.
now I think as well in terms of money and or or and how much the improvements are going to cost a member taking in 1 1.5 billion pounds.
I think that's enough to to pay for the improvements myself.
you know the at the money isn't isn't an object, we're making a huge profit on this and we need to think about that and to ensure that the scheme works works, the pinnacle of your very Dudley Rye work, so the traders of Tunbridge Wells and for the through the pedestrians and cyclists and bus users and car users as a whole around the whole of temperatures.
I'm not cynical saying you know this.
this debate isn't it?
boundary historic landscape yeah well, I haven't, although we've melted the debate, while we sought to clarify for targets Ms Kane, if you've got a specific question, the officers, caterers, you is learned and I'm saying what I think okay cabinet and I say myself that we should explore options they, but also we need to look definitely at.
the white listing and look at the experiences of the residents in the new Dudley Road.
and the the central temperatures as well.
because it affects all of all the temperatures.
any traffic situation impacts anywhere from Eridge Road to to the I 21, so we need to look at it carefully and consider all our options, thank you very much and we've got to get it right, and yes, it takes time sometimes, yes, but we want to do this expedient as possible.
one of them is next year said Nasa, thank you to attendance.
thank Sarah and I certainly don't want to get into now. He said she said, et cetera, about how the decisions were made and how we can get past a move into finding a solution for the scheme. But what I would like to do is just to read out, and now that I've got from Simon Jones, that's the as it has come, and Simon Jones says you don't know it was the Corporate Director of Highways ICSA, so he's the most senior Highways Officer in Kent, and he said the statement is wrong. At no stage have we specifically asked Tunbridge Wells to carry out enforcement. It was noted the 5 1 was signed off by previously the Paul Carter, but for phase two has always been them in brackets Tunbridge Wells Borough Council asking us if we would permit them to enforce as we allow them to enforce on street parking. I hope this House he then confirmed that he had a conversation with the chief executive of Tunbridge Wells, who also confirm that that is the case. So if there is any dispute, and it's gonna lead anywhere, can I suggest the officers talk to each other if they really need a result that it should resolve it? But as far as case they say are concerned, what I've just read out was a statement from Simon Jones. So I think what we now need to do is to have a look at how we can resolve this issue. If there is an issue I personally, and this is probably gonna, be quite unpopular with our visitors, I don't believe that any street should be given away asked to go through this area, because what will happen if some drivers witnessed cars driving through there, they're going to think that it's OK for all cars to drive through there. They will be following them and I will start racking up more fines, so I don't think that solution is a solution. We have to find a solution that works and I believe, kids at area as it was meant to be.
a pedestrian site zone or pedestrian cipher zone than it was previously, but but that's my opinion, thank you Sara, thank you and action, and yes, we've got to get it right, but if it happens you've got to get it right and,
he informed residents that at the same time, we can have that conversation to understand that it's not a knee-jerk reaction, because there are consequences and other any other hands Juliet Sarah, we have the last hand up currently now and that is Councillor Gruen I said at the last hand-up his Councillor Bruno and you know thank you.
thank you, Madam Chairman, I've got a a couple or two questions and or or a comment I will, unfortunately, Councillor Oakford, I I might say the opposite to you.
I, I think it's unfair that the residents of of the York, Road and Dudley Road take responsibility for other drivers going down through the road. We could. We can't we have our own responsibility of our own cars, and I'm very aware of the effect on the residents in their time and money the and stress that they do because of this, so I want to get it back on to something that Jamie spoke about and that was about the tyro that they would have to have a consultation. Just a question with this, if we want to expedite this issue, if it is, in fact something that we want to do regarding a white listing, is, would it be possible to have an experimental tyro in which case we don't need a consultation? That's the first question and the second question is written about the signs of to KCC adopt this scheme, and I think it's some time this year as at March or April. If there are fines, where does the the the money go from from the fines thank you.
not sure any decisions being made to adopted at the moment, but officers
Jamie here in the future, I do not today.
I might need to take further advice on the experimental order, and whether the bus gate or rogue traffic regulation order needs consultation for further exemptions, I'm not sure I can answer that.
now, but I can certainly work with John Jane to see whether that's required a nurse John or Jane, you know the answer now.
John McKay.
Jane has her hand-raised, thank you Jane I'm so sorry, I can't see any slurry, and I don't know the answer to the experimental order, as I said, orders are not my forte and I think we would need to find out and what are what I do know the answer to and is that,
we well we've been asked to extend our an agency agreement to continue enforcing a PR to until the end of June, whereupon KCC will take the enforcement back.
and they will then be in receipt of any surpluses that there are from the scheme.
thank you.
chairman, I am mindful that Peter outfit's hand is to race that might be historical, thank you, sir, historically, or are you coming back Peter?
legacy, I'm just wading through the psyche of at Surrey.
OK, thank you very much, Prif we are paying attention Chairman, there are no further hands raised, thank you no further hands raised, so we need to move towards.
the board deciding which recommendation it's going to go, for, so can we open up no more debate or have proposals or overdue members to to discuss this place.
hands now raised from Councillor Pope and Councillor Lidstone, thank you, Chairman, Councillor Pope central service, and thank you.
thank you.
I say I'm looking at the the report and
there was an option B to enter it, it does answer and address a number of the
Tuesday are currently in are occurring with with the PR too, and people driving through unaware that there they've entered a restricted zone.
but it doesn't have been particularly the red paint on the roads, but it doesn't really deal with everything.
it still leaves mountain road as a as a teddy, a confusing dead end during operation, I've I've seen people turning around either in Manston right, usually where the pedestrians are crossing or even driving onto.
Mount Pleasant and turning around in the middle of the junction, between your crowds and where you enter pr 1 to get into five ways, so I I I'm I'm concerned that.
although the proposed option, the quick win option, does resolve some issues, it actually leaves how a lot of problems.
apart from the Bolton Road end.
there are an
outside year that there is the long loop for Dudley Road and York, Road residents and which is also similar for nationwide residents and which has increased.
a la PIP, which is probably about half an hour to Niall, which isn't ideal and actually means people are actually burning more fuel, trying to find a parking space.
the idea is that the people have raised the issue, that some people are using Dudley and Ygritte as a shortcut to avoid two sets of traffic lights.
another option was already there before, but if they are to that, and I can imagine that perhaps some trucks might be using it as a way to access not some road as well as driving down Newton Road, although the there is a problem with the turning, if you're coming if you're a big truck trying to use Newton Road turning left and left again it's very tight.
type, I actually have suggested a further change to the existing.
design which would actually remove some of the cart, certainly removes the confusion, do anybody Dragon Mountain right, and the biggest confusion is actually for people who are visiting the town for the first time I've seen people looking confused, I know that a restriction, but I have no idea where they're meant to go. It's not obvious that you should have to do a U-turn. I wouldn't expect her to do a U-turn.
for a restriction, usually there'd be some exit or escape route that allows you to avoid it.
and, I think, quite listing residents on York, Road and Dudley right, I think that would actually just encourage more people to diagnose the town centre and the first-time visitors.
to end up picking up signs, or at least the
invited to have treated well, and what happens is there either pass or they are pale?
but they are, they just makes them not want to come back to the town again, so they think that's good publicity.
however, I think, even though I think there are still a lot of problems with the design, even with red, paint on the road and some of the signage changes or additions.
I think we will, we would need to do more than just the simple changes in option B.
and I think the core of that change that I've been prepared using is that any cause exclamation right monsoon radio credit, Dudley right would actually turn south on Mount.
Pleasant and drive down to the traffic lights and I wouldn't be allowed to enter months and ride and this would actually make the crossing of mountain road for pedestrian safer because very few vehicles would be entering once and right apart from buses and taxis or vehicles would be allowed to exit Munson right onto Mount Pleasant so it would actually have a reduction traffic of Munson right but it would mean that some of the traffic that currently is going across Mount Pleasant.
we now go down unpleasant to the traffic lights or otherwise, I think the confusion from Winston Reid would still exist, I think if we were to introduce white listing large number of cars for residents on York, Road and Dudley Road, that would also cause confusion and encourage more people to get fine, so you don't know the town.
that's a summary of what I I W recommends, the changes should be.
if, if we're going to keep the restriction and I do believe the restriction is worth keeping, but I do think we need to make bigger changes than an option B in the longer run, and if we're not going to make this, I would struggle to support.
keeping the restriction in place because I think it needs to be made easier for for residents and clearer and less confusing to people visiting the town for the first time, I think I'll leave it at that I think that's hopefully understandable thank you so much as it is spectacular and can I just clarify and you're concerned about option B that doesn't go far enough, but it has been said earlier that that work would go on after if indeed would adopt option B, then we could still.
so it could still be looked at the signature suggestion and and putting on the table, yes, I will content, I would expect option B as an interim, but I think we need to do more, yes, but we need to do something.
time is in essence here today in discussing the parents, isn't it between doing something quickly, but not recognising the implications, and they're doing it thoroughly and properly, and that's that, but that is that which has been suggested early on in the meeting that maybe there's a price to drop that John said could be done followed by a large breaching that could be very well run and then we very quickly get some information together with some senior officers and move forward, and I don't know if that makes sense is that they're trying to send you're trying to support Councillor Pope. Yes, I think I think putting the red paint on the writers, as proposed in option bays, as the one thing that makes credit to the there, are the visible queues that will make people think 0 I shouldn't be going here, but I don't think it goes far enough. No, no one can think
thank you very much for your contribution and what I think I said we got you have Councillor Whetstone and Councillor Munday, waiting to speak, Natalie Councillor Richardson and Councillor Munday, thank you, thank you Chair, I that I retract my previous disagreement with Councillor Pope because I interpreted his comments to two to be instead of rather than in addition to option B so on on that basis.
yeah, you know, I mean, I'm aligned with him, I the residents at the end of Sally's piece, I believe, asked for clarity and transparency now I think those are two things that, as elected officials elected Members sorry,
we are, you know, we, we were bound to give to residents, I think they're perfectly reasonable asks, and there clearly hasn't been enough of of those with this scheme in terms of clarity, I think clarity to people coming to the town and who don't know the area and who end up accidentally driving three through and being fined as a result so absolutely supportive option B 2 to provide that in terms of transparency and we have talked figures I've consistently insisted the that we need to ring fenced income.
so that any highways changes that we need to make to improve the scheme or come from that funding, but this isn't a cash cow for Tunbridge Wells Borough Council taking advantage of residents, and I think that's really important, so I've consistently insisted on that I will speak to that hopefully at the planning transportation CAB as well.
certainly, at the very least, we need to ensure that the all of any remedial work is paid for from that money before we look at other uses for it.
and then I think the final point is just you know poor residents have been there's been so much back and forth on this and I I think that's option B is fantastic because it gives us a tangible deliverable within or within a reasonably short space of time when it comes to Highways and you know and I would push us to.
and put in place a some sort of consultative workshop, or in a face-to-face meeting with residents, I would like to say that we commit ourselves as a board to having that in place by the next JCB in three months. I appreciate that is always dangerous to commit yourself to something like that when you know you know show that you are able to deliver on, but I mean that's, to my mind, is the sort of
tie type, you know, turn turnarounds and priority. We need to give this because otherwise, every year the residents are or are just going to feel like. They've been battered back again and again and where we were kind of blocking things, so we want to get this moving as quickly as possible so that that's my views and I am chair and I'll be definitely supporting option B and and hopefully we can, we hope we can agree on that as well. Thank you yes, I'm very, very much in agreement that something is moving towards, such as it possibly can, and as long as we get the right so
so yes, and I feel I've got to support us for option B. So, and who are stronger hand up last hand up in this section at the moment, Chairman is Mark Montague, thank you, Councillor Mantegna, the Chair. I also agree option visas as a stepping stone rather than a final solution. Yes, absolutely though we get to that final solution, I do think it's worthwhile exploring what listing the residents know. We've had two figures bandied about, tonight's mum was about 74 people, Yohan was through 300, so no, it's got to be done 100, with a number of houses, whereas I thought 74 was potentially the number of permits that we have issued, so I would say, only issue permits for those people actually live in those roads otherwise
I just monitor the increase in traffic,
do you agree with Councillor Piper, I think maybe a South only flow?
might be the owner, the proposed way, going forward and stopped all traffic going north now around the war memorial.
the other thing I would like to raise is that I've got a couple of friends who wanted to go to Camden Road, they plugged into their satnav, and it took them past the War Memorial, so I don't know whether there is any way we can contact Nasa of the satellite manufacturers to get them to block that route.
minutes,
sustainable tourism, if I am I, this different manufacturers out there and we have struggled in the rural areas where the lorries come the wrong way, and if anybody knows or has contacts, it would be good to investigate that, I guess but the two officers know anything catering officers into side if they know anything about sadness because despite the point isn't it?
the Chair, we can certainly try and make contact with them.
if it is always difficult with the satnav companies, but generally they yeah, a lot of they're getting right, but obviously in this case I haven't introduced that on their satnav, but I'll I'll take that back and see what we can do about that because I needed drawing an unfamiliar area was missed at all. Yes, we have more than you look at the road signs these days she did yeah yeah, thank you, thank you for raising that any more hands up
chair, if I can just say on the satnav issue, I think the one of the difficulties around PR to and in the paywall is that they're not 24 hours, not 24 7.
and I think possibly the the the satnav companies have a bit more difficulty with that if it was an absolute restriction ii 24 7 then it's an easy one to sort programme in, but I I think, because it's only sort of from 9 to 6, it is more difficult, but that is something we can look into certainly good, thank you, thank you.
so anybody else, any more contributions Councillor Roberts, would like to contribute Chairman, thank you, thank you, Councillor Roberts, thank you, Chair, I'll just like to we agree with Councillor Ron Di on his zoological thoughts.
in reality, whilst option B is there, but it doesn't actually do anything for the residents at all, and we definitely have to sort of do something for him slightly nervous that.
I suppose it's Councillor Wells, but in a way the Bill would have a deadline and we need to get reports out or have a meeting by slightly nervous about anonymity, yes is cancelled, Eastern suggested some degree to stop being restricted, residents might never attend because they work and no sort of thing, so I'm assuming he will have the consultation and then will be a full consultation with the residents in that road.
yeah, he's not excited out so that we could, but I'm not too sure how we articulate that in this meeting 2 to ensure that we will maintain this momentum.
yeah yeah, I certainly support you in have option B with the proviso we do something else. Thank you yes, I think I think I heard people be reassured that Vice Chairman and I am very keen it's been stored as fast as possible, and certainly after this meeting, if indeed the auction day is adopted, then we will and I have any queries me, patients, that we will try and push this forward and for the next its April meeting, I think I just wondered maybe we'll carry on with the by Chair, but I wonder if we need to formally amend the recommendation just to make mean I noted this so that we have all admitted it will be made, but I think that's why I keep repeating myself. Uribe Wellesley military planes
several times, and I just want to keep repeating it no as chairman just just a quick message for you, Councillor Brunei, would just like it noted that she is having difficulty with internet, so has I'm going to relay her message to you exactly it says, could you say I support option B but with additional amendments?
thank you Chairman, that's fine with additional amendments, yes, but I think she's reading directly from report points, be I'd say, with some amendments I understand the I thank you, thank you, Councillor Bruno, and I think it's.
if it is she she still connected so we can legally take her vote if you like.
I am it might drop out, although I am just talking in the night that's great, thank you,
k any other members to the final call, because it sounds julia's if there is a majority in favour of B, and but can I call on any other GTP members to
final call that they want to make any comments.
I see no other hands raised now chairman, so you may be ready to move to consider the petition and make the recommendation, yes, could we move to do that, then and could could we ensure that everyone because we're on technology that all the members of the board are connected and able to indicate I mean, perhaps we ought to have a show of hands or somehow do you suggest you need to ensure that we,
might it be better if we say
if people do not support, be that they make that known with a show of hands, if you're saying you feel that you have a majority Chairman, that might be the easiest solution or the most sensible solution, and yes, I wanted to be absolutely right so,
I can't see everybody's hands, so there are those who raised their hands who are not in favour of supporting recommendation B to retain public realm to scheme, but incorporate some amendments to help rate for for I'd fallen over my own teeth help raise further awareness of the restrictions if they raise their hands. They'll move to the top of my screen and I will be able to capture those
so anybody not in favour, but I can remind visiting members that you are not voting, thank you, yes,
I see no hands raised chairman, so that would suggest all are in favour.
question can be carried out recommendation, the board recommends option B.
so can we add character, thank you and Chairman just for absolute clarity, there have been no other suggestions that I am recording for specific amendments, is that correct, that is my understanding, we so you can any other Member disagree with me.
no.
so you're going to follow officer recommendations, that's noted, thank you for option B. Thank you, Chairman, thank you OK.
can we move on then to agenda item 6 and people who have been patiently waiting active travel update?
so I can now welcome Hilary Smith economic Development Manager to introduce the report Hillary thank you for your occasions, absolutely fine, thank you very much and I will be very brief, as this information is, and this report on me is for information only it's a show report on two projects that are being funded by active travel England and both of the projects are being taken forward in partnership between Tommy Jones Borough Council and Kent County Council and both are currently at an interim stage and but are proceeding well, which is why we wanted to just put this informative report before you.
and we are planning more engagement on on both of the projects with with local communities and representative parish representatives.
in the next couple of months and and then the intention is to to bring back a more detailed report, as the projects will be meeting and their final stages, and by the time of the next J TB meeting, so that was all I wanted to say really at this stage, thank you very much very.
are there any questions from members that you can say July?
then no raised hands.
thank you, thank you very much, that was so that's just, so can we many than that the report is noted.
highlighted. Thank you now thanks very much and agenda item 7 highway works programme and we now move to Parry works programme. Julian Cox SCC Highways Manager will present Julian. Are you still with us parliamentary Chair? Thank you very much and outpatients, obviously, because of the the time constraints, I will walk straight this if that's OK, so I'll just go page by page. It's just the standard generic report that comes out to refugees by
so if there are any questions for page 29
Page 30.
none.
by 31 known page 32
none.
33, None 34, None
the 35 and 36 Nana none and 37.
9 38 none 39.
none and 40 and 41, none just leaves 42, and that's the end.
Councillor Atkins has put his hand up, he pipped her at the post Councillor EdStone, sorry, Councillor Atkins, I misled you up now, OK, transactions, yeah sorry, I couldn't take my Foster back to page 38 sorry actually a patient with the site and the the vessel road rely with their
so how is it how they are progressing, I guess it has not been questioned.
yeah, I mean, it's, as you know, at the last Chertsey bridge, John Farmer, came from KCC say, it's actually being led by the the Major projects team over at KCC. As far as I'm aware, it's still progressing from the update that we had from John at the last JCB and the the detailed design is progressing, following on from the comments that were made, particularly around the cyclists, and the alternative access arrangements for them. My understanding is that John still looking at those, what I can do is dropped on a line and ask him if there's not. I can come back to you outside this meeting if that's OK, Councillor yeah, I appreciated thank you very much
thank you.
and and Councillor Whetstone as it is written, I felt like JCB bingo, but I've got there.
so.
Dylan, it might actually be a question better answered by Councillor barrington King on page 42 really pleased to see the a crossing feasibility study on Burton Road.
on the way.
I, I think, about Ryan saying there was a there was last year or a sort of very serious.
a collision between a beacon or an inner child by Temple Grove Academy, so just wondered if we could just.
do you know what is finding a little bit more, whether this crossings by the school is that the the intention here on that became very crossing?
thank you, Councillor Ledston, I, if Paul, is able to comment on this because it's combined member grant, obviously it's been funded by Polser, whose member grant it again. I'm not trying to pass the buck, it will be dealt by the highway improvements. Team are obviously maintenance issues that dealt by myself and my team don't tend to come up in these meetings. I don't know if Paul wants to make any comments at this stage. Yes, that I'll give you an update Gillian which, John Armstrong anything we're aware the unfunded yeah
survey.
of the traffic there, which I think is in progress and just about be finalised, and when I was first elected we don't like over six years now that I had the AKC Sylvester's out several times to that particular area looking at the possibility and feasibility of putting in a zebra crossing there but my making things safer for sure and each time the response and I think there was at least three or 49.
was the sight lines were very, very difficult, but that doesn't mean that we can't do anything, so let's get the numbers in, let's see what we can do, and then we're working, empirical information and see if we can come up with some remedial mitigation and two results that make life safer for the people who care, but thank you,
thank you very much, Councillor Barrett again.
in fact, and that brings us to the end, attract high calibre Councillor Roberts has his handwriting, not sure I'm sorry, Councillor Robert, thank you.
just a very quick on a on page 36 developer funded works is currently reference number TW, which the parish and there's one in Pembury, House nest, a new junction opposite, the hospitals going.
it is available online to review
or do we have to wait for them to be published?
with planning it's normally a case of, obviously the public consultation will be done on the schemes if or if required, a lot of them with the sort of developer works lots of them could be under 2 7 8 works, which is essentially where we give permission to that developers to do something on the highway which has normally gone through planning already, obviously particularly in relation to housing developments and the sort of improvements that they all do.
it will come out into the public arena if required, a lot of them are society 2 7 8 agreements will have gone through that public arena in terms of the planning process, and then it's just a case of something that's identified within that planning processes and implemented by the developer alongside Casey say so I can ask individual questions of that team regarding that specific scheme if that would help.
beige tabloid honouring okay, and I thank you.
thank you.
OK, thank you very much, cheerio, and thank you Chairman.
member contributions, so moving on, then to item 8, which is the topics for future meetings.
I would like to in line for tenders that if they would like to raise it, please excuse my dog.
that is, I would like to raise a topic for a future meeting, they should first are subject to the appropriate honour in order to obtain necessary professional advice, including costings and resource implications, only once that advice has been received should it be submitted in advance for consideration at a future meeting, I'd also like to remind Members that, given the current exceptional times that we are currently going through, budgetary constraints are likely to feature heavily on any suggestions going forward.
items already proposed for the next meeting.
our highways works, update concrete roads, update Julian I think you're going to bring that forward and because we pushed it off this agenda, didn't we are active? Yes, active travel update and highways improvement plans, which is something I've been pushing to to get on this agenda and and of course to any follow up from today's main agenda item, because hopefully we will be able to have a I'd like to suggest to board members that we could her hopefully having agenda item on there too to
say where we're at, in terms of PR to say, would that be in order would members be happy with that?
yes, thank you, yeah.
thank you Chairman, I note that fewer agenda-setting meeting yeah, thank you and any other comments from any other members, please.
any hand surgery no hands, no hands, so we're very rapidly approaching the end, and I'm sure you're all delighted to know that, but I would like to particularly thank again the residents for your patience and your contributions and we will be pushing this forward to get some some results, and I I don't doubt it will be quite a bit of hard work, but let's move this forward and not lose momentum and and I'm so sorry that you've had to.
appear to wait so long, but thank you so much for taking the trouble to be here and the date of the next meeting, I haven't got written on my piece of paper here other than we know it, so it provides at 6.00, so may I thank you very much, all of you for your contributions and and wish you a very good evening. Thank you. Meetings closed
and for their luggage, OK, thank you, sir, thank you.
- 1 Apologies for Absence, opens in new tab
- 2 Declarations of Interest, opens in new tab
- 3 Notification of Persons Wishing to Speak, opens in new tab
- Minutes , 02/10/2023 Joint Transportation Board, opens in new tab
- Notice of Petition received by Kent County Council, opens in new tab
- JTB Jan 15 epetition Final, opens in new tab
- Drawing 1.1 - Do Minimum Opt, opens in new tab
- Drawing 2 - Enhance existing Opt Rev1, opens in new tab
- Drawing 4 - Calverley Rd Sign Opt, opens in new tab
- Drawing 6.1 - Do Minimum Opt, opens in new tab
- 240105_JTB Report on Active Travel Jan 2024_hs, opens in new tab
- Tunbridge Wells Highway Works Programme Report 15th January 2024, opens in new tab
- 9 Topics for Future Meetings, opens in new tab
- 10 Date of the Next Meeting, opens in new tab