Agenda and minutes
PDF 172 KBVenue: Webcasting - Virtual. View directions
Contact: Clare Rendell Email: c.rendell@somersetwestandtaunton.gov.uk
Webcast: View the webcast
| No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Apologies
To receive any apologies for absence. Additional documents: Minutes: An apology was received from Councillor Marcus Kravis. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Minutes of the previous meeting of the Executive
To approve the minutes of the previous meeting of the Committee. Additional documents: Minutes: (Minutes of the meeting of the Executive held on 20 January 2021 circulated with the agenda)
Resolved that the minutes of the Executive held on 20 January 2021 be confirmed as a correct record.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Declarations of Interest
To receive and note any declarations of disclosable pecuniary or prejudicial or personal interests in respect of any matters included on the agenda for consideration at this meeting.
(The personal interests of Councillors and Clerks of Somerset County Council, Town or Parish Councils and other Local Authorities will automatically be recorded in the minutes.)
Additional documents: Minutes: Members present at the meeting declared the following personal interests in their capacity as a Councillor or Clerk of a County, Town or Parish Council or any other Local Authority:-
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Public Participation
The Chair to advise the Committee of any items on which members of the public have requested to speak and advise those members of the public present of the details of the Council’s public participation scheme.
For those members of the public who have submitted any questions or statements, please note, a three minute time limit applies to each speaker and you will be asked to speak before Councillors debate the issue.
Temporary measures during the Coronavirus Pandemic Due to the Government guidance on measures to reduce the transmission of coronavirus (COVID-19), we will holding meetings in a virtual manner which will be live webcast on our website. Members of the public will still be able to register to speak and ask questions, which will then be read out by the Governance and Democracy Case Manager during Public Question Time and will either be answered by the Chair of the Committee, or the relevant Portfolio Holder, or be followed up with a written response. Additional documents: Minutes: Mr P Bisatt spoke on agenda item 8, East Street and St James Street, Taunton:- 1. Why was it proposed to exclude buses from East Street, and force them to use a much longer and at times, heavily congested route via The Crescent and Upper High Street? This seemed completely at odds with the wider aim of encouraging the use of public transport on environmental grounds. Town centre improvements should result in improved conditions for buses, not make them worse. The Report did not address this issue at all. 2. How would the permanent loss of 3 bus stops on The Parade, and 2 stops in East Street, be addressed? Where would they be replaced, and what would be the knock-on effects for the streets in which they had to be located? 3. Why was it proposed to allow general traffic to use East Street one-way during peak periods? This would require cyclists to use a contraflow lane in an unpleasant situation, where there would potentially be heavy vehicles travelling in the opposite direction, and cause East Street to be visually dominated by road markings and other traffic management paraphernalia. It would also prevent or restrict a future redesign of The Parade befitting its historic role as the town's market place, rather than a traffic roundabout. 4. Why was no action apparently being taken to close North Street and Corporation Street to general traffic, even though £20m of taxpayers money was spent 10 years ago on the 'Third Way' to enable traffic to avoid these streets? 5. What was the wider strategy for the future management of traffic in North Street, Bridge Street, Corporation Street, Hammet Street and others within the town centre? Should not the proposals for East Street be considered as part of such a wider strategy with appropriate public consultation, as was the case with the 2008 Town Centre Area Action Plan? 6. Why was the council proposing to permanently exclude buses from East Street when this would be contrary to Policy Tr9 of its adopted Town Centre Area Action Plan? Yours faithfully, Philip Bisatt, MRTPI (Rtd), CMILT
The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation responded:- 1. The closure of East St was a temporary scheme that was initially introduced to allow social distancing as non-essential retail was allowed to reopen in July 2020 following the first national lockdown. This continued throughout the year as social distancing continued and into the busy Christmas period. Once this was over, we entered another lockdown we took the decision to retain the current scheme to enable social distancing essential shopping and click and collect queues. As we carried out work on a more permanent design for East Street, we continued to engage with SCC to work on further projects that would help to alleviate traffic congestion around the town centre which included how and where the buses operated. Traffic modelling to assess the impact of any permanent scheme for East Street would be undertaken by SCC. However, ... view the full minutes text for item 101. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Executive Forward Plan
To receive items and review the Forward Plan. Additional documents: Minutes: (Copy of the Executive Forward Plan, circulated with the agenda).
Councillors were reminded that if they had an item they wanted to add to the agenda, that they should send their requests to the Governance Team.
Resolved that the Executive Forward Plan be noted. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This matter is the responsibility of Executive Councillor for Planning and Transportation, Councillor Mike Rigby.
Climate Positive Planning: Interim Guidance Statement on Planning for the Climate Emergency (the Statement) has been produced in response to the Council’s Climate Emergency declaration and identification of an action within the Carbon Neutrality and Climate Resilience (CNCR) Action Plan. Additional documents: Minutes: During the discussion, the following points were raised:- · Councillors thanked the officers for their hard work on the report. · Councillors queried how the document could be used to enforce planning applications. The Strategy Specialist advised that the document would strengthen advice given to applicants and also guide officers in the advice they gave but it could not be used to enforce, it would be used to compliment other policies that were already in place. · Councillors advised that it was useful information for the Planning Committee and that they would be keen to have a member briefing on the document. The Strategy Specialist advised that a session had been arranged for the Planning Committee to attend.
Resolved that the Executive approved:- 2.1That Climate Positive Planning: Interim Guidance Statement on Planning for the Climate Emergency (the Statement) was approved as additional explanation and guidance to support existing adopted planning policies. 2.2That approval of future updates to the Statement were delegated as follows: (a) Minor amendments including textual and visual changes and enhancements to be delegated to the Director for Development and Place in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation. (b) Updates relating to changes in national Government legislation and guidance, or the need to reference or update reference to other local or national evidence or strategy documents to be delegated to the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation in consultation with other fellow Executive Members. (c) More significant updates beyond those listed above to be delegated to Executive Committee. 2.3That Members noted that the Statement was purely to provide additional explanation and guidance to support existing adopted planning policies it was not policy in itself, and that the status of the document for approval would hold no weight in the decision making process on planning applications. Any alterations to existing adopted planning policy, or proposals for new planning policies relating to planning for the Climate Emergency would be brought forward through formal processes associated with Local Plan review and production of the Local Plan to 2040. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Safeguarding Policy
This matter is the responsibility of the Leader of the Council, Councillor Smith-Roberts.
To seek approval for an updated Safeguarding Policy. Additional documents: Minutes: During the discussion, the following points were raised:- · Councillors highlighted it was an important time to consider the report, especially as the country was about to come out of a national lockdown. · Councillors were pleased to see this Policy was being updated, especially considering how important the Policy was. · Councillors thanked officers for their hard work on the Policy and report. · Councillors highlighted that they wanted updated training sessions on Safeguarding. The Community Resilience Manager advised that he would arrange some training sessions for councillors. · Concern was raised on what happened if a councillor needed to discuss a complex safeguarding case with officers and whether they would be able to share data with them. The Community Resilience Manager advised he would ensure that a process was set up for such complex cases. · Councillors agreed that it was important that they could provide support for their vulnerable residents.
Resolved that the Executive:- 2.1Approved the Safeguarding Policy as at Appendix A; and 2.2Approved delegation be provided to the relevant Corporate Director in consultation with the portfolio holder, to make any subsequent amendments required as a result of legislative or operational changes. The Safeguarding Policy would be reviewed annually and approved by the Senior Management Team. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
East Street and St James Street, Taunton
This matter is the responsibility of Executive Councillor for Planning and Transportation, Councillor Mike Rigby.
This report is split into two recommendations, which contribute to the same goals and objectives. The first details a plan to increase participation in active travel, reduce private car and public transport use whilst enabling social distancing in Taunton town centre, centred around new interventions on East Street. The second seeks authorisation for SWT Officers to work with the Highway Authority to make a permanent traffic regulation order on St James Street, following the successful 12-month trial closure which ended earlier this year. Additional documents: Minutes: During the discussion, the following points were raised:- · Councillors thanked the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation and officers for their work on the scheme. · Councillors queried whether the work on engaging and consulting with the disability groups would continue. The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation advised he was in continuous talks with the disability groups to ensure the appropriate support was given. · Councillors queried whether the timings for blue badge holders was flexible. The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation advised that the timings would not be rigid, which would allow the blue badge holders to access all the shops they required. · Councillors were pleased that the parking for blue badge holders would be flexible. The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation highlighted that Somerset County Council would make additional disabled parking available in the surrounding streets to support the scheme in East Street. · Councillors queried whether the additional spaces would be permanent. The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation advised that it would run in line with the temporary closure of East Street. · Councillors queried why the times of 8-10am were used for blue badge holders. The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation advised that he did not want parking to encroach into the wider use of the space for pedestrianisation. · Councillors queried whether the barrier put in place at East Street would be removed at the end of the temporary closure. The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation advised that there would be a barrier and that he expected by the end of the temporary closure, the traffic layout would have changed. He further advised that traffic modelling would be carried out whilst East Street was closed. · Concern was raised on how pedestrians would be made aware that East Street would be a shared space with many different users. The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation explained that it would be a joint responsibility of all the different users, so motorists, cyclists and pedestrians would be safe whilst using East Street. There would also be additional safety signage put in place. · Councillors were pleased to support the closure of East Street as it provided space for safe social distancing, especially during the Covid Pandemic. · Councillors were please to support the closure of St James Street as it had supported the creation of the Independent Shopping Quarter which had proved a success. · Councillors queried the timescale for the additional consultation. The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation advised that it would not be a one off consultation but that it would be continuous during the closure to keep dialogue open with the different user groups. · Councillors requested clarity on the terms of engagement. The Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation requested that officers discussed the terms direct with councillors. · Councillors thanked the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation for his engagement with the disability groups. · Concern was raised on the connections to active travel and that councillors did not want the inclusion of cyclists and ... view the full minutes text for item 105. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Local Validation Checklist
This matter is the responsibility of Executive Councillor for Planning and Transportation, Councillor Mike Rigby.
This report seeks approval to adopt the Local Validation Checklist (LVC) following a public consultation. The Local Planning Authority (LPA) is required by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) to review the LVC every two years. Additional documents: Minutes: During the discussion, the following point was raised:- · Councillors thanked officers for their work on the report and were happy to support the recommendations.
Resolved that the Executive:- 2.1Approved the LVC subject to a full public consultation and any comments received being fully considered and we necessary amendments made by the Principal Planning Specialist in conjunction with the Portfolio Holder for Planning. |