Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: The Guildhall, St Peter's Place, Canterbury

Contact: Josie Newman  01227 862 009

Items
No. Item

275.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

Apologies for absence had been received from Councillor R Thomas.

276.

Substitute Councillors

Minutes:

Councillor Glover was present as a substitute for Councillor R Thomas.

277.

Declaration of any interests

TO RECEIVE any declarations for the following in so far as they relate to the business for the meeting:-

 

a.       Disclosable Pecuniary Interests

b.       Other Significant Interests (what were previously thought of as non-pecuniary Prejudicial interests)

c.       Voluntary Announcements of Other Interests

 

Voluntary Announcements of Other Interests not required to be disclosed as DPI’s or OSI’s, ie announcements made for transparency reasons alone, such as:

         Membership of outside bodies that have made representations on agenda items, or

         Where a Councillor knows a person involved, but does not have a close association with that person, or

         Where an item would affect the well-being of a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc but not his/her financial position.

 

[Note: an effect on the financial position of a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc; OR an application made by a Councillor, relative, close associate, employer, etc, would both probably constitute either an OSI or in some cases a DPI].

 

Minutes:

The Chairman made a voluntary announcement on behalf of the Committee to let it be known that a number of the speakers were known to a number of the Committee members.

 

Councillor I Thomas made a voluntary announcement that he was a Kent County Councillor, KCC were a partner in a number of the matters before the Committee, and that he was a member of the Planning Committee.

 

Councillor Hirst made a voluntary announcement that he was the director of a firm of property developers.

 

Councillor A Baker made a voluntary announcement that she was the Council representative on the Quality Bus Partnership.

278.

Minutes of meeting Thursday, 28 June 2018 of Regeneration and Property Committee pdf icon PDF 72 KB

To confirm as a true record.

Minutes:

The Committee agreed by general assent that the minutes were a true record.

279.

Public participation

Members of the public may speak on any item on the agenda, for a maximum of three minutes, provided that notification has been given to Democratic Services by 12.30pm on the working day before the meeting.

Minutes:

There were 10 speaker registered for the meeting they would be heard prior to the consideration of the relevant items (numbers 6 - 10).

280.

Station Road West Integrated Transport Hub pdf icon PDF 2 MB

TO NOTE the report of the Director of Development

 

Decision:

The Council does not defer any further action on the Canterbury west multi storey car park, that a conceptual diagram of the Canterbury West Station area as an integrated transport hub be produced and made available to Councillors, and that work continue with stakeholders and partners to realise this.

 

Reason for the decision: The car park did not work against the integrated transport hub and instead offered more opportunities for it to be improved.

Minutes:

The Chief Executive clarified that the recommendation from the Canterbury Forum meeting held on the 10 September 2018 was for the Regeneration and Property Committee to consider. The recommendation from the Forum was “that the council defers any further action on the Canterbury West multi-storey car park until it has fully explored the provision of a fully integrated transport hub.”

 

(The following members of the public spoke prior to the debate:

1. Richard Norman

2. Sue Langdown (on behalf of the St Stephen’s Residents’ Association)

3. Peter Styles

4. Sian Pettman

5. Jeremy Baker

6. Councillor Dixey

7. Councillor Warley)

 

The Chairman updated the Committee with the following:

1.    Network Rail had confirmed that it would take them around 5 - 10 years to decommission their operational facilities on Roper Road and an alternative access to the Station from there was not possible before that. They were still hoping to deliver a platform extension.

2.    South Eastern were planning a cycle hub at the station and this could significantly improve the cycle parking provision

3.    Network Rail were interested in moving their car park in to the multi story this could  free up space to provide the potential to allow the extension of the ticket hall and further space for bus provision.

4.    The Council was continuing to work with Stagecoach in regard to bus provision to the station, presently they were happy with an in road bus stop.

5.    The Next Bike scheme approved previously by the Committee was progressing and the operators had confirmed there would be a node at Station Road West.

6.    The car share scheme approved previously by the Committee was progressing and they would be using the multi storey car park.

7.    All spaces in the multi storey car park would be ready to allow charging of electric vehicles.

 

The Chairman proposed and it was seconded that action in regards to the multi storey car park continue without delay and that a conceptual diagram of the Canterbury West Station area as integrated transport hub be made available.

 

1.    The Committee debated the issues covering matters including the following:

2.    The benefits of increasing parking in the area.

3.    The merits of delaying or not the construction of the multi storey and the views of the Canterbury Forum.

4.    The need for better bus provision to the area.

5.    Taxi provision to the station.

6.    Opportunities presented by the multi storey car park and by other areas of land in the locality.

7.    Electric charging provision for vehicles and the potential for differential charging in the future.

8.    The provision of parking for those with mobility needs including those with young families.

 

RESOLVED that: The Council does not defer any further action on the Canterbury west multi storey car park, that a conceptual diagram of the Canterbury West Station area as an integrated transport hub be produced and made available to Councillors, and that work continue with stakeholders and partners to realise this.

 

Reason for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 280.

281.

Report on Spa Esplanade shared space trial pdf icon PDF 420 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of the Director of Development.

Additional documents:

Decision:

That cycling is permitted at Spa Esplanade and that work continues to be done to encourage safe use of the area by all users.

 

Reasons for the decision: Cyclists share space with pedestrians, wheelchairs, prams, dog walkers and many other non motorised users at many locations across the district and elsewhere

Minutes:

(Prior to the consideration of the item ward councillors D Thomas and A Cook spoke.)

 

The Senior Transportation Officer introduced the report which discussed options for cycling on the seafront at Spa Esplanade and explained what correspondence had been during and since the trial. She explained that the during the trial work was done with the different users encourage respectful and safe shared use of the space.

 

Chairman proposed the officers recommendation on the proviso that work continued to be done to encourage safe use of the area by all users. This was seconded and when put to a vote agreed.

 

The Committee debated the issues covering matters including the following:

1.    Cycling speed - it was difficult to go very slow but some went too fast.

2.    The need for all user groups to be respectful of each other.

3.    Other examples of shared use paths.

4.    The location was busy and well used.

5.    The difficulties of speed humps for wheelchair users and their carers.

 

RESOLVED: That cycling is permitted at Spa Esplanade and that work continues to be done to encourage safe use of the area by all users.

 

Reasons for the decision: Cyclists share space with pedestrians, wheelchairs, prams, dog walkers and many other non motorised users at many locations across the district and elsewhere

 

Record of the voting

For the proposal: Councillors A Baker, Doyle, Eden-Green, Fisher, Fitter-Harding, Glover, Hirst, I Stockley, J Stockley, I Thomas and Waters (11)

Against and abstaining from the proposal: None

282.

Quality Bus Partnership priorities pdf icon PDF 87 KB

TO CONSIDER the report of the Director of Development.

Decision:

That the annual priorities for the three partners are approved by the City Council as set out in the report.

 

Reasons for the decision: The annual priorities for the three partners of the partnership that were set last year have largely been met. In setting new priorities for the current year, care has been taken to align these to the Canterbury district transport strategy, and to set priorities that are achievable.

Minutes:

That the annual priorities for the three partners are approved by the City Council as set out in the report.

 

Reasons for the decision: The annual priorities for the three partners of the partnership that were set last year have largely been met. In setting new priorities for the current year, care has been taken to align these to the Canterbury district transport strategy, and to set priorities that are achievable.

283.

Sustainable Transport Forum pdf icon PDF 94 KB

TO NOTE the minutes of the Sustainable Transport Forum.

Minutes:

(Prior to the consideration of the items a member of the public, Grahame Harrison, spoke.)

 

The Chairman introduced the notes of the Sustainable Transport Forum explaining that he was also the chairman of that Forum.

 

The Senior Transportation Officer gave points of clarification for the public speaker.

 

The Committee made comments and asked for points of clarification. Matters including the following were covered:

1.    The need to prioritise expenditure on projects that were most pressing.

2.    Ideas were needed to ensure that cyclist operated considerately alongside the high street particularly at night.

3.    The new automatic number plate recognition provision in many of the Council’s car parks.

4.    The provision of electric vehicle charging in new developments.

5.    Methods of charging electric vehicles varied considerably so it was important to plan for this.

6.    City centre safety.

7.    Concerns around access to Whitstable rail station for those with mobility issues. The Senior Transportation Officer confirmed that these would be passed to Network Rail.

 

The minutes were noted by the Committee by general assent.

 

(Councillor Eden-Green left the meeting)

284.

Proposed disposal of 35 Pound Lane Canterbury (formerly The Marlowe Lab) pdf icon PDF 100 KB

TO CONSIDER the report for the Director of Development.

 

Please note the information contained later in the agenda.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

(Prior to the consideration of the item ward councillors Warley and Dixey spoke.)

 

In response to one of the speakers the Principal Property Asset Surveyor explained that the site was split into two parts. Planning policy required the Council to market both parts together for sale with the current planning class of D1 (non-residential institution). Once the 12 month period expired it might be prudent to split up the plot if no interest had been identified.  In that case it might be possible to open discussions about parking with adjoining owners.

 

The Committee debated the potential on the expiration of the 12 months for the premises to be used for social housing before it was agreed by general assent that the press and public be excluded for the remained of the debate to allow discussion of the commercially sensitive matters.

 

(This matter was resolved at minute number 287).

285.

Date of next meeting

7pm, Tuesday 27 November 2018, The Guildhall, St Peter’s Place, Canterbury.

Minutes:

7pm, Tuesday 27 November 2018, The Guildhall, St Peter’s Place, Canterbury.

286.

Exclusion of the press and public

TO RESOLVE – That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act or the Freedom of Information Act or both.

 

Minutes:

RESOLVED: That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business on the grounds that there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act or the Freedom of Information Act or both.

287.

Annex exempt from publication: Proposed disposal of 35 Pound Lane Canterbury (formerly The Marlowe Lab)

(The report relates to the proposed disposal of a Council-owned property and contains commercially-sensitive information that could prejudice the sale process. Therefore, s. 43 Freedom of Information Act 2000 and paragraph 3 of schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 applies. The Council considers that at present the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing it.)

 

TO NOTE the supplementary information.

Decision:

(a)  In the light of marketing advice received and to reflect the Council’s planning policy, to authorise the Head of Property & Regeneration to instruct local agents to offer the property on the open market for a period of 12 months, and, if this is unsuccessful, to bring the matter back to the Committee.

(b)  To authorise the Head of Legal Services to enter into any legal documentation necessary to complete the transaction.

 

Reason for the decision: The property is surplus to the Council’s requirements and disposal is considered logical in portfolio management terms. It is in a good city centre residential location and demand is expected to be active.

 

Minutes:

(The information contained within the appendix was exempt information because it contained commercial data, and its disclosure would be likely to prejudice the commercial and contractual interests of the council and the parties. (Section 43 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and paragraph 3 Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 apply).

 

(The Committee also considered the information contained in the public part of the agenda).

 

The Committee discussed the information contained in the annex.

 

RESOLVED:

 

(a)  In the light of marketing advice received and to reflect the Council’s planning policy, to authorise the Head of Property & Regeneration to instruct local agents to offer the property on the open market for a period of 12 months, and, if this is unsuccessful, to bring the matter back to the Committee.

(b)  To authorise the Head of Legal Services to enter into any legal documentation necessary to complete the transaction.

 

Reason for the decision: The property is surplus to the Council’s requirements and disposal is considered logical in portfolio management terms. It is in a good city centre residential location and demand is expected to be active.

 

For the proposal: Councillors A Baker, Doyle, Fisher, Fitter-Harding, Glover, Hirst, I Stockley, J Stockley, I Thomas and Waters (10)

Against and abstaining from the proposal: None