Issue - meetings

(Report Reference KBF31)

(Report Reference KBF31)

Mr Hughes introduced the report and explained that following the request at the previous meeting the table of triggers had been coded with a traffic light system to reflect the status of each trigger. Mr Hughes then responded to the points raised under the public participation section of the meeting and advised of the measures available to a local authority should a developer not meet its S106 obligations. He also updated the forum regarding the current status of the Wellhouse Lane works which were awaiting technical approval.

Regarding the earlier question concerning the Courtenay Road Foot/Cycleway, Mr Hughes informed that the planning permission did not require CALA to construct the path to a certain specification and that much of the design and construction had been determined in a way to minimise impact to the existing trees along the avenue.

Mr Hill of CALA referred to the earlier question regarding the footpath on phase 1B and confirmed that he would take the issue away and consider it further. He also advised that following the meeting he would be contacting colleagues regarding the road surface issues on Bingham Road, the street furniture and speed limiter signs.

Members debated the report and asked several questions, particularly focussing on:

• the Wellhouse Lane Junction,
• the Community Development Worker role
• transport agreement triggers
• travel plan issues such as the car club,
• access from Phase 1A to the nature reserve
• the impact on transport infrastructure within the surrounding area
• the County Councils expenditure of S106 monies

These points were responded to by Mr Hughes and Mr Hill accordingly. Finally, Mr Hill reported that he hoped to be able to share plans showing the phased approach of connectivity at the next meeting of the forum

RESOLVED:

1.         That the report be noted.