Agenda item

To consider the modifications required to the advertised Traffic Regulation Orders required for the proposed Radstock Regeneration and Highway Improvement Scheme in conjunction with the Norton Radstock Regeneration Project to be implemented, and either agree, modify or remove some of the proposed elements following further public consultation on the revised proposal.

The scheme is dependent on securing HCA capital grant of £800k, which will be put at risk if the scheme is delayed beyond the current programme to let the highway works contract by the end of March 2012.

Lesley Mansell (Chair, Radstock Town Council) made a statement supporting the proposals and asking for prompt implementation.  She said there was a huge majority in favour of the infrastructure improvements.  She acknowledged that there were concerns about accessible parking for disabled drivers, and asked the Cabinet to address these issues.

Councillor Eleanor Jackson made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 3 and on the Council's website] in which she thanked the Cabinet for listening to the points made in previous consultations on the issue.  She appreciated the effort put into consulting with local people.  She felt that the NRR scheme had been better than the original proposals made in 1981, and that the current proposals were better than the NRR scheme.  She still felt that it would be best to drop the proposals altogether, which would save the Council money and would avoid the disruption which the proposals would inevitably inflict upon the town.  She expressed support however for the speed limit proposals; the weight limit proposals; and the increased disabled parking being proposed.  She asked for a condition to be added to the TRO – that adequate temporary parking facilities be provided during the works, so that traders would not lose business as a result of the disruption.

Amanda Leon (Radstock Action Group) made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 4 and on the Council's website] in which she asked a number of questions which she said Cabinet had never answered.  She therefore appealed to the Cabinet not to proceed with the scheme.

Gary Dando (Radstock Action Group) made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 5 and on the Council's website] in which he appealed to the Cabinet not to proceed with the scheme.  He outlined three areas for concern which he felt must be addressed before the scheme could be reconsidered.

Cate Le Grice Mack (Chair, Norton Radstock Regeneration Company) made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 6 and on the Council's website] in which she welcomed the proposals and said that she felt they would improve air quality in the town.

George Bailey (Radstock Action Group) made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 7 and on the Council's website] in which he expressed concern about the proposals for The Street; asked Cabinet to ensure the future of a rail link in the town; and raised a number of other objections.  He asked Cabinet to cancel the proposals.

Catherine Whybrow made a personal statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 8 and on the Council's website] welcoming the proposals which she said were essential to the town before regeneration could take place and which she felt would lead to a lively and safe town centre.

Heather Chipperfield made an ad hoc statement expressing support for the views of the Radstock Action Group and saying that the people of Radstock did not want the scheme to go ahead.  She felt that the development and the road scheme were ill conceived.

Joanna Hilton in an ad hoc statement asked the Cabinet to understand the concerns about job losses and the problems faced by small businesses if their trade were to be disrupted.

Rupert Bevan in an ad hoc statement referred to the fears that the high street shops would be lost to Radstock.  He called for a moratorium on the proposals.

Colin Curry in an ad hoc statement observed that the consultation had not asked the key question: "Do you want the redevelopment and traffic proposals to proceed?"  The people of Radstock had answered this question because over 2000 had signed the petition calling for the scheme to be dropped.  He presented a petition to Cabinet.

The Chair referred the petition to Councillor Roger Symonds for his attention.

Councillor Martin Veal in an ad hoc statement asked for clarity about the wording and date of the petition.  The Chair asked the Democratic Services Officer to read aloud the wording, which was: “We, the undersigned, are totally opposed to the proposals to create a new road by diverting the Frome Road (A362) through the middle of Radstock”.  The petition contained 765 signatures and was not dated.

[Petitions containing 1326 signatures had been presented to previous Cabinets with the same wording.]

Councillor Rob Appleyard in an ad hoc statement expressed his concerns that the residents of his ward should be able to pass through Radstock when they needed to. He felt that the proposals did address this need.  He felt that the local retailers should be delighted about the possibility of new housing, because it would bring with it a new local customer base.  He welcomed the proposals, which he felt would be a starting point for longer term development.

Councillor Roger Symonds, in proposing the item, said that if approved, the proposals would signal the start of regeneration for Radstock.  He thanked all the contributors to the debate and assured them that Cabinet had listened carefully to all the points made, and had in fact on a previous occasion asked for further work to be done to take on board the points being made.  As a result, the proposals before Cabinet were very different from the ones originally put forward.  He made a commitment to work with local retailers to minimise the parking restrictions during the works.

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposals.  He said that it had been a long journey to get to this point, but that the scheme being offered was one which the highway engineers believed would work.  He said that officers would work hard to make temporary parking available for shoppers while the works progressed.  He reminded the Cabinet that the housing options were still being considered and that the HCA funding was still available.  He felt that it would set the scene for the next stages of regeneration for Radstock.

Councillor Simon Allen said that it was evident that the people of Radstock were very passionate about the future of the town.  He was delighted that the scheme improved pedestrian crossings; introduced 20mph limits; and improved traffic flow.  For these reasons, he felt the scheme would bring about improvements for the whole community.

Councillor Cherry Beath endorsed the previous comments.  She felt that the local traders had confidence that the Council would work hard to ensure their businesses would not suffer during the works.  She agreed with the comments made by Lesley Mansell about economic growth.

Councillor Nathan Hartley thanked the residents of Radstock for engaging with the consultation.  He observed that the original proposals had not been drawn up to tackle the congestion suffered by the town, but that the present proposals did tackle it.  He thanked Jacob Rees-Mogg MP, who had been supportive, and the local Labour Group who also supported the scheme.  He referred to paragraphs 5.6 and 5.16 of the report, both of which showed that a majority of respondents had been in favour.

On a motion from Councillor Roger Symonds, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To IMPLEMENT the Radstock Regeneration and Highway Scheme;

(2) To ABANDON the proposed Frome Road, Radstock Bus Lane Order;

(3) To IMPLEMENT the Various Roads, Radstock One Way and Prohibition of Right Turn Order after it has been modified by the REMOVAL of Frome Road from Schedule 1 and Church Street from Schedule 2;

(4) To IMPLEMENT the Alteration to Pedestrian Crossing - Wells Road (A367) Order; and

(5) To IMPLEMENT the Various Roads, Radstock Authorised Parking Places Order as advertised.