TATE Action Group Meeting 23rd April 2014
Present: Peter (Chair), Nicola (secretary),Shirl, Keith, John R, Bernard, Graham
Apologies:Peter T
Agenda
- Previous minutes and actions
- Finance and Fund raising
- Meeting with planners
- Traffic - WYG technical note 10
- Annual Parish Meeting
- FOI – outstanding requests/actions
- Environment
- Walton cycle track funding
- Walton – getting debate there
- aob
Minutes
Item 1 Previous Minutes and Actions
The previous minutes were agreed as accurate. In relation to the funding of the Walton cycle track Graham was still following this up. (Action GD).Keith had written to Gillian regarding the difference in traffic movements between the TATE application (6 vehicle movements per house per day) and the East Leeds extension (10 per day) but had not received a reply. Peter had again followed up on his lack of response from Councillor Taggart with the Plans Panel secretary but had been referred to David Newbury. With regard to the notes from the meeting on 9th April – Keith had not received a reply to his query about the traffic figures for 933 houses and Peter had chased Alan Lamb who had not yet given any indication of his success in obtaining the reports that were not available publicly. It had been discovered that TATE was not in the LEP submission for funding for 2015/16.
Item 2Finance and fund raising
Peter confirmed the financial report was the same as the last meeting. Graham was asked to submit a funding request for his item that had been recorded as a provision since last June.
Item 3Meeting with Planners
It was agreed that Peter, Shirl and Graham would attend the meeting with the planners. Peter and Shirl would produce a dossier of evidence prior to the meeting. (Action PL and SD). Regarding viability Peter felt that given the guidance in the NPPG we had a right as “interested parties” to see the viability report.
Item 4Traffic – WYG technical note 10
Keith covered his analysis so far of the new WYG document – although the High St assignment scenario was not new as it was the one made available in November 2013. The RFC figures are obtained by multiplying base data by a factor of choice – in this way the input data can be manipulated to get the final figure you want. The use of DOS (degree of saturation) in the tables for the junctions of Church Causeway and at Walton Gates with the new “relief” road implied these junctions were traffic light or roundabout controlled. It was agreed that the traffic figures for the bridge appeared to be complete fiction but as it was not a junction it was difficult to model. Bernard would organise a traffic survey at the bridge so that figures could be presented at the meeting with the planners. (Action BC). Keith will prepare an analysis of the flawed traffic figures. (Action KA). It was also noted that the walking isochrone was still wrong and was not using relevant “centre of site” positioning.
Item 5Annual Parish Meeting
Peter had been invited to speak at the Thorp Arch Parish Council annual meeting. He briefed the meeting on what he would say. John R thought he should also mention the viability meeting TAG were having with the planning department.
Item 6FOI – Outstanding requests/actions
Shirl was waiting to hear from the Commissioners office regarding their request to LCC. Bern was pursuing obtaining the minutes of the meeting regarding the TATE PPA. The EIR were relevant in obtaining reports that had a strong public interest.
Item 7Environment
Shirl had written to Yorkshire Wildlife Trust to ask if they were carrying out further surveys but they thought LCC should push the developer to fund these.
Item 8Walton cycle track funding
It appeared from the Walton PC minutes reported in Causeway that the funding for the cycle track was very uncertain.
Item 9Walton – getting debate there
There was a discussion regarding potential ways of getting Walton to understand the implications of the TATE development. John R agreed to talk to Derek (Action JR). A possible approach to some of the candidates for the forthcoming councillor elections was discussed. Nicola said she would find out who the candidates were.(Action NM).
Item 10aob
The public inquiry for the Grove Road development was discussed. Peter also mentioned the housing build rates that LCC were now faced with. Nicola would continue to track the City Plans Panel agendas and the one for the May meeting should be available next week. (Action NM).