Spring 2007 Royal Tunbridge Wells Civic Society Newsletter In this Issue: Tudeley 1542, one of the documents found by Jane Dickson in the TWBC archives. See page 16. Fitting a tyre. Richard Filmer’s talk on Kentish crafts. See page 22. Pembury Road - a van churns up the verge where the daffodils used to be . See page 8. 22 Front Cover - ‘The Bat’s Revenge’ at The Opera House,www.thecivicsociety.org Feb 6th 2007 Contents Introduction ... 4 Visit to the House of Commons ... 4 An invitation to join a Civic Society outing this Spring. From the Planning Scrutineers ... 5 Chairman’s Letter by John Cunningham ... 6 Who is to Blame? by Daniel Bech ... 8 Daniel Bech asks what is worse - KCC’s poor standards, or TWBC’s ‘can’t be bothered’ attitude ? Trees of Tunbridge Wells by Richard Still ... 10 Richard Still describes the trees in the Woodbury Park Cemetery. Power to the People by Alastair Tod ... 13 Alastair Tod explains the Society’s views on Sustainability and the Planning Process. Box of Delights by Jane Dickson ... 16 Jane Dickson describes her latest finds in the borough archives. Local History Group News ... 19 Including references to the Waterdown Forest military camp in the Frant parish registers, researched by Ann Bates. Putting Faces to Names - John Sworder ... 21 Traditional Kentish Crafts ... 22 A report on the recent talk by Richard Filmer. Forthcoming Events ... 24 Editor: Chris Jones. 52 St James Road, Tunbridge Wells, TN1 2LB Tel 01892 522025 (evenings and weekends) Email [email protected] Membership Secretary: Frances Avery. 16 Great Courtlands, Langton Green, Tunbridge Wells TN3 0AH 2007 Newsletter Spring 3 Introduction Last summer the Committee had a brainstorm. We went off to Goudhurst one Saturday afternoon, to the home of Roger Joye, to ponder the meaning of exist- ence. What are we all here for? Exactly what are we trying to achieve? What might we do differently? Roger drew some diagrams on a flip-chart. We all had the opportunity to say what we thought. We were all very polite. None of us listened to what the others were saying - we were too busy working out what we would say when it was our turn. At the end of the day Roger and John put together some notes. Somebody suggested that we might ‘refresh’ the design of the Newsletter. (That’s the sort of thing you say at a brainstorm.) We might, for example, include some colour. But it was getting towards the end of the afternoon and we didn’t get as far as considering whether we should change the content of the Newslet- ter, or seek to target new classes of readership. Just that we might introduce some colour. So, over the winter months, I have been looking at other Newslet- ters and magazines to see what we might do differently. I didn’t want to change the size, and changing the main type-face proved too difficult, as the main arti- cles, which had already been written, didn’t then fit into the same number of pages. So I have tweaked the titles with bigger letters, and included more pic- tures, and worked out how to have text running vertically up the page. And included some colour. I hope you like it. House of Commons Visit Greg Clark has kindly arranged for us to have a guided tour of the House of Commons - on Tuesday, 8th May. Tickets can be booked using the enclosed form. There is a limited number of tickets. Those of you who have already reserved a place will have a ticket reserved, but only until 21st April - like every- one else you will need to send in an application. The tour starts at 10:30am. However, we must be at the starting point - the Sovereign’s Entrance - by 10:20. A coach has been arranged , leaving Tunbridge Wells (Crescent Road) at 8am. The return journey by coach will cost £14, though this is optional - you may make your own way there and back, in which case there is no charge for the visit. If you are proposing to travel by train, we would suggest the service that leaves Tunbridge Wells at 08:40. The tour takes about an hour and a quarter. We then meet Greg for a chat. In the afternoon we have the option of visiting the Jewel Tower, part of the mediae- val Palace of Westminster. The coach will return at 4:00 pm. Our thanks to Greg for arranging the visit, and to Charmian Clissold-Jones for the organisation. 4 www.thecivicsociety.org News & Views From the Planning Scrutineers With the stagnation that seems to be want to lose this building and tried to gripping the centre of town, most of the find other solutions to meet the appli- recent action has been in the residen- cant’s needs. In the end the application tial areas. The amended application for was withdrawn. flats in Culverden Down came to We objected to illuminated signage Committee this week (see below). The at Lloyds Bank on Mount Pleasant, amended proposal by Sunrise Senior and to inappropriate new windows at Living for development next to Hawkenbury United Reform Church. Dunorlan is still being considered. Both applications were refused. We A new proposal for houses and flats also objected to full-heght pictures in in Farncombe Road will disappoint the windows of Tesco, and to new win- residents who fought so vehemently dows at Sankeys on Mount Ephraim, against the last one. The fear is that, but both were permitted. once one development is approved, We were pleased that a proposal for Farncombe Road will go the way of change of use of one of the houses in Forest Road. We have objected to the Calverley Park Crescent was with- Farncombe Road proposal, and to fur- drawn. ther development at 185 Forest Road. And finally, we are objecting to a There was an application late last back-garden development in Frant Rd year, to replace Dingley Dell (a ‘cot- because of its impact on the character tage orné’ on Rusthall Road, beyond the of adjoining Broadwater Down. Spa Hotel) with a new house. We don’t 69-71 Culverden Down Members will be aware that a con- officers was that, since the proposal troversial plan to replace 69-71 satisfied all the relevant policies in the Culverden Down with a block of 11 flats TWBC Local Plan, the proposal should was refused last year, and is currently be approved. awaiting an appeal. This year, the de- Several residents spoke out against velopers have submitted an amended the proposal, while the architects, un- proposal for only 7 flats. This new pro- derstandably, spoke in favour. A discus- posal was considered by the Planning sion by the committee followed at the Committee last Thursday. end of which the councillors voted, by In spite of over 400 letters of objec- 9 votes to 4, against the plan. tion, including one from the Society, and, We await, with increased interest, we understand, one from Greg Clark, the result of the appeal on the original the recommendation of the planning aplication. Gill Twells 2007 Newsletter Spring 5 News & Views Chairman’s Letter Re-organisation of Local Government. January 25th 2007 has been and gone and no submissions were made to Central Government by or in Kent to be a Unitary Authority or for an enhanced two-tier working system. What might still come, is more Town, Parish or Neighbourhood Councils (of which RTW has none), but that would mean higher rates and more bureaucracy. TWBC seems to favour using the Town Forum in that role – for free. All the District Councils in Kent, together with KCC, did however respond to the Government in the form of a ‘Statement of Kent Commitment’, which reiterated how they felt politically and the high standards of responsibility, service and commitment to which they aspired. One development which seems to be growing is the shared services model, where Councils share services. TWBC has already been sharing its Licencing service with Sevenoaks and is about to start sharing its Scrutiny service with Maidstone. This needs to be watched closely – lower costs may add up to no more than lower service and less effectiveness. New Housing Plans in Tunbridge Wells. Many of you will have heard that the SEERA (South East England Regional Assembly) has allocated a target of 5,000 homes to be built in the Borough of TW over the next 20 years i.e. an average of 250 a year. This figure might appear somewhat frightening, but it is the view of the Society that the figure as such should be no cause for alarm because: •The target is homes (including flats and conversions), not houses, and therefore does not mean 5,000 new sites • In any case, the average new homes in the Borough during the last 4-5 years, has been just under 300 a year, so a target of 250 should be achievable without too many prob- lems. • In the Borough, there are apparently some 1,500 planning permissions for new homes already granted but not yet implemented, so only about 3,500 new homes/sites would need to be found over the next 20 years. • As far as RTW is concerned, it would not be expected to take all 5,000 and a reason- able figure for Royal Tunbridge Wells and Southborough would be of the order of about 2,500 - 3,000. • In RTW, there are still a number of major ‘brown-field’ sites, such as the Kent and Sussex Hospital and the Bus Garage, so the immediate need for sites may be reduced, but not eliminated.