Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

No apologies received.

County Councillors Holden and Bruneau were not present at the meeting.

Councillor Lewis left the meeting at 6:50pm.

Councillors Barrington-King and Mackonochie left the meeting at 7:00pm.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in items on the agenda. For any advice on declarations of interest, please contact the Monitoring Officer before the meeting.

There were no disclosable pecuniary interests or other significant interests declared at the meeting

To note any members of the Council wishing to speak, of which due notice has been given in accordance with Council Meeting Procedure Rule 18, and which items they wish to speak on.

The following people had registered to speak:

Agenda Item 5 – Ms Dawn Hodgson

Agenda Item 6 – Mr Harry Hopwood, Ms. Jenifer Vinell

To approve the minutes of a previous meeting as a correct record. The only issue relating to the minutes that can be discussed is their accuracy.

Members reviewed the minutes.  No amendments were proposed.

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting dated 3 July 2023 be approved as a correct record.

Registered Speaker  Dawn Hodgson – not present at the meeting.

John Strachan, TWBC Parking Manager, presented the report and provided a verbal update on responses.

Questions and discussion from Members included:

-       It was suggested that Co-wheels facilities and cycle routes in Rusthall might give some relief to the demand for parking.

-       Although deemed driven by the need to secure vehicular access, the Highway Code reinforcement of junction parking rules by KCC was commended to ensure safety of pedestrians and cyclists. 

-       It was clarified that the development timings in Windmill Street would be the influencing factor between the initial loss of carparking space and the additional spaces planned as part of the development. It was confirmed that feedback would be given to make the residents views known re managing the timings with minimal loss of parking.

-       It was noted that, technically, there was no loss of parking around junctions as a result of proposed junction restrictions as the Highway Code already sets this driver expectation. It was confirmed that the restriction road markings would serve to reinforce the guidance.

-       Parking around road junctions in Edward Street, Southborough, was raised as a particular issue. Urbaser (refuse collection agents) had put notices on cars where access was impeded.  Parking was noted as being similarly bad on the corners of both  Western Road and Forge Road with safety, visibility and access all noted as particular challenges.

RESOLVED –

1. That the Joint Transport Board considered representations made in response to the public consultation.

2. That the Board endorsed the recommendation that the restrictions proposed be put in place.

Registered Speakers - Harry Hopwood and Jenifer Vinell 

-       The view expressed by one speaker was that extending the parking permit restrictions would help reduce current parking challenges for residents in the area.

-       One speaker noted that there was an observed disparity between number of households and possible resident parking spaces available, most commonly observed in evenings and weekends. It was reported that having to park some distance from home and poor lighting were considered a safety concern. Leaving the situation as it currently stood was suggested as the best possible compromise; extended parking permits were considered unlikely to make any difference.

John Strachan, TWBC Parking Manager, presented the report and provided a verbal update on responses.

-       The point was reinforced that schemes such as this were proposed to manage local worker and commuter parking and to protect, or give preference to,  resident parking over other road users.

-       Final figures from the formal public consultation were provided with 24 residents against the extension, 12 residents in favour and 1 resident unclear. Based on these numbers, the officer noted that the parking scheme would not be supported into the currently un-regulated kerbside space in Clifton Road.

Questions and discussion from Members included:

-       It was suggested that, based on speaker comments, an investigation onto improved lighting in the area  should be considered.

Resolved –

Members were in agreement with the recommendation not to endorse the making of advertised changes to Clifton Road Permit Parking Restrictions.

No questions or discussion points were raised by Members.

RESOLVED – The report was noted.

Julian Cook, KCC Highways Manager, introduced John Farmer, KCC Project Manager (Major Projects),  to deliver the information report as set out in the agenda.

-       It was noted that there were delays in finalising the Badsell Road junction due to the proposal over the line of a watercourse which raised potential flooding concerns.

-       Flood modelling work and associated risk assessments had been undertaken as detailed in the report.  Work and discussion with the Environment Agency remained ongoing with a view to identifying mitigation measures so a planning application could be made hopefully before the end of October.

-       It was acknowledged that, as outlined in the report, the roundabout at Dampiers Corner needed to be larger which would require land. It was confirmed that any residual Section 106 monies would only be used for the development of the Dampiers Corner roundabout. There had been a meeting with Paddock Wood Town Council who had expressed frustration at the delays; expressed concern for safety of pedestrians and cyclists and a need to limit any tree loss at the Badsell Road Junction.

Questions and discussion from Members included:

-       Concerns were raised that the design proposed did not encourage Active Travel per KCC plan to achieve net zero. It was noted that KCC was implementing a design that was part of the requirement of consents for the housing development.

-       It was suggested that the curves within the design would lead to higher vehicle speeds posing a risk to pedestrians and cyclists.

-       The issue of pedestrian crossings in the design was raised. It was suggested that school children would be unwilling to wait for lights to change, posing a risk to their personal safety. It was further noted that the design proposed the removal of the North side crossing of Maidstone Road.

-       The challenges of managing the junction with the constraints of the area were acknowledged. Local developer land constraints were being investigated for possible pathway widening options. Improvements to the plan for pedestrians and cyclist would be made where possible.

-       It was clarified that KCC had no funds and that Active Travel projects were funded from Government Grants. TWBC had applied for grants – some of which had been successful and had been invested in other areas of the county. It was reinforced that the officers were working within financial constraints set down by KCC.

-       While some disagreement was expressed regarding the funding of the Active Travel scheme and lack of inclusion of provision for pedestrians and cyclists, there was agreement by all parties that the safety of cyclists and young people was of the utmost importance. Any schemes considered would be developed around the funds available for which there were specific criteria that KCC worked to.  

-       The point was made that the use of Section 106 monies to mitigate development impact, through investment in modal shift (moving people out of cars), would be transformative. It was noted , as previously, that S106 monies are required  ...  view the full minutes text for item TB19/22

Julian Cook, KCC Highways Manager, introduced the report as set out in the agenda.

Questions and discussion from Members included:

-       It was confirmed that the report  detailed works that would be undertaken where large developments affected the highway within the application. It was reiterated that the report details and funds only covered the larger schemes that KCC and the Agreements Team were working on and not every development. It was further clarified that details of planned resurfacing works could be found further on in the report but that the officer would send a direct response to Councillor O’Connell by email regarding Hawkenbury works.

-       It was clarified that ‘footway preservation’ meant minor resurfacing to level out minor surface damage.

-       It was confirmed that TW area resurfacing works were completed early on in the year and that capital bids were underway for planned works next year. 

RESOLVED – The report program as at today’s date was reported and noted.

To agree any topics for future meetings, of which prior notice must be sent to the Chairman and Democratic Services Officer no later than 4pm on the working day before the meeting. There can not be any substantive debate/discussion or any decision on any topics raised, except to agree whether the topic may come forward in future.

Discussion included the following:

-       It was proposed that Public Realm 2, and an associated petition, be considered as an Agenda item for the next meeting to address resident concerns.

To note that the next scheduled meeting will be held on Monday 15 January 2024.

The next meeting was scheduled for Monday 15 January 2024 at 6pm

Notes:

The meeting concluded at 7:10 pm.