A verbal summary of current policy will be given by an officer from Kent County Council.
Minutes:
Parish Councillor Graeme Stevenson, Brenchley and Matfield Parish Council had registered to speak:
“Residents of Blind Lane which is part of Brenchley Road (Blind Lane is the section between Pixot Hill/Crook Road crossroads and the western end of Brenchley High Street) and Windmill Hill in Brenchley, have been complaining repeatedly about the number of HGV’s using these unsuitable roads, particularly local scrap lorries belonging to a number of premises based at Old hay, near Paddock Wood. These companies include Scrap co, JR Car Spares Auto Recycle, Core Commercial, Charles Trent, Osmonds plus others, repeatedly use these unsuitable roads for access to and from their depots from the larger trunk road network of the A21 or the A228. Their use of these roads causes damage to property and road signs and is dangerous for parents and children going to Brenchley and Matfield Primary School, which is located at the western end of Blind Lane. A much wider and safer route is available via Mascalls Court Lane and Mascalls Court Road. To give an understanding of the unsuitability of these roads: Blind Lane (this section of Brenchley Road) has pinch points of 3.9m in width. The widest point of Blind Lane is 5.2m. Whilst Mascalls Court Lane has a consistent measurement of 6.5m width and Mascalls Court Road has only one pinch point of 4.9m in width. From Old hay there is also the option of using Churn Lane, to access the B2162, which runs between Horsmonden and Collier Street.
These firms have been contacted by residents and claim they have been told by KCC Highways that they must not use Mascalls Lane at Paddock Wood as it passes Mascalls school. By coming through Brenchley they are passing Brenchley and Matfield Primary school, if this claim is true should the same argument not apply?
Our request is that these roads are identified and provided with signage stating ‘Unsuitable for HGVs’ and the lorries serving these local scrap companies are asked to use the wider and safer routes provided by Mascalls Court Lane or Church Road to access the trunk road network? It is noted that recently similar signage has been erected at both Watermans Lane and Chantlers Hill nearby (even though Chantlers Hill has a consistent 6m width), and residents in these affected roads in Brenchley do not understand why Blind Lane (Brenchley Road) should be any different.”
Paul Leary, West Kent Schemes Manager at Kent County Council provided a summary of the work being done by KCC in regards to speed management and HGV’s on rural roads which included the following:
- Speed Management
o KCC work within the guidelines at set out by the Department for Transport when setting speed limits (Department for Transport Circular 01/2013).
o Speed limits must be evidence lead and self explaining.
o The ultimate aim was to ensure that speed limits were self complaint.
o Speed limits must be appropriate for the road. They should take account of any history of collisions, take account of the road geometry and the make up of the area (schools, residential etc.). It would also consider what engineering measures were already in place.
o KCC would also look at the road function; was it a through route, did it connect with any major destinations etc.
o Another consideration related to the make-up of road users including pedestrians, cyclists, equestrians etc.
o Existing traffic speeds were also a major consideration.
o To note, what whilst most rural roads were subject to the national speed limit of 60mph (single carriageway), in the vast majority of cases drivers were travelling below and often significantly below this speed limit. This was primarily due to the nature and appearance of these roads making it impossible to drive anywhere near the 60mph limit.
o The introduction of lower speed limits on these roads (which were already self-enforcing) would require the installation of speed limit signs which could lead to an increase in speeds.
o KCC were able to establish vehicle speeds using traffic surveys. The results of those surveys would be used to inform whether any action was appropriate and any associated costs.
- HGV’s on Rural Roads
o Any issues/concerns related to HGV’s on rural roads should be reported to KCC.
o If in a Parish Council area it should be done via the HIP process.
o It should be noted that whilst the use of ‘Unsuitable for HGVs’ signing was something that could be used, the signs were advisory signs and therefore not enforceable. It was also important these signs were not overused.
o The Lorry Watch scheme was effective where restrictions were already in place e.g. a 7.5 tonne restriction or a width restriction.
o Lorry Watch signs could be put up on their own with no volunteers on the ground. Parish Council’s were welcome to discuss this option with the KCC Freight Team.
o Restrictions could be imposed where it was thought necessary but there were cost implications to consider (TRO’s and implementation costs).
o Enforcement of any restrictions would be a matter for the police.
o KCC were in discussion with the Department for Transport regarding lorry parks.
o KCC had a Freight Action Plan which set out plans for HGV movement in Kent.
o KCC were also looking to improve HGV parking overnight in laybys and verges. Enforcement would be dependent on whether there were any restrictions in place.
Action:
1. Paul Leary to contact Councillor Graeme Stevenson to give an update on the issues raised in his statement.
Supporting documents: