Agenda and minutes

The Chairman made the following announcement:

“Members often raise various Highways and Transportation matters at meetings of the Joint Transportation Board (JTB).   However, ad hoc requests not on the agenda should not be addressed at the JTB but must follow the process of investigation within the Kent County Council (KCC) Highways and Transportation’s current reporting systems before coming to JTB in the form of reports for decision or information purposes.

“General highway enquiries that include requests for improvements or changes to the highway should be logged through our contact centre on 03000 418181 or through our on line fault reporting tool at www.kent.gov/highways .  This is the quickest way to raise concerns or receive information and ensures the necessary audit trail is set up and the enquiry is routed to the appropriate officer.  Enquiries are given a unique reference number which can be used to track the progress of the enquiry either on line or though the contact centre.  When logging enquiries requests can be made for a call back or a written response and there is the ability to highlight that the issue has been raised by a County, District or Parish Councillor.

“Of course, the District Manager,  Paul Valek, and his team are always available for issues that you feel direct contact or site meetings are needed.”

In response to a Member’s query regarding issues that are the responsibility of Thanet District Council, Robin Chantrill-Smith confirmed that Members should continue to raise those matters with him.

Tribute was paid to KCC Highways and Transportation on their effective reporting system and to Paul Valek and his team for always responding so promptly.

It was AGREED that the wording of the Chairman’s announcement be circulated to other Board Members.

Apologies for absence were received from Mr Martyn Heale, Kent County Councillor and Councillor Sheila Bransfield (for whom Councillor Vera Hovenden was present as substitute).

There were no declarations of interest

To approve the Minutes of the Joint Transportation Board meeting held on 3 September 2013, copy attached.

On the proposal of Councillor D Saunders, seconded by Councillor K Gregory, the minutes of the meeting held on 3 September 2013 were approved and signed by the Chairman.

Minute No. 18(b) refers

It was NOTED from Paul Valek, District Manager, Kent County Council, Highways and Transportation, that it had not been possible to finalise a report in time for submission to this meeting; however, a report would be brought to the next meeting of the Board, on 27 March 2014.

Scheme for MARGATE Railway Station Forecourt

In speaking under Council Procedure Rule 24.1, Councillor King stated that he had found the drawing of the Margate Station Forecourt enhancements (Annex1) harder to follow than the drawing for Ramsgate station (Annex 2). 

He enquired as to what the yellow rectangles to the right of the drawing represented and how many taxi ranks were proposed in the new design.  He also commented that two of the three pedestrian crossings illustrated on the drawing appeared to go up the road rather than across.

Nina Peak, Partnership Manager, Southeastern Railway, displayed a clearer drawing of the scheme (drawing now published as part of the details for this meeting).

She reminded Members of the purpose of the scheme; namely, to help promote Margate as part of Thanet Regeneration by making the station more welcoming and providing better connectivity and improved transport interchange for rail commuters.  She advised that features of the scheme would include:  an improved walking route; improved surfacing in the form of paving; two parking places for buses; adjusted kerb heights for ‘step-free buses’; ’20-minute’ waiting bays; and planting of new trees.  She added that the ‘disabled parking bays’ would be moved back a bit from the front of the station building, with the new location still being considered safe and convenient, and that the number of taxi ranks would be reduced from ten to eight.

Members then asked questions in relation to the scheme, and Nina Peak responded by providing the following information:

1.  If it was found, during the course of time, that more than eight taxi ranks were required, part of the ‘drop-off area’ could be used to create new ranks.

2.  Thanet District Council’s tree officer was being consulted on what type of trees should be planted.  The number of trees planted would exceed the number of trees removed.

3.  The number of disabled parking bays would remain the same and the accessible parking bays would be built to the Department for Transport (DfT) specification for size and access zones.

4.  The size of non-disabled parking places would be standard by National Rail’s terms.

5.  There would be signage both on the road and on signs, and Paul Valek, District Manager, KCC Highways and Transportation, advised that the road markings should last several years.

6.  There would be five, 20-minute waiting bays and these would be free of charge.

A Member expressed reservation about the maintenance budget being sufficient to replace features on a like-for-like basis.

Scheme for RAMSGATE Railway Station Forecourt

Nina Peak outlined the main elements of the scheme, after which the following issues were raised by Board Members:

Did the enhancement scheme for Ramsgate station not conflict with proposals to install a new parkway station at Manston?  Also, should Mr David Brazier, Kent County Council Cabinet Member for Transport & Environment, be requested to provide the Board with details of plans for the parkway station?

In response, Nina Peak stated that she understood  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

The report was NOTED.

Kelly Garrett, Safety Critical Schemes Engineer, KCC Highways and Transportation, presented her report and in a discussion that ensued the following points and questions were raised by Members:

1.  Cliffsend was not a typical English village in that it was divided by a carriageway;

2.  What were the relative distances of the new East Kent Access Phase 2 (EK2A) roads and Sandwich Road and Canterbury Road West?

Kelly Garrett stated that she did not have that information to hand, but would provide it direct to Mr J Elenor.  She pointed out that she did not consider the roads to be comparable in that the new roads were dual-carriageway, whereas the ‘old roads’ were single-carriageway.

3.  What was happening in relation to reducing the speed limit at Cottington Bridge?

Paul Valek, District Manager, KCC Highways and Transportation, reported that additional drainage measures had now been put in place, the settlement was being monitored and had now stopped.  It was anticipated that the area would be resurfaced in Spring 2014. All associated costs were being borne by the Contractor.

4.  If a major accident occurred at the Lord of the Manor roundabout, would serious traffic disruption not ensue?

Kelly Garrett pointed out that Canterbury Road West and Sandwich Road would still be available for use; indeed, the choice of roads at the present time was greater than had previously been the case.

5.  Were drivers not being forced to use the new Heignst Road purely on the basis that it was considered that not enough people were using it?

Kelly Garrett stated that the primary objective behind the new EKA2 road development had been to open up Thanet for investment.  A by-product of that objective was to return Canterbury Road West and Sandwich Road to residential use.

She also pointed out that measures would be put in place to enhance traffic flow at the Lord of the Manor signalled gyratory.

It was proposed by Mr Terry and seconded by Councillor K Gregory:

“THAT the next steps as outlined in paragraph 6.1 of the report be approved, namely:

a)  Carry out various traffic surveys;

b)  Continue to monitor the effects of the Phase One trial works and make alterations where necessary;

c)  Progress the detailed design of the Phase Two works taking into consideration the consultation and exhibition results and the Phase One trial.  Alterations will be made to the proposals where possible in line with the consultation and exhibition feedback and trial;

d)  Advertise the Traffic Regulation Orders for the proposed changes to the speed limits and parking restrictions;

e)  Report revised Phase Two proposals to the March 2014 meeting of this Board;

f)  Commence with the construction of Phase Two in Spring 2014.”

Upon being put to the vote, this motion was declared CARRIED.

Paul Valek, District Manager, KCC Highways and Transportation, updated the programme verbally as follows:

Appendix A – Footway and Carriageway Improvement Schemes

There was an additional scheme, namely, resurfacing of roundabout between Bromstone Road and Rumfields Road, which had been COMPLETED.

Appendix C – Street lighting

Councillor K Gregory asked how many more street lighting columns were outstanding.  Paul Valek undertook to provide this information to Councillor Gregory.

Appendix D – Developer Funding Works:  waiting restrictions and highway works for new doctors’ surgery, Grange Road, Ramsgate

Mr Shonk suggested that waiting restrictions should be introduced outside the shops.  Robin Chantrill-Smith, Enforcement Manager, Thanet District Council, advised that a loading bay would be put in place between Nos. 9 & 12 Grange Road.

Appendix E – Transportation and Safety Schemes:  Pedestrian route improvements – Fort Road/Love Lane/King Street/Hawley Street, Margate

In response to a request by Mr W Scobie, Paul Valek undertook to let him see the plans.

Appendix G – Member Highway Fund:  (?)  Funding of additional TDC parking enforcement around the QEQM Hospital – Mr W Scobie

In answer to a query from Mr W Scobie, Robin Chantrill-Smith stated that he was unable to confirm, at this stage, that there would be budget capacity to extend this area of parking enforcement.

The report was NOTED.

It was proposed by Councillor K Gregory, seconded by Mr W Scobie and AGREED:

1.  THAT the recommendations shown in Annex 1 are approved;

2.  THAT the proposals which require statutory consultation are advertised and that any traffic-related objections are reported back to a future meeting of the Board.

https://democracy.kent.gov.uk/documents/s42644/D2

The report was NOTED.

http://www.kent.gov.uk/roads_and_transport/highway_maintenance/winter_weather_maintenance.aspx

The report was NOTED.