Contact your Parish Council


Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

10th September 2019

 

 

Objections to Traffic Regulation Orders

 

Final Decision-Maker

Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

Lead Head of Service

Jeff Kitson, Parking Services Manager

Lead Officer and Report Author

Charlie Reynolds, Operations Engineer

Classification

Public

Wards affected

All

 

Executive Summary

 

Requests have been received by Parking Services from residents and local councillors for the introduction of parking restrictions at several locations across the borough. These locations have been surveyed and evaluated to assess the impact on parking provision within each local area where significant parking difficulties were identified.

 

Proposed orders were advertised, and all comments received during the formal consultation were reviewed and considered.

 

The objections to the traffic regulation order proposals were presented to the Joint Transportation Board on 10 July 2019 and the Board recommendations are included in this report.

 

Purpose of Report

 

Decision.

 

The report provides the background details of each of the traffic regulation order proposalís which received objections during the consultation period and the recommendations of the Joint Transportation Board which require approval by the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee.

 

 

This report makes the following recommendations to this Committee:

 

That:

 

1.   The views of the public and the Joint Transportation Board members be considered.

 

2.   The Joint Transportation Board recommendations to the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee, as set out in Appendix 1, be agreed as:

 

a)   The proposals for West End are not proceeded.

 

b)   The proposals for Pattenden Lane are proceeded.

 

c)   The proposals for Church Green are proceeded.

 

d)   The proposals for High Street are proceeded.

 

e)   The proposals for Sovereign Way are proceeded.

 

f)    The proposals for Sutton Forge are proceeded.

 

g)   The proposals for Albion Road are proceeded.

 

h)   The proposals for Chantry Road are proceeded.

 

3.   The objectors be informed of the outcome and Kent County Council as the Highway Authority be recommended that the orders are made and implemented.

 

 

 

Timetable

Meeting

Date

Joint Transportation Board

10th July 2019

Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee

10th September 2019

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Objections to Traffic Regulation Orders

 

 

1.       CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES AND IMPLICATIONS

 

Issue

Implications

Sign-off

Impact on Corporate Priorities

The relevant Strategic Plan objectives is:

         Embracing Growth and Enabling Infrastructure

Parking Services Manager

Cross Cutting Objectives

The report recommendations support the community by taking into consideration the traffic issues and managing the parking demand.

Parking Services Manager

Risk Management

Consideration must be given to objections and formal letters of support in relation to each proposal. However, this must be balanced against the risks involved in relation to road safety, free flow of traffic, environmental impact and vehicle migration.

Parking Services Manager

Financial

The costs of the order variation and implementation will be met from within the existing Parking Services budget.

Specialist Finance Manager (Strategy and Advice)

Staffing

There will be no impact on staffing

Parking Services Manager

Legal

The making of TROs is governed by statute. Formal orders will need to be made and signed by Kent County Council as the Highway Authority under their statutory powers

Cheryl Parks Mid Kent Legal Services (Planning)

Privacy and Data Protection

Parking Services will hold data in line with retention schedules.

Parking Services Manager

Equalities

The public consultation has identified a possible impact in terms on the elderly populationís ability to access village amenities as a result of the changes to traffic regulations.† Consideration has been given to these comments and the proposals amended accordingly.

Equalities and Corporate Policy Officer

Public Health

None.

Senior Public Health Officer

Crime and Disorder

None.

Parking Services Manager

 

Procurement

None

Specialist Finance Manager (Strategy and Advice)

 

2.        INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

 

2.1†† Requests have been received by Parking Services for the introduction of parking restrictions at several locations across the borough to manage parking demand. †Kent County Council and Maidstone Borough Council Officers met with Marden Parish Council to discuss the issues raised.

 

2.2†† The roads were surveyed and evaluated to assess the impact on parking provision within each local area where significant parking difficulties were identified.

 

2.3†† Proposed orders were advertised, and all comments received during the formal consultation were reviewed and considered.

 

2.4†† Recommendations following public consultation were presented to the Joint Transportation Board on 10 July 2019 as identified in Appendix 1.

 

2.5 † The Joint Transportation Board resolved;

 

†††††† That the Joint Transportation Board recommends to the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee and Kent County Council as the Highway Authority that:

 

†††††† 1. The proposals for West End are not proceeded.

 

†††††† 2. The proposals for Pattenden Lane are proceeded.

 

†††††† 3. The proposals for Church Green are proceeded.

 

†††††† 4. The proposals for High Street are proceeded.

 

†††††† 5. The proposals for Sovereign Way are proceeded.

 

†††††† 6. The proposals for Sutton Forge are proceeded.

 

†††††† 7. The proposals for Albion Road are proceeded.

 

†††††† 8. The proposals for Chantry Road are proceeded.

 

 

 

3.        AVAILABLE OPTIONS

 

3.1†† Option 1: To accept the recommendations of the Joint Transportation Board will recognise objections made in relation to specific proposals and will allow orders to be implemented to regulate parking to reduce difficulties.

 

3.2†† Option 2: Rejecting the recommendations of the Joint Transportation Board will result in some orders not being implemented, which are intended to regulate parking to reduce identified difficulties.

 

3.3†† Option 3: To make the orders as advertised would not take account of comments received during formal consultation or the views expressed by the Joint Transportation Board.

 

 

4.        PREFERRED OPTION AND REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS

 

4.1† To accept the recommendations of the Joint Transportation Board will recognise objections made in relation to specific proposals and will allow orders to be implemented to regulate parking to reduce difficulties.

 

4.2† Appendix 1 provides the proposed orders receiving objection, to The Kent County Council (Various Roads, Borough of Maidstone) (Waiting restrictions and Street Parking Places) (Variation No 22) Order 2019 with a summary of the objections and the relevant recommendations.

 

4.3† Appendix 2 provides a full summary of the consultation and responses.

 

4.4† Appendix 3 provides maps of the proposed orders.

 

 

5.       RISK

 

5.1     As part of the legal process to amend Traffic Regulation Orders,

†††† †† formal consultation has been undertaken and any objections received

†††† †† considered. As this is a legislative process, the risks associated to legal

†††† †† challenge is reduced.

 

 

6.       CONSULTATION RESULTS AND PREVIOUS COMMITTEE FEEDBACK

 

6.1†† Correspondence was sent to statutory and non-statutory consultees, Public Notices were also posted in the affected roads.

 

6.2†† A Public Notice formally advertising the orders for The Kent County Council (Various Roads, Borough of Maidstone) (Waiting restrictions and Street Parking Places) (Variation No 22) Order 2019 were published in the Local Press during the week ending Friday 1st March 2019.

 

6.3†† Full details were contained in the draft orders which, together with a copy of the Public Notices, site plans and a statement of the Councilís reasons for proposing to make the orders were placed on deposit at the Main Reception, County Hall, Maidstone, Kent, ME14 1XX, and at the Gateway Reception, King Street, Maidstone, ME156JQ.

 

6.4†† Proposed orders were advertised, and all comments received during the formal consultation were reviewed and considered.

 

6.5 † The results of the public consultation were formally presented to the Joint Transportation Board on 10th July 2019.

 

 

7.       NEXT STEPS: COMMUNICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE DECISION

 

7.1†† The decision of the Strategic Planning and Infrastructure Committee will allow Traffic Regulation Order to be amended accordingly.

 

7.2†† This will also allow the objectors to be informed of the outcome.

 

7.3†† Once the formal process has been completed, the Has Made Order will be submitted to Kent County Council for sealing.

 

7.4†† After the Order has been sealed then the restrictions can then be implemented.

 

 

8.        REPORT APPENDICES

 

8.1† The following documents are to be published with this report and form part of the report:

 

   Appendix 1: Proposed Orders Receiving Objections and the Recommendations of the Joint Transportation Board†††††

   Appendix 2: Full Summary of the Consultation and Responses

   Appendix 3: Maps of the Proposed Orders

 

 

9.        BACKGROUND PAPERS

 

9.1†† None.