Maidstone Borough Council

 

Maidstone Borough Council

 

Planning, Transport and environment Overview & Scrutiny Committee

 

Tuesday 18 November 2014

 

Review of Transport in Maidstone – alternatives to using a car

Stage Three – Rail Services

 

Report of: Tessa Mallett, Overview & Scrutiny Officer

 

1.          Introduction

 

1.1        At its first meeting of the 2014-15 Municipal Year the Committee agreed to carry out a review of Transport in Maidstone – alternatives to using a car, with the main purpose of looking at ways of easing congestion in Maidstone town centre.

 

1.2        A Working Group was appointed to develop and scope the review topic.  The scoping document is attached at Appendix A

 

1.3        Stage one of this review – Walking and Cycling was carried out at the meeting on 22 July 2014.

 

1.4        Stage two of this review – Bus Services was carried out on 16 and 30 September 2014.

 

1.5        The draft reports for stages one and two (Bus Services) of the review are being presented to the committee at this meeting.

 

1.6        This item is Stage three of the review – Rail Services.

 

1.7        The full draft report for all three stages of the review of Transport in Maidstone – alternatives to using a car, will be presented to the committee at their meeting of 17 February 2014.

 

1.8        In preparation for the review of Rail services the working group consulted with all Parish Councils asking for the following information:

 

·         What issues does your parish have with train services within the borough that result in people using their car rather than the train?

 

1.9        Responses were received from six Parish Councils and are attached at Appendix B. A Response from Loose Parish Council is attached as Appendix C.

 

1.10     Witnesses invited to attend this meeting are:

 

  • Mike Gibson, Public Affairs Manager, SouthEastern Rail;
  • Mike Fitzgerald, Chair Kent Community Rail Partnership and Medway Valley Line Group;
  • Keith Harrison, Chief Executive, Action with Rural Communities;
  • Stephen Gasche, Principal Transport Planner – Rail, Kent County Council (KCC).

 

1.11     Questions sent to these witnesses to help with their preparation for the meeting included:

 

·         What are your perceptions of the where the weaknesses are in rail services in the Maidstone borough?

·         What could rail service providers/planners do to relieve some of the congestion pressure in Maidstone?

·         What do you do to integrate your services with other public transport services?

·         How can scheduled changes be better communicated to users?

 

1.12     Mr Gasche is unable to attend the meeting but has sent his responses to the questions which are attached as Appendix D.  Mr Gasche responded to the following questions:

 

·         What can KCC do to help integrate all the public transport services?

·         What can KCC do to encourage more innovative transport services?

 

2.          Recommendation

 

2.1    The committee are advised to review the evidence gathered by the working group to date (Appendix B, C and D) in preparation for interviewing the witnesses at this meeting.

 

2.2        The committee may wish to focus its questioning on:

 

·         The feedback received from the parish councils;

·         The questions sent to the witnesses as per 1.11 and 1.12 above;

·         The Scoping document for the review attached as Appendix A.

 

2.3     Committee are recommended to focus their questioning on how rail services can be provided to help ease congestion in Maidstone.

 

3.      Impact on Corporate Objectives

 

3.1     The Strategic Plan sets the Council’s key objectives for the medium   term and has a range of objectives which support the delivery of         the Council’s priorities. 

 

3.2     The Committee will consider reports that deliver against the     following priorities:

 

·         ‘For Maidstone to have a growing economy’ and ‘For Maidstone to be a decent place to live”. 

 

4.      Financial Implications

 

4.1     There are no financial implications.

 

5.      Relevant Documents

 

5.1     Appendix A – Review scoping document

          Appendix B – Feedback received from borough and parish councillors

Appendix C – Feedback received from Loose Parish Council

Appendix D – Written response from Stephen Gasche, Principal Transport Planner – Rail, Kent County Council.

 

6.      Background Documents

 

6.1     None