Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Carter.

The following substitution was noted:-

Councillor Yates for Councillor Mrs Parvin

Councillor Mrs Gooch indicated her wish to speak on Item 6 – Minutes of the Meeting held on 15 April 2009 and Item 12 – Integrated Transport Programme for 2010/11.

Councillor J A Wilson declared an interest as he is the Ward Member for Coxheath and Hunton and Councillor Robertson declared an interest as he is a Member of the Medway Valley Line Committee.

All Maidstone Borough Councillors declared that they had been lobbied regarding the petition on Walderslade Woods Road.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 15 April 2009 be approved as a correct record and signed.

Mrs Jo Campbell addressed the Board concerning Item 8 – Clapper Farm Lane.  Mrs Campbell was speaking on behalf of her husband and her neighbour at Overbridge Farm.  Mrs Campbell mentioned that when she bought her property the searches undertaken by their solicitor identified only 2 public footpaths.  The tarmac section of the track was unnamed and no other public rights of way were notified.  Mrs Campbell said that they are opposed to it becoming a highway.  Mrs Campbell said that it was felt that it would compromise road safety at the Staplehurst end of the track and provide a haven for fly tipping.  Mrs Campbell mentioned that she was concerned about the way Marden Parish Council had handled this situation.  She had tried to obtain copies of the minutes of the meeting but was told they were confidential, but not why.  Mrs Campbell was not consulted in April and they believe it is an inappropriate use of tax payers money.

Mr Paul Linaker addressed the Board concerning Item 8 – Clapper Farm Lane.  Mr Linaker informed the Board that he was present at the meeting on 15 April 2009 when the Board approved the proposed report.  The Traffic Regulation Order and the briefing of residents unfortunately did not take place and now there is confusion as to whether it is a highway or not.  Mr Linaker suggested that Kent Highways officers meet with local people who have a very good knowledge of the local area and footpaths.  Mr Linaker stated that he has lived at his home for 22 years and he does not recognise the risks mentioned by Mrs Campbell.

Mr Stuart Jeffery addressed the Board concerning Item 11 – Update on Petitions.  Mr Jeffery referred to the Fant Traffic petition that was presented in January.  At the meeting in April, £85,000 for the new scheme was clearly shown to be allocated which broadly addressed all the points raised in the petition.  However, Mr Jeffery felt that there had been a u-turn by Kent Highway Services, in that it has now come to light that the scheme only covers Gatland Lane and Fant Lane.  Mr Jeffery would like to know why and feels an explanation is deserved by those residents of Fant who signed the petition.

Mr Peter Houston addressed the Board concerning Item 8 – Clapper Farm Lane.  Mr Houston said that he had lived in the same house for 31 years.  His address is Springfield Cottage, Battle Lane.  If this is meant to be Clapper Farm Lane, then why is that not his address?  Mr Campbell has experience various thefts over the years and has a constant flow of undesirables checking out the area to see what they can steal.  Mr Houston believes the lane would become a haven for fly-tipping, quad bikes etc.  Mr Houston stated that the mound of earth blocking the use of the track was left there following the bridge works.  The track is not usable in the winter as there is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Mr Moreton, the Community Delivery Manager from Kent Highway Services, updated the Board following their decision at the last meeting. 

Mr Moreton acknowledged the comments made by the public speakers this evening.  Mr Moreton confirmed that a meeting of both Marden and Staplehurst Parish Councils had taken place and residents were able to raise their concerns.  Mr Moreton confirmed there is conflicting information on the highways definitions mapping information and he has been trying to specify exactly what the status of Clapper Farm Lane is.  Mr Moreton stated that he had arranged a meeting of highways definitions officers and legal personnel on 7 August.  Once all the information has been reviewed, a decision will be made on the way forward. 

RESOLVED:  That the update be noted.

The Board considered the Report of the Interim Director of Kent Highway Services regarding the Highway Works Programme 2009/10.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

The Board considered the Report of the Interim Director of Kent Highway Services regarding Highway Drainage.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

The Board considered the report of the Head of Transport and Development regarding an update on petitions submitted to Kent Highway Services.

Mr Corcoran referred to the comments made by Mr Jeffery and stated that there has not been a u-turn.  A traffic calming scheme is being implemented and £85,000 has been allocated for that.  Mr Corcoran confirmed that consultation on the scheme was about to start.  Mr Corcoran apologised that the scheme does not extend to the full extent of the petition and that if the scheme does go ahead following consultation it will be monitored and if it is felt that it needs to be extended, it will be looked at then.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

The Board considered the report of the Head of Transport and Development regarding the Integrated Transport Programme for Maidstone 2010/11.

The Board were informed that the new Cabinet Member for Highways has decided to review the process and has arranged a meeting with all Joint Transportation Board Chairman across the County in August. 

The Board felt it was important that at the meeting of the JTB Chairmen, their concern regarding the issue of major vs minor schemes is raised and fully debated.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

The Board considered the report of the Head of Countywide Improvements – Highway Improvement Schemes 2009/10.

Members commented on some of the schemes and queries raised were answered by officers.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

5.00 p.m. to 6.30 p.m.