The JTB discussed transport issues affecting the borough in detail, including urging KCC to use to provide safer travel in towns and villages; M2 widening at ‘20’s plenty’ Faversham; completion of the Northern Relief Road; school transport options; concerns about the road network on the Isle of Sheppey; and more frequent train services. The concern was also raised that increases pollution. ‘20’s plenty’ The Chairman proposed that delegated powers be given to him, the Vice-Chairman, and the Swale Cabinet Member for Environment and Rural Affairs to report back to the consultation with issues raised at the JTB. This was seconded and the report was noted. Thanet It was noted that LTP4 is intended to be a higher level than the district transport strategy; that Thanet District Council proposed the inclusion of Port ‘Ramsgate a scheme to improve signage for walkers would be in keeping with Investment’; Outcome 5; and that the should also be shown ‘Journey Time Improvement project’ in LTP4 in addition to The report was then noted. ‘Thanet Parkway Railway Station’. Tonbridge and Malling The report was presented and the Board were invited to respond to the consultation. Reference was made to the proposals affecting Tonbridge and Malling. Tunbridge Wells There were two public speakers at this JTB a representative from the Town Forum – Transport Working Group and the former Borough Councillor, David Scott. The Town Forum felt strategic transport was too focused on north Kent, and that the west of the county should have better links to East Sussex. They also asked for devolution of funding to local communities, for example for street lighting. David Scott asked for more emphasis on technology and presented the idea of rapid transit pods as alternative public transport in Tunbridge Wells. The Board members discussed the draft plan and remarked that it was of a high-level and did not do much for Tunbridge Wells specifically, also that making Kent a pioneer in terms of active travel needs evidencing. Questionnaire Analysis For the analysis of each question, the four district council responses that were submitted online have been excluded and will be considered separately alongside the other district and Medway responses. councils’, Council’s, Question 3: the Ambition
The JTB discussed transport issues affecting the borough in detail, including urging KCC to use ‘20’s plenty’ to provide safer travel in towns and villages; M2 widening at Faversham; completion of the Northern Relief Road; school transport options; concerns about the road network on the Isle of Sheppey; and more frequent train services. The concern was also raised that ‘20’s plenty’ increases pollution. The Chairman proposed that delegated powers be given to him, the Vice-Chairman, and the Swale Cabinet Member for Environment and Rural Affairs to report back to the consultation with issues raised at the JTB. This was seconded and the report was noted. Thanet It was noted that LTP4 is intended to be a higher level than the district transport strategy; that Thanet District Council proposed the inclusion of ‘Ramsgate Port Investment’; a scheme to improve signage for walkers would be in keeping with Outcome 5; and that the ‘Journey Time Improvement project’ should also be shown in LTP4 in addition to ‘Thanet Parkway Railway Station’. The report was then noted. Tonbridge and Malling The report was presented and the Board were invited to respond to the consultation. Reference was made to the proposals affecting Tonbridge and Malling. Tunbridge Wells There were two public speakers at this JTB – a representative from the Town Forum Transport Working Group and the former Borough Councillor, David Scott. The Town Forum felt strategic transport was too focused on north Kent, and that the west of the county should have better links to East Sussex. They also asked for devolution of funding to local communities, for example for street lighting. David Scott asked for more emphasis on technology and presented the idea of rapid transit pods as alternative public transport in Tunbridge Wells. The Board members discussed the draft plan and remarked that it was of a high-level and did not do much for Tunbridge Wells specifically, also that making Kent a pioneer in terms of active travel needs evidencing. Questionnaire Analysis For the analysis of each question, the four district council responses that were submitted online have been excluded and will be considered separately alongside the other district councils’, and Medway Council’s, responses. Question 3: the Ambition