Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
Minutes
Community Overview Committee Held at: Boulogne Room - Civic Centre Folkestone Date Monday, 14 March 2016 Present Councillors Mrs Ann Berry, Peter Gane,
Mrs Claire Jeffrey, Mrs Mary Lawes (Chairman), Len Laws (Vice-Chair) and Mrs Rodica Wheeler
Apologies for Absence Councillor Richard Pascoe, Councillor Paul Peacock,
Councillor Mrs Susan Wallace and Councillor Roger Wilkins
Officers Present: Andy Blaszkowicz (Head of Commercial and Technical
Services), Katharine Harvey (Head of Economic Development), Jyotsna Leney (Community Safety Manager), Sue Lewis (Committee Services Officer) and Shaun Taylor (Anti-Social Behaviour Manager)
Others Present: Councillor Mrs Jenny Hollingsbee, Cabinet Member for
Communities. Rebekah Button - Safeguarding, Kevin Stevens – Emerging and Changing, Ivan Rudd – Health and Wellbeing, Hilary Knight – SKC CCG and Jayne Hagues – Troubled Families District Partnership Manager
38. Declarations of interest There were no declarations of interest.
39. Minutes The minutes of the meeting held on 8 February 2016 were submitted, approved and signed by the Chairman.
40. Community Safety Jyotsna Leney, Community Safety Manager informed members that a new Community Safety Plan had been published and in line with this invited representatives from the 5 priority sub groups to give a short talk on the work
Public Document Pack
Community Overview Committee - 14 March 2016
2
and roles they play as part of Community Safety Partnership and sub group chairs. The attached presentation provides a more detailed outline of their work with members paying particular attention to the following points under each priority. Priority 1 – Rebekah Button, Safeguarding
• Members noted the that 183 people had been assisted through the domestic abuse one-stop shop, giving advice, guidance and referrals to assist those in need.
• Year 6 – pupils hearing about the work that goes on and learning how to deal with issues within their own families.
• Year 9 Youth Conference - pupils being given the opportunity to attend workshops to learn the right from wrong through dance, theatre groups, music and partners covering issues such as Child Sexual Exploitation and radicalisation.
• Police checks – the DBS checks last for 3 years for all taxi drivers with staff and agency workers being renewed yearly.
Priority 2 – Shaun Taylor, Safe, Clean, Greener and ASB
• Clean for the Queen initiative.
• Crime reduction initiatives:- Lighting,Cheriton - has made a significant impact on the reduction in crime. Urban Pastors – 30 volunteers now work to help the youth and vulnerable on a Saturday night. TRO’s – nearly 1000 tickets have now been issued with 25 % payment rate on illegal lorry parking.
• Graffiti – this is always going to be an issue and community groups will need to be encouraged to help in this area.
• Partnership working – Rainbow Centre and Porchlight. Priority 3 – Kevin Stevens, Emerging and Changing Communities
• Gangs – there has been a significant change in the number of organised gangs in Folkestone and this is due to them being pushed out from the cities. They are targeting the young vulnerable people.
• Partnership Working – working together to help communities to help themselves.
• Integration work is ongoing eg community hub in East Folkestone
• Traveller Communities – there are no permanent sites in Shepway and the police want to work with them and partners to provide a support network for any issues that may arise.
Priority 4 – David Gardner (presented by Shaun Taylor), Preventing Offending and reducing re-offending
• Identifying those most vulnerable.
• Mapping – researching areas that are most vulnerable, paying particular attention to areas, types of residents, groups, crime statistics.
Community Overview Committee - 14 March 2016
3
• East Folkestone – working with community groups, residents and partners to support those who offend or are potential re-offenders.
• Teaching – helping families to work together, young and old and understanding their needs.
• Housing needs – looking at the types of housing in communities and how this affects residents.
Priority 5 – Ivan Rudd, Health and Wellbeing
• Main areas of concern – alcohol and healthy eating.
• Sport initiatives – see slide for further information.
• Ward Profiles – these will help with particularly hard hit areas and partners will work to teach and communicate health and wellbeing.
Councillor Mrs Hollingsbee attending in her capacity as portfolio holder thanked all concerned for the extensive work being carried out. Members asked if the link to PREVENT e-learning training could be circulated to all councillors and thanked all the representatives for their attendance.
41. Policy Statement on Flooding and Coastal Protection Report C/15/81 The Policy Statement on Flooding and Coastal Erosion Risk Management sets out how the council approaches flood and coastal defence in the district. Andy Blaszkowicz, Head of Commercial and Technical Services introduced members to an updated and simplified Policy Statement on Flooding and Coastal Erosion Risk Management. Members were informed that, although Defra has overall responsibility for flood and coastal erosion the Council has responsibility for delivering flood and coastal defence for the district and it is this policy that details how the Council will assess flood and coastal erosion risks and the action that will be taken to reduce or manage them. Particular attention was paid to the areas at significant risk in the district as follows:
• Coastal flooding
• Pent Stream – rapid response catchment
• Fluvial flooding from the Nailbourne
• Surface water flooding – Folkestone Members were pleased to see that the Pent Stream is on the list of priorities and happy to see the works that have been agreed for Beach Management and Coronation Parade, particularly the Parade as it is a priority to make it safe for the public as soon as possible. Members were happy to support the recommendations being put to Cabinet.
Community Overview Committee - 14 March 2016
4
Proposed by Councillor Peter Gane Seconded by Councillor Mrs Claire Jeffrey and Resolved: 1. To receive and note report C/15/81. 2. To approve the Policy Statement on Flooding and Coastal Erosion
Risk Management. 3. To approve that the policy statement comes into effect from the
date it is approved. (Voting: For 6; Against 0; Abstentions 0)
42. Draft response from SDC to the DfT Consultation on the New Partnership arrangements for the Southeastern Rail Service Specification The Department for Transport (DfT) / Transport for London (TfL) consultation is underway on proposed new partnership arrangements that will oversee the specification of the new South East rail franchise, which will operate from June 2018. Approval on SDC’s draft response to the consultation is being obtained via an individual members decision by Councillor Malcolm Dearden, Cabinet Member for Transport. Katharine Harvey, Head of Economic Development, introduced members to the report and the consultation document put forward by DfT/TfL. She provided members with a short presentation on the main points, as well as the council’s draft response. This is attached to the minutes for information. Members paid particular attention to the following:
• Partnership Approach – making it clear that the HS1 service remains high priority;
• Principles for Success – making it clear to safeguard services locally;
• Governance and Timing – agree the governance arrangements but assurance on transparency is needed and consultation on the new operator is vital.
Members agreed to the draft responses put forward and were happy to support the decision to be made by the Cabinet Member for Transport. Proposed by Councillor Mrs Rodica Wheeler Seconded by Councillor Mrs Mary Lawes and Resolved: 1. To receive and note Report C/15/82. 2. To note the draft response to the consultation’s six questions
(refer to Appendix 1).
Community Overview Committee - 14 March 2016
5
3. To note the proposed procedure for seeking Member approval for submission of SDC’s response to the consultation (section 4 of the report).
(Voting: For 6; Against 0; Abstentions 0)
43. Draft SDC response to DfT's Lower Thames Crossing Option C consultation This item addressed Shepway District Council’s draft response to the Department for Transport (DfT) / Highways England consultation on the Lower Thames Crossing Location C proposals. Katharine Harvey, Head of Economic Development, introduced members to the report and the consultation document put forward by DfT and Highways England (HE). She provided members with a short presentation on the main points as well as the council’s response to the consultation. This is attached to the minutes for information. Members paid particular attention to the options put forward by HE on the proposed route options leading to the bored tunnel which will cross under the Thames between Gravesend and Strood south of the river and at Tilbury to the north. These options form part of the circulated report and are also seen in the attached appendix. The draft SDC response indicates a preference for the Western southern link south of the river, as this has less environmental impact and has fewer complexities in joining the national road network. Members of the committee considered the information provided and agreed that the Cabinet Member for Transport be supported in the draft response. Proposed by Councillor Len Laws Seconded by Councillor Peter Gane and
Resolved: 1. To receive and note Report C/15/83. 2. To note the draft response to the consultation questions (appendix
2). 3. To note the proposed procedure for seeking Member approval for
submission of SDC’s response to the consultation (section 4 of the report).
(Voting: For 6; Against 0; Abstentions 0)
44. Overview and Scrutiny progress Report OS/15/17 sets out the overview and scrutiny monitoring information
Community Overview Committee - 14 March 2016
6
which is underpinned by the work programme for the Community Overview Committee. Councillors are asked to note the work of the committee. Proposed by Councillor Mrs Rodica Wheeler Seconded by Councillor Mrs Ann Berry and Resolved: 1. To receive and note report OS/15/17. 2. To note the overview and scrutiny progress (appendix 1).
(Voting: For 6; Against 0; Abstentions 0)
Shepway Community Safety Partnership Plan
2016-17
• Overview of the Partnership
• Priority 1 – Safeguarding
• Priority 2 – Clean, Green, Safer including ASB
• Priority 3 - Emerging and Changing Communities• Priority 3 - Emerging and Changing Communities
• Priority 4 - Preventing Offending and Reducing Repeat Offending.
• Priority 5 – Health & Wellbeing
• Summary and Questions
Minute Item
40
Page 7
Community Safety Partnership Structure
Safeguarding Sub Group
Chair: KCC
Domestic Abuse
Child Sexual Exploitation
Child Exploitation
Safer, Cleaner, Greener
Sub Group
Chair: SDC
Built Environment & New
Developments
CSP Meeting.
Chair: C/Insp Elmes (Kent Police)
Deputy Chair: Jeremy Chambers (SDC)
Attendees: Numerous Partners
Emerging and Changing
Communities Sub Group
Chair: Kent Police
Gangs
Migration
Health and Wellbeing
Sub Group
Chair: Public Health
Drugs and Legal Highs
Alcohol
Prevent Offending &
Reducing Repeat
Offending Sub Group
Chair: KSSCRC
Preventing OffendingChild Exploitation
Counter Terrorism-
Prevent and Vulnerable
Persons
Youth Inclusion
Trafficking / Modern
People Exploitation
Female Genital Mutilation
Developments
Housing Provision
Quality of Life &
Reassurance
Road Safety
Anti-social Behaviour
Community Cohesion &
Inclusion
Migration
Bespoke Communities
Travellers
Alcohol
Mental and Physical
Health
Active Communities
Preventing Offending
Preventing Re-Offending
Integrated Offender
Management
Troubled Families
Joint Family Management
Programme
Community Resolutions
Page 8
Introduction
• Shepway Community Safety Partnership (CSP) meets quarterly.
• Sub groups meet bi-monthly.
• Clean, Safe, Green and High Risk ASB meetings are every Tuesday.
• Funding through the Police Crime Commissioner – currently
£28,858 and agreed for next financial year only. This is given in two
payments after a report to the PCC has been submitted on how thepayments after a report to the PCC has been submitted on how the
money has been spent. The CSU applies for additional match
funding for projects.
• Sub groups defined on new emerging themes for the district taking
into account partners priorities.
• Each sub group receives £3,000 to assist with their work.
Page 9
Priority 1 – Safeguarding – Rebekah Button
• Domestic Abuse – One Stop Shop multi-agency
weekly Drop In for Domestic Abuse over the last year
has seen visitors increase by 10.3% (183 people
assisted).
• Child Exploitation and Trafficking – two officers from
the Council have been trained to deliver awareness.
Also CSU paid for online educational tool for schools
around CSE.
• Taxi drivers receiving training and awareness around
CSE and trafficking , elements will be built into their
knowledge test.
• Preventing violent extremism – two officers from the
Council have been trained to deliver awareness.
Page 10
Priority 2 - Safeguarding (cont’d)
• Networking breakfast organised for
domestic abuse providers.
• DA conference being organised for
practitioners for October 2016.
• Safety in Action Day – for year 6 pupils in
Safeguarding the Next
Generation
• Safety in Action Day – for year 6 pupils in
all of Shepway being organised.
• Youth conference – year group 9 pupils
from all secondary schools attending –
“Safeguarding The Next Generation” to be
held in June 2016.
Page 11
Priority 2 – Safe, Clean, Greener & ASB – Shaun Taylor
• Improve living standards for those within rentedaccommodation – April – Dec 2015 - 118 includeshousing condition complaints, fire safety checks, rentdeposit schemes inspections & B & B inspections,properties improved by home safe loans – 9,properties improved for disabled persons 44, energyefficiency 3
• Improve appearance of the district – Green Gym,Clean for the Queen, PSPO dog fouling New Romney
• Multi-agency action days – East Folkestone, • Multi-agency action days – East Folkestone, Hawkinge
• Crime reduction initiatives – Cheriton Rec lighting,outreach work in Hawkinge,
• Road Safety – KFRS targeted work and Road SafetyDay, Halfords and Park Farm targeted where boyracers. Local speed awareness campaigns.
• Support to the Urban Pastors scheme.
• TRO for overnight parking 600 FPN issued - 25% paid.
Page 12
Priority 2 – Safe, Clean, Greener and ASB (cont’d)
• PSPO for street begging, street drinking, the taking ofnew emerging drugs (legal highs), sleeping in a publicplace – 3 cases pending prosecution, 2 communitytriggers resolved, Missenden Court closure order, 7CBOs including 3 pending court (highest number in theCounty).
• PSPO introduced in New Romney Recreation Grounddogs prohibited unless guide and assistance dogs.
• PSPO going forward for the part closure of SmallpoxHill for flytipping.Hill for flytipping.
• Diversionary activities – SHAPE Gillingham FC andFolkestone Sports Centre – 60 young people engagedin the last year.
• Sports based projects accessible to all – 90 engagedup to Dec 2015.
• Develop Independent Advisory Group to review allpartner activity with minority groups – chaired bymember of CSU, SDC.
Page 13
Priority 3 – Emerging and Changing Communities – Inspector Kevin
Stephens
• Complete a profile of the gangs in Shepway – “feet on
the street” multi-agency event – Payers Park, East
Folkestone.
• Develop community interventions to aid intelligence
and disrupt gang activity – intelligence gathering,
search warrants, stop checks, covert observations.
• Develop multi-agency risk assessment and referral
process for those vulnerable to being recruited into
gangs.
• Develop and understanding of bespoke communities
within Shepway and develop regular engagement.
Page 14
Priority 3 – New and Emerging Communities (cont’d)
• Understand the drivers of migration in and out of
the district.
• Understand the needs of migrants and the wider
communities and support their integration.
• Travellers – understand the legal requirements in
respect of travellers.respect of travellers.
• Develop accessible community services hub to
facilitate engagement and participation with
partners – Roma Community Hub every Thursday
4.30 – 7.00 Early Years Centre, Dover Road.
Page 15
Priority 4 – Preventing Offending and Reducing Reoffending –
David Gardner
• Identifying those most vulnerable to reoffendingand assessing their needs to reduce the risks.
• Identify specific “hotspots” of need in relation forcrime and ASB
• Identify target group to focus on – 9-12 year oldsas early intervention process.
• Reduce intergeneration offending – how the• Reduce intergeneration offending – how thebehaviour of parents and siblings can affect theindividual.
• Ensure the right support systems are in place.
• Mechanism to deliver intervention, diversion,support and restorative justice – “PositiveChoices”
Page 16
Priority 4 – Preventing Offending and Reducing Reoffending (cont’d)
• 5 Step intervention approach
• Youth coaching
• Anger management
• Family conferencing
• Separated parents mediation
• Restorative Justice
• Support young offenders with
consideration of cultural barriers.
• Increase the number of young
people in restorative justice
conferences to reduce the fear of
crime.
Page 17
Priority 5 – Health and Wellbeing – Ivan Rudd/Hilary Knight
• Know Your score –www.kent.gov.uk/knowyourscore
• Support County health campaigns
• - Alcohol
- Stay well this winter
- Keep warm
- Get flu jab
- Healthy Eating- Healthy Eating
• Promote Kent Alcohol Care pathway –identification of high risk groups, training foridentification and referral pathways.
• Linking in with the schools in deprived areasto the Folkestone Sports Centre to developtaster sessions for families.
Page 18
Priority 5 – Health and Wellbeing (cont’d)
• Increase health and wellbeing in the
workplace – organisations to invite
their HR team to discuss.
• Delivery of the Mind and Body
programme by Kent Addaction
supporting young people in relation to
self harm.self harm.
• Street Cheer programme the
Folkestone Sports Centre
• Funding for the SHAPE Programme
linking into Gillingham FC and the
Folkestone Sports Centre.
Page 19
Summary and Questions
• 5 sub groups with a working Tactical Delivery Plan.
• Accountable to the PCC office on how funds are spent
and they attend CSP meetings and receive regular
updates.
• Work of the Partnership is in conjunction with priorities• Work of the Partnership is in conjunction with priorities
for the Council and strategies of partners, particularly
the Kent Control Strategy, Kent Police, PCC Police and
Crime Plan and the KCC Kent Alcohol Strategy.
Page 20
Community Overview Committee
Shepway District Council’s draft
response to the DfT/Highways England
consultation on new partnership
arrangements for the South East rail
service specification
Community Overview Committee
14th March 2016
Dr Katharine HarveyHead of Economic Development
Minute Item
42
Page 21
– Intention to transfer from DfT to TfL
responsibility for overseeing inner suburban
services operating wholly or mostly within
Greater London.
– Sets out commitment to improve capacity
and service levels across London and the
South East’s rail network, through greater
partnership working between TfL/DfT and
other stakeholders
Consultation on new partnership arrangements for the
South East Rail service franchise specification
other stakeholders
– Partnership arrangements will influence the
process for awarding new train franchises in
Greater London and SE to operate from
February 2018
Views by 18th March 2016 to questions on four themes - Partnership Approach;
Principles for Success; Governance and Timing and What can be achieved
Page 22
Partnership Approach- Aims to develop a partnership approach involving DfT, TfL, rail operators, Network
Rail, supply chain companies plus wider stakeholders including Local Authorities;
LEPs; other local/regional organisations
- Want to get clearer understanding and focus on the role of rail infrastructure
investment in supporting economic growth
- Want to speed up infrastructure investment and service improvements
1. Do you agree with the principle of a partnership to better integrate the
specification of rail passenger services across London and the South East?
SDC Draft Response
3
SDC Draft Response
- Agree with partnership approach principle.
- Needs to be proportionate and equitable
- Assurance that utlying areas (such as Shepway) have same level of priority as
others and have an influence over the new services
- Service development on HS1 continues to be a priority with service
improvements to and from the coast
- Investment is in line with area’s plans for housing and jobs growth
Page 23
Principles for Success
• More frequent services, better interchanges and increased capacity
• Greater reliability for all passengers
• High standards of customer service
2. Do you agree with the principles that the partnership will work to? Are there any
specific issues that have not been captured?
4
SDC Draft Response
- Support the three principles
- Should be applied equally and proportionally to safeguard rail service needs
of outlying and coastal communities
Page 24
Governance and Timing- Responsibility for overseeing inner suburban services operating wholly or mostly
within Greater London transferred to TfL from DfT.
- Outer suburban and south east area services will remain the responsibility of DfT.
- Demarcation of boundaries subject to further discussion between DfT and TfL.
- Proposed partnerships to oversee governance arrangements for the respective
areas and stakeholder views to be taken into account during the specification and
management of train operator contracts
3. Do you agree with the proposed governance arrangements?
5
SDC Draft Response
- Support proposed governance arrangements in principle.
- But further detail required on detail and transparency to show and ensure
stakeholders views are taken account of.
Page 25
Governance and Timing4. What form do you propose the input from local authorities and LEPs could
take?
SDC Draft Response
- Local Authorities should be formally consulted on potential new rail
operator contract
- Will enable views on the desired level of service provision to be apparent
at an early stage
5. Do you agree with the safeguards for transfer of inner suburban services to TFL
6
5. Do you agree with the safeguards for transfer of inner suburban services to TFL
as set out here?
SDC Draft Response
- Want to ensure service changes for inner suburban network do not
adversely affect and lead to a poorer service to and from outside TfL area
- Want to ensure that HS1 to and from London St Pancras continue to be a
priority with service improvements to and from the coast as demand from
the coast increases
Page 26
What can be achieved?
6. Are there other outcomes you might expect to see achieved??
SDC Draft Response
- Welcomes aspiration to ensure that service improvements focussed on
suburban London are not at the expense of longer distance services from the
wider South East
- But practicality of achieving this depends on the practical effectiveness of
partnerships and their influence over Network Rail
7
- Better use of technology and real time information welcomed
- But infrastructure across the whole network will need to be put in place for this to
work
Page 27
Community Overview Committee
Shepway District Council’s draft
response to the DfT/Highways
England consultation on the Lower
Thames Crossing Option C Proposals
Community Overview Committee
14th March 2016
Dr Katharine HarveyHead of Economic Development
Page 28
Policy framework and Initial Actions• Based on a willingness of local communities to participate
• Recognises importance of providing upfront information on
issues such as geology, socio-economic impacts and
community investment
• A number of initial actions followed by a process of working
with communities. The Initial Actions include:
9
with communities. The Initial Actions include:
– A National Geological Screening (NGS)exercise
– Amendments to national land-use planning arrangements
for GDF and boreholes
– Providing greater clarity on how DECC/RWM intend to
work with communities
Page 29
Siting process
10
Page 30
GDF Initial Actions
11
Page 31
Draft National Geological Screening Guidance
Issued for consultation Sept 2015 – response
deadline 4th Dec 2015
Consultation seeks views on:•Approach to screening
•Sources of information to be used
•Form of the outputs•Form of the outputs
•Any other matters considered relevant
Page 32
Approach
The screening will:
1. Consider the long term safety of the geological
environment addressing 5 geological topics of
Rock type, Rock structure, Groundwater, Natural
processes and Resources
2. Provide geological descriptions at regional scale2. Provide geological descriptions at regional scale
Detailed technical instructions on how to capture
the information, reviewed by the Independent
Review Panel (IRP)
Page 33
Approach -SDC response• Welcome bringing together all existing geological information
available
• Agree with the general approach proposed
• Welcome the inclusion of the IRP and this will give public
confidence
• Recommend that explicit reference is made to considering
international evidence from work in other countriesinternational evidence from work in other countries
• Pleased to note that a range of suitable geology, including
sedimentary rocks and evaporites has been identified
internationally as suitable for geological disposal.
• Welcome that seismicity will be addressed
• Welcome that the volumes of rock suitable for only a part of the
inventory will also be included in the screening.
Page 34
Sources of Information
Page 35
Sources -SDC response• Not able to comment on the appropriateness of the data and
information sources that are being proposed for this exercise
• But confident that through using the IRP of experts and this
consultation process that appropriate sources will be used.
Page 36
NGS Outputs
Page 37
NGS Outputs
Page 38
Outputs -SDC response• Recognise the logic of using BGS regions
• Needs to be as much information provided as possible for
specific areas where there has been previous debate on the
potential siting of a GDF so that this process takes things
forward for these areas.
• The narrative output needs to be as clear and easy to • The narrative output needs to be as clear and easy to
understand as possible, but with more detailed information also
available
Page 39
Other issues -SDC response
• Request that the process includes an indication of the relative
veracity or confidence in the level of information provided in
one area versus that available in another place, either by
means of a scale for different areas to reflect this, or as part of
the narrative.
This would enable communities to better understand:This would enable communities to better understand:
• the relative confidence that can be ascribed to the geological
information available for one community compared to another;
and
• the amount of further preliminary investigations of the geology
might be required in the early further stages of the consultation
process.
Page 40
Community Overview Committee
Shepway District Council’s draft
response to the DfT/Highways
England consultation on the Lower
Thames Crossing Option C Proposals
Community Overview Committee
14th March 2016
Katharine Harvey
Head of Economic Development
Minute Item
43
Page 41
Background
• In 2013 Highways England consulted on
Option A (existing Dartford Crossing) and
Option C (eastwards between Gravesend
and Strood)
• In January 2016 HE identified Option C as • In January 2016 HE identified Option C as
the ‘preferred’ option and is consulting on
details
• Deadline for responses 24th March 2016
Page 42
Current consultation
Views being sought on:
• Choice of Location C
• Route options north of the Thames (i.e. Essex)
• Route options south of the Thames in Kent
• Nature of proposed scheme• Nature of proposed scheme
Page 43
Choice of Location C- Location C crossing is east of Gravesend and west of Strood in Kent and to Tilbury in
Thurrock.
- SDC supported Location C in January 2013 consultation
On balance do you agree or disagree with a crossing at location C?
SDC Draft Response
4
SDC Draft Response
Support Location C subject to:
- measures to mitigate local environmental and community impacts
- consultation with affected local authorities and local communities
Page 44
Routes north of Thames in Essex
- Three routes – 2,3 & 4. Route 3 favoured.
SDC Draft Response
- All appear viable, meet transport objectives and will unlock housing and jobs growth
- Have varying adverse local environmental and community impacts
- Will consider supporting Essex County Council’s position in respect of their preferred
Where do you think the route should be located north of the river?
5
On balance do you agree or disagree with our proposal for each of these?
- Will consider supporting Essex County Council’s position in respect of their preferred
option
SDC Draft Response
- Appear to be best available route options
- All give improved north/south freight and transport flows to/from other parts of the
country
Page 45
Page 46
Routes south of Thames in Kent- Two route options – Western southern link and Eastern southern link. Eastern
southern link favoured
SDC Draft Response
- Both are viable and will meet transport and economic growth objectives
- Each has differing adverse local environmental and community impacts
- Further discussion is required with affected local authorities and communities
- SDC is in favour of supporting KCC’s position which is to favour the Western
southern link due to:
Where do you think the route should be located south of the river?
7
On balance do you agree or disagree with our proposal for each of these?
southern link due to:
- Lesser environmental impact
- Fewer complexities of Eastern southern link’s joining point with M2 at Junction 1
- SDC will reconsider its position if the adverse environmental impacts of Eastern
Southern Link can be overcome
SDC Draft Response
- Appear to be best available route options
- Need to take the views of affected local authorities and local communities into
account
Page 47
Western Southern Link Eastern Southern Link
Page 48
Proposed schemes- Twin tunnels with two lanes each direction and space for maximum 3 lanes.
- Tunnel 2 miles long
SDC Draft Response
- Should also consider immediately designing for 3 lane capacity in each direction,
with scope for 4 lanes in the future
- Concern that there not a strategic enough approach that looks at improving roads
and junctions further afield which feed into the Thames Crossings.
Having evaluated the options, do you agree or disagree with our proposed
scheme?
9
and junctions further afield which feed into the Thames Crossings.
- Other measures that should be included are:
• Road improvements on A229 Bluebell Hill; M2 Junction 5 with the A249; M2 /
A2 Brenley Corner; and duelling of the A2 north of Dover along Jublilee Way to
Whitfield and near Lydden.
• Measures that support bifurcation on the strategic road network to enable
traffic to either choose the M20 corridor to the Channel Tunnel or the M2/A2
corridor to Dover
- Should fully explore opportunities for private sector funding for delivery of option C
proposals and for part of any future toll income to be ring-fenced to improve Kent’s
wider road network
Page 49
Proposed schemes
SDC Draft Response
- Further testing and modelling of their preferred options and junctions required
- Need reassurance that longer distance traffic using the new Crossing will not leak
onto the local road network and lead to an increase in traffic on local road
We would welcome any comments you may have on our proposals for junctions,
and feedback on additional junctions.
10
Page 50
