REPORT FORMAT INCLUDING DECISION NOTICE FOR CABINET€¦ · Web viewConsiders that this project should be installed before any new houses are built . 1. Does not believe more people

A28 Sturry Road, Bus, Taxi and Cycle Lane, Canterbury

To: Canterbury Joint Transportation Board - 14 November 2017

Main Portfolio Area: Growth, Environment & Transport

By: Roger Wilkin, Director of Highways, Transportation & Waste

Classification: For Recommendation

Ward: Northgate

Division: Canterbury City North

Summary: Report on the results of the A28 Sturry Road Bus, Taxi and Cycle Lane consultation

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Sturry Road forms part of the main A28 corridor and is a key route for buses, carrying the flagship Triangle route from Herne Bay, the Breeze from Thanet, and the Park and Ride service from Sturry Road. All are high frequency and well patronised routes. Add to this the school buses and there are over 200 buses on weekdays that use this route. The existing bus lane begins at the Park and Ride site and runs westwards to Vauxhall Road then is discontinuous until South Street meaning that there is a gap of approximately 600m.

1.2 The Canterbury Local Plan aims to deliver 16,000 new homes by 2031. Of the 12 key strategic sites allocated, 6 are accessed from and to Canterbury via the Sturry Road corridor. Mass movement of residents through this corridor is therefore a fundamental component of the successful delivery of that plan. The adopted KCC and CCC Transport Strategy relies on providing good alternatives to the private car to encourage people to travel by more sustainable means. Buses need to provide fast and reliable journey times in order to be an attractive alternative. The provision of this bus lane in Sturry Road, is an opportunity to provide those benefits without disadvantaging traffic in the all vehicle lanes.

2.0 Scheme Overview

2.1 Many developments in the nearby area have contributed, through conditions to their planning permission, towards the extension of the bus lane as part of their mitigation for the highway impact of their development(s). This scheme is an opportunity to provide the required mitigation, and promote bus patronage. It may free up some capacity in the all vehicle lane by removing buses and taxis

from that lane. The proposed scheme provides a bus lane from Vauxhall Road roundabout to South Street, as is shown in the drawing in Appendix B.

3.0 Consultation Results

3.1 A wide reaching consultation was carried out over the 6 weeks between 11 September and 22 October to gauge the public’s views on the proposals. 117 responses to the consultation were received and are summarised in the table below:

All Responses

Response Residents of Sturry Road

Residents of the area

Non-residents

All

Strongly agree 0 14 31 45

Tend to agree 0 6 18 24

Neither agree nor disagree 0 0 2 2

Tend to disagree 1 2 5 8

Strongly disagree 17 5 14 36

Don’t know 0 0 1 1

3.2 Full details of the written responses and analysis of those responses are given in Appendix C.

3.3 Residents raised common issues including loss of parking, loading problems that the bus lane would cause, traffic running much closer to houses with the issues of noise, vibration, safety and privacy. There was also concern about pedestrian safety as buses will be running much closer to the footways, particularly opposite the petrol station where the traffic lanes and existing footway widths are narrow.

3.4 The Kent Tile Centre was concerned about parking and loading. There is often parking available in front of their showroom during the daytime while residents are away at work. They have concerns that if customers do not have convenient parking, their business will no longer be viable.

3.5 Loading is another significant issue for residents. While the day to day issues such as postal services and refuse collections are allowed in the bus lane, deliveries of larger items such as furniture and white goods would not be permitted as standard. Deliveries would have to be made from the opposite side of the road or from side streets which causes issues for these larger deliveries either crossing a busy road or having to be moved from a parking space somewhere up a side street.

3.6 The narrow lanes in the localised area near the Kent Tile Centre were also a concern. Of necessity, the three 3m wide lanes are below the desirable lane widths. This will mean that the buses will have to run close to the pavement and the front of the houses. Pedestrian safety was raised as the existing footway is narrow and often used by people with mobility scooters and pushchairs, this is restrictive particularly on bin collection day. Concerns were also raised about the increase in noise, vibration and road spray affecting their properties and with privacy issues as the buses will be running very close to the front of their homes. The current on-street parking does tend to give an additional buffer of over 2m to ease this issue. Further east it is possible to widen the footway to between 2.5 to 3 metres as an improvement as part of the scheme.

3.7 Kent Police did not object to the proposals but expressed concern about the additional burden of enforcement on them at a time when their resources are being cut.

3.8 Councillors Alan Baldock and Jean Butcher, the two ward councillors for Northgate ward submitted a joint response to the consultation and raised the following points:

Road Safety: the narrow running lanes will mean that pedestrians will be closer to moving traffic the present arrangement where there is a buffer of parked cars. On refuse collection days pedestrians will have to move into the carriageway to pass the wheelie bins.

Loss of parking: the scheme does not propose any form of alternative parking. The option has not been investigated to negotiate shared residents’ parking with the businesses in Sturry Road that have off street parking such as Asda, B and Q and Marshwood Close.

Loss of trees: the scheme proposes the removal of roadside trees and does not offer any replacement.

Deliveries and taxis: these are not catered for and therefore any loading and unloading would have to be carried out remotely at great inconvenience.

Missing link: it is incorrect to state that this bus lane is the missing link as there is another missing link where buses have to join the main running lane of traffic between B and Q and Old Park Avenue. The bus lane is also missing outside Jesus Hospital.

3.9 The full text of this letter is available in Appendix E

4.0 Options Considered

4.1 There are a number of options that have been considered:

Option 1: Proceed with the project as proposed.

This is an identified project in the adopted Transport Strategy and will help to meet the agreed target to increase bus patronage. It can be provided without removing traffic lanes or prejudicing against existing traffic flows. As objections have been received in relation to no loading, it is likely that a Public Inquiry will

be required and therefore a significant delay to the programme with no guarantee that funding will be available in future years.

Option 2: Proceed with the project and include an exemption in the bus lane Order to allow loading/unloading except between 7.30am and 9.30am and 4pm and 6pm (the am and pm peak).

This would address one of the main concerns raised in the consultation that loading and unloading would be prohibited if the bus lane were to be provided. Whilst this would represent a slightly less beneficial scheme from the buses perspective during the off peaks, it would be a compromise and would serve to mitigate some of the objections made during the consultation. This would also negate the need for a Public Inquiry.

Option 3: Not to proceed with the scheme at the present time. This will result in the funding being lost and/or returned to developers and more importantly an essential element of the Transport Strategy being undermined. Proceeding in this way would also mean Members must accept the large growth in the area, resulting from numerous development sites, would cause an increase in traffic flows, congestion and delays with no scope for modal shift.

5.0 Next Steps

5.1 If the project is approved, the scheme will be progressed to detailed design, with a view to construction in the spring/summer of 2018.

6.0 Financial

6.1 The overall estimated scheme cost is £700,000. KCC have secured allocation from the Local Growth Fund of £300,000. £147,000 of funding is available from developer’s S106 contributions and a bid for funding from the Kent Lane Rental Fund has been successful for the remaining £253,000.

7.0 Legal implications

7.1 Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO) for the parking restrictions and the bus lane have been advertised. If there are any relaxations to the requirements of the Order, these can be included and the TRO can be made.

8.0 Conclusions

8.1 The consultation on the scheme has highlighted that there is positive support for the provision of a westbound bus lane on Sturry Road as an extension to the existing. Objections have been received relating to loss of on street parking and loss of amenity.

The scheme is a key measure, the first to come forward from the newly adopted Transport Strategy, that will encourage sustainable travel to the City.

9.0 Recommendations

9.1 It is recommended that Option 2 is progressed. This represents the best compromise between the overall aim of the scheme to encourage sustainable travel into the City and retain some residential amenity.

Future Meeting if applicable: None Date:

Contact Officer: Gary Peak – Schemes Project Managere mail: [email protected]: 03000 418181orColin Finch - Principal Transport & Development Planner (Canterbury & Swale)E mail: [email protected]: 03000 418181

Reporting to: Tim Read - Head of Transportation Service

Appendices

Appendix A Scheme Context PlanAppendix B Consultation PlanAppendix C Detailed Consultation Responses and analysisAppendix D Journey time survey carried out by a local residentAppendix E Full response received from Ward Councillors Alan Baldock and

Jean Butcher

mailto:[email protected]

Appendix B – Consultation Plan

KEYSturry Link Rd with bus lane Proposed bus Lane Existing bus lane Future developer funded bus lane

Appendix B – Consultation Plan

Appendix C: Analysis of Responses

117 responses to the consultation questionnaire were received and in addition 3 letters were received via the local ward councillors. The breakdown of where the responses came from is given in the table below:

Response Number of responses

A resident of the affected length of Sturry Road 23

A resident of the area (excludes people who also said they are a resident of the affected street) 27

A local business owner 5

A pedestrian who uses the pavements along Sturry Road 29

A cyclist Who uses Sturry Road 26

A bus passenger who travels along Sturry Road 39

A driver who uses Sturry Road 72

Other 13

A representative of a local community group or residents association 2

On behalf of a Parish/Borough/Town/District Council in an official capacity 1

On behalf of a charity, voluntary or community sector organisation (VCS) 1

Other organisation 1

People were asked how much the proposals will affect them and were asked to rank the effect on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means ‘it won’t affect me at all’ to 5 where it means ‘it will affect me a lot’. The responses received are summarised in the table below:

Affect Scale Number of responses

It won’t affect me 1 4

2 18

3 24

4 29

It will affect me a lot 5 38

Don’t Know 4

When asked why it will/won’t affect them there were a range of responses and these are summarised in the table below:

Response Number of occurrences

Objection to the loss of on-street parking 26

Objection to the loading restrictions 14

Concerns about the traffic running closer to homes and the noise, vibration, spray and privacy issues this raises 18

Agreement that the project will reduce delays, congestion, improve journey times or improve traffic flow 18

Comment that the project will not reduce delays, improve journey times or improve traffic flow 11

General comment that Sturry Road is congested and they wouldn’t want it any worse 1

Comment that the bus lane was needed over the whole length of the road 1

Comment that the bus lane isn’t needed as there is no congestion on this section 2

Comment that the project will improve the speed or reliability of bus services 7

Concern that it will be worse for non-bus traffic 5

Comment that it will not help traffic leaving the city 2

Considered that air quality will be improved 1

Concerned that this project will not help to reduce air pollution or will make it worse 13

Comment that cycle journeys into Canterbury will be improved 2

Concern that the project will make it worse for cyclists 6

Considered that alternative cycle provision is needed 3

Comment that few cyclists use the existing cycle lane 1

Comment that people would not transfer from cars to buses 2

Comment that respondent would consider changing to bus/ Park & Ride 1

Comment that public transport is not an option for many people 1

Concern that properties will be devalued 6


Concern that buses running close to narrow pavements will be a danger for pedestrians 6

Concerned about or Objects to the loss of trees 3

Concerned that the 3m lanes are too narrow and will force traffic into the bus lane or result in conflict between large vehicles 2

Concerned about the increased light pollution from the relocated streetlights 1

Concern that the bus lane will damage the visual amenity of Sturry Road 2

Statement that the money should be spent on repairing roads instead 2

Suggestion that the road should be widened on the other side so that parking could be retained 1

Suggestion that motorcycles should be able to use the bus lane 1

Comment that there is a need to restrict large lorries, 4x4s and loud motorbikes 1

Suggestion that Sturry Road be made one way from Vauxhall Roundabout to Northgate Roundabout and Broadoak Road be made one way in the opposite direction from St Stephens Roundabout to Vauxhall Road

1

Concern about the speed taxi drivers will travel at in the bus lane 1

3.10 The questionnaire also asked “To what extent do you agree or disagree with the proposal to construct a new city bound bus lane along Sturry Road between the Vauxhall Roundabout and South Street”. The responses are summarised in the table below:


Strongly agree 45

Tend to agree 24

Neither agree nor disagree 2

Tend to disagree 8

Strongly disagree 37

Don’t know 1

When asked why it will/won’t affect them there were a range of responses and these are summarised in the table below:


Objection to the loss of on-street parking 12

Agreement that bus/cycle journey times will be more reliable 12

Concern that the project will make air pollution worse 11

Support for measures to ease congestion 7

Unhappy with the loss of the outbound cycle lane 8

Considers that the project will not improve traffic flow or improve congestion 6

Concern about pedestrian safety as the removal of parking and verge will bring buses much closer to pedestrians 5

Concerns about the traffic running closer to homes and the noise, vibration, spray and privacy issues this raises 3

Supports measures to improve bus journey times/priority 4

Concern about the condition of the road surface at present including potholes and sunken covers

(note: this project includes the resurfacing of the carriageway)4

Support for measures that will encourage Park & Ride usage 3

Concern about the removal of trees 4

Considered that a Sturry bound bus lane is also needed 1

Disagree with taxis using the bus lane 1

Considers that this project should be installed before any new houses are built 1

Does not believe more people will use bus services or cycle 1

Considers that the number of bus stops could be reduced 1

Suggests that an outbound bus lane would ease congestion in the city centre more than an inbound lane 1

Considers that there will need to be enforcement of the bus lane, especially for delivery drivers who will park on the bus lane 1

Considers that the Fordwich to Canterbury cycle route is an unsuitable alternative 1


Suggests that we have two lanes inbound in the morning and two lanes outbound in the evening 1

Concern that properties will be devalued 2

Suggests that electric cars be allowed to use the bus lane 2

Concern about parking for disabled people 1

Roadworks to build the project will be worse than the existing problems 2

Considers that there is insufficient space for an extra lane 1

Suggestions of additional/alternative measures in the wider Canterbury area 4

3.11 From the consultation these results can be broken down by user types and whether they live in the area or are passing through:

All Responses



Non-residents All







Bus passengers using Sturry Road



Non-residents All







Cyclists using Sturry Road



Non-residents All







Motorists using Sturry Road



Non-residents All







Appendix C – Detailed Consultation Responses. Responses have been cut & pasted from original response with personal data removed

Question 3Please indicate on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 means ‘It won’t affect me at all’ and 5 means It will affect me a lot how much the proposal is likely to affect you

Response Please tell us why:5 1. Safety concerns

a. Many residents of Sturry Road will lose the on-street parking along that stretch of road. This means they will have to park further away, in other streets, which is a safety concern if they have to walk alone and/or in darkness between their cars and houses. This may be of particular concern to the vulnerable residents.

b. The pavement is already narrow along the stretch of road between numbers 182 – 216. This is further-compromised in parts by telegraph poles on the pavement and – one day per week – wheelie bins. There is an unusual raised kerb along this stretch which is a particular favourite with small kids who like to walk along it. If the bus lane goes ahead, the pavement becomes much more dangerous. When a bus passes by, a pedestrian will be walking on a narrow strip of pavement with solid walls of the houses on one side of them and a moving bus on the other. It would be very dangerous for a child to walk on the raised kerb.

c. The new proposed bus lane will also serve as a taxi lane. There are no plans to install speed measures/cameras (there have to be three severe injuries or deaths before a speed camera can be installed). I am concerned that some taxi drivers will use this lane to drive at excessive speeds, which is a further safety concern.

d. There are obviously pedestrian crossings already in place, and these will remain. However, many people will cross the road without using a pedestrian crossing. They do this at their own risk, of course; however the addition of the bus lane will mean there are now three active lanes to cross instead of two. This increases the risk of an accident.

e. At the narrowest stretch of the road, near Esso, the three lanes of moving traffic are planned to be “approximately 3m” each. HGVs and buses are wider than 3m each when you take the wing mirrors into account. This can only result in accidents when these large vehicles try to pass each other. A collision of wing mirrors constitutes an accident, which requires both vehicles to stop. This will cause delays along exactly the piece of road on which you are proposing to reduce delays, as well as inconveniencing both vehicle drivers and potentially numerous bus passengers. According to the Average Daily Flow figures that you provided me with, in 2016 there were 576 buses and 583 HGVs, so the potential for collisions is very high. Whilst speaking to you on the telephone on 24 October you stated that the “approximately 3m” widths also included up to the midpoint of the 25cm dividing line. I have since been informed by a retired Principal Traffic Engineer of 44 year’s experience that this is incorrect. Graham Aldridge (I understand you have already been forwarded some of his comments regarding this


Response Please tell us why:proposal) stated that, “The actual lane should be 3 metres not including the marking. It is wrong to assume that you can install a bus lane where the drivers will have to stray onto the bus lane line. It would wear the road marking very quickly and make it difficult for drivers, not familiar with the area to understand the layout. It would also mean that the buses would be squeezing through literally millimetres away from other vehicles especially if cars have stopped with the nearside of the car close to the bus lane line. Even car mirrors can be fairly wide and a bus in that situation would not be able to pass., If the other vehicle is a lorry, it would be impossible for the bus to pass. Drivers in the lane adjacent to the bus lane would be forced to stop very close to the bus lane line or they would be too close, dangerously close in fact, to traffic travelling in the opposite direction.”

2. It’s unnecessary

a. This part of Sturry Road rarely gets congested currently. Buses come along frequently and it’s easy to catch one within a few minutes. The proposal suggests that housing developments in Herne Bay, Sturry and Hersden plus the new Sturry Link Road will mean greater flow of traffic along Sturry Road but that doesn’t make sense. People who want an easier journey into Canterbury from those areas (especially Sturry and Herne Bay) can already take an alternative route through Broad Oak/Broad Oak Road and enter Canterbury at the St Stephen’s end (I do it myself sometimes and it’s rarely congested through Broad Oak either).

b. At the very least, why can’t the KCC “wait and see”? According to the Schedule of Housing Developments you provided to me, the plan is for only circa 5,000 houses to be built over the course of the next 14 years. The turnaround time for this proposal from start of consultation (Sept 2017) to planned implementation (Jan 2018) is very short at four months. So why not wait and see what the actual effect is, rather than assume the forecast effect (which we all know, by the very nature of forecast analysis, contains supposition and guesswork)?

c. The removal of the peak-hour restriction on cars turning into Brymore Road would be a more effective way of reducing cars on the part of Sturry Road that does tend to get a bit more congested. Currently anyone who needs to get to the Council offices, Royal Mail sorting office, Canterbury Court and all the residents of the surrounding roads have to drive up Tourtel Road and access these places via Military Road.

d. The works are expected to cost £700,000, which I consider to be a waste of public funds. There are a number of local roads, such as East Street and Vauxhall Avenue, that would benefit from resurfacing – a


Response Please tell us why:more relevant and necessary way to spend the money.

e. I feel the current ‘congestion’ is usually only an illusion created by the four pedestrian crossings and the traffic-light controlled junction along the length of the road. A driver may feel the road is slow-moving but this is largely created by the constant stop/start of travel caused by all the traffic lights. This is highlighted in more detail in my next point.

f. I have taken the liberty, over the last few weeks, of collecting video evidence of which shows there is no current need for the new bus lane; in fact far from it. The road could sustain a much greater level of traffic before congestion would make its way up to and past South Street. The videos are available on request, but I have summarised my findings in Appendix A.

3. Loss of parking spaces

a. Approximately 20 parking spaces will be lost in total. This will not only affect those 20 drivers, but also the hundreds of other car drivers in the surrounding residences of South Street, East Street, Reed Avenue, Field Avenue, Vauxhall Avenue, Vauxhall Crescent and Riverdale Road if Sturry Road residents have to start parking their cars in one of these locations.

b. It is unrealistic to assume that the loss of the parking spaces is nothing more than a minor inconvenience to the affected residents. The surrounding roads, named above, are already full to bursting with cars. It was a huge and irresponsible oversight that KCC did not include these residents in the consultation by leafleting these addresses and give them a decent opportunity for them to have their say. As you know, I’ve been door-knocking over the last few weeks and making them aware but I was not able to cover all the potentially-affected addresses (circa 400). I can report that at the time of writing, I have covered around 90 addresses and only one person (in Conrad Avenue) has said she is in favour of the new bus lane. A few people were indifferent and the vast majority (around 80) were against it.

c. There is a very real risk to us residents of Sturry Road who manage to park their cars on one of the neighbouring streets that we may experience malicious damage to our vehicles from disgruntled residents of those streets. From speaking to many of them I learned that they already struggle to park. I also know of one Sturry Road resident who has already had all her tyres let down when she parked in South Street overnight.

d. There is currently unrestricted parking available at Marshwood retail park, which makes a useful (unofficial) overflow car park for the local residents. If the loss of these 20 parking spaces along the road means


Response Please tell us why:that this car park is used more frequently there is a likelihood that restrictions will be brought in (eg a Parking Eye surveillance system), which means that nobody will be able to leave their car there for more than an hour or two. Furthermore, at the time of writing, only two of the four units in Marshwood are currently in use, with the other two due to open imminently. There is also a fifth unit currently in construction (which is replacing approximately 20 parking spaces), and this increases parking demand for the businesses further. This, in effect, means that parking demand on Sturry Road increases further if Marshwood ceases to become an option. In any case there is no guarantee that residents can rely on this parking which is on private land.

e. The Kent Tile Centre at 210 Sturry Road needs to use the road outside their shop to take in deliveries. In addition, the loss of parking for them will have a major detrimental impact on their 40-year-old family business. They currently rent a car park for customers’ use but that is not guaranteed to continue. If they lose the on-street parking outside the shop and they lose their car park they will almost certainly not be able to continue to trade from 210 Sturry Road. They will have to relocate to another premises, losing that familiarity with their current customer base and potentially (eg if they relocate to an industrial estate) much of their passing trade. They are actually google-searched more often on the search term “Sturry Road Tile Shop” than they are on the actual business name of “Kent Tile Centre” so relocating may lose them those potential customers.

4. Other concerns

a. Unloading our cars outside our houses will no longer be possible if the bus lane goes ahead. How do you propose we do a weekly shop? We can’t park up to unload and we would also be unable to have groceries delivered as the delivery vehicle would not be able to stop outside. Where will the removal lorry park when we want to move home? Where is the refuse lorry supposed to park on bin day?

f. When I bought my house I did so within a week of it going on the market and I paid the full asking price. One of the big attractions for me was the nearby parking. As I said, I suffer from anxiety, panic attacks and depression and it was important for me to be able to park safely close to my house. When I inevitably come to sell my house I can reasonably expect, according to an estate agent friend of mine, to wait substantially longer for a buyer and to not achieve full asking price. You have already informed me that KCC will not provide me with any financial compensation should the bus lane go ahead, so I am expected to take this financial hit myself. I also rent out my spare room and the


Response Please tell us why:loss of parking will affect the rent I can charge.

g. I cannot quantify this next point because I am not a buildings expert; however I feel that having buses running so much closer to my house could cause some degree of structural damage. The house already shakes when a bus or lorry passes by. Your Average Daily Flow figures state that 576 buses use the road every day, so it would be reasonable to assume that 50% of those buses travel westbound every day. Those buses, should the proposal go ahead, will be travelling approximately 6 feet from my house and shaking my foundations even more than they do already.

h. If 288 buses are passing by my house every day at a distance of 6 feet, it’s safe to say I will never be able to open my bedroom blinds and expect any degree of privacy whatsoever!

i. I find it incredible that the council will give the go ahead for developers to build students villages with no parking included in the plans. Kiln Court and Steele Court are examples of these developments – 44 units with no parking provided. Whether the council accepts it or not, some of those residents will run cars – this increases the demand for on-street parking on Sturry Road even further. How can you give the go ahead for units to be built with no parking and then blithely propose to remove some of the existing parking? I find this truly incredulous.

One of my neighbours who lives at *** Sturry Road (I believe) is a disabled lady in her eighties or nineties whose main mode of transport is by private hire taxi. A bus lane outside her house would leave her in a predicament which I cannot see a solution to. Currently the taxi driver will park up outside her house, go up to the lady’s front door and help her down her path and into the taxi. This can take a few minutes. If the bus lane is installed there will be nowhere for the taxi driver to park. Can you suggest a solution to this? Is the taxi driver expected to park in a side street (space permitting, of course) and escort the lady a much further distance to his/her taxi?

4 I frequently travel into Canterbury

4 The proposal will improve the cycle journey in to Canterbury from the Sturry direction. Cycle journey times in this direction will be more reliable, since I won't need to wait in queuing traffic.

The bus lane will allow bus journeys into the city from the Sturry direction to be more reliable, which should help to encourage some modal shift away from private motor vehicles.

Air quality will potentially be improved as a result of the proposals, making the environment better for me breathing that air as a cyclist.


Response Please tell us why:3 because I use the road occasionally2 I live in Whitstable and do not often use the Sturry Road to enter or leave

Canterbury.

3 I drive this route regularly for work and private purposes, often at peak times.

5 Improve the reliability of the bus service and minimise delays.

4 when visiting relations on sturry rd. i need to park a car nearby to transfer shopping etc. to the house the road is not very wide to be split into different lanes. the old terraced house appears to vibrate and windows rattle at the moment with the traffic, and the buses would be even nearer.

4 The Sturry Road into Canterbury is already awful and slow moving.I would not like to see anything that makes this slower

4 I travel into Canterbury, frequently by bus (including Park & Ride) and sometimes by car

5 I drive from Chartham to Hersden every day via Sturry for work

4 Whilst it is hoped that by introducing a bus lane traffic will flow freer and more people will use the bus you have put forward no evidence that this will be the case. In all likelihood a bus lane will have the opposite effect on traffic slowing it down even more than it already is. Can't really see more people taking the bus particularly if they go to Canterbury to do their weekly shop. Cannot see the benefit of lugging two or three fully laden shopping bags onto a bus. The only benefit I can see will be the fines that will be given to frustrated drivers illegally caught using the bus lane. Loading and unloading will be made more difficult than it already is. Residents already finding it difficult to park will find it almost impossible . If they have young families it could conceivably put young lives at risk if they have to cross a major busy road in order to enter or egres their vehicles when going to and from their properties. Still I expect parents or drivers will be blamed if that ever happened with the council washing their hands of it as usual.

3 Bus lanes are essential and I will only be inconvenienced a bit

3 Ease traffic flow3 Improved traffic flow, when taken together with other improvement

locally.2 Although I travel along Sturry Road, this is by car and not by bus or bike


Response Please tell us why:5 This will affect our members. Many of our members and their families will

cycle, drive, walk and use busses on Sturry Road. SPOKES East Kent Cycle Campaign aim is to encourage cycling as part of everyday transport, not just for leisure. For people to use active travel routes they need to be perceivably safe. An overriding criterion from our perspective is whether as a parent you would be happy to send your 12-year old son or daughter out on a daily journey by bike unsupervised on a given route.

3 canterbury bus lanes are already a joke they are like a patchwork quilt all over the place not connected already hard enougth to get along the road without reducing it for a bus lane people who have to park on street will be forced park elsewhere causing congestion and your idea of delivery drivers not being able to park out side propertys will end up getting someone badly injured if not killed do you not realise how busy this road is and how differcult it is to cross over the road as apedestrian let alone carrying goods

1 I seldom use the road and don't live in the city.

4 Regular user4 I use the Triangle bus service to Canterbury & return.

4 An increase in bus routes only taking buses into the city will increase the number of buses going into the city, but will also increase the number of buses going out of the city where there is no provision for the extra load, this will add to the already congested city routes.

3 Use to get to retail outlets.

2 I regularly use Sturry Road to access both Canterbury city centre and many businesses located on Sturry Road and the acssociated business parks

3 I frequently take buses along this stretch, and so will be affected.

3 We only drive through Sturry Road occasionally (either by bus or in our own car), but as the traffic will continue towards Military Road (which is round the back of our house) we are interested in a congestion-free area.

2 I sometimes cycle along the Sturry Road, but not often.

2 I am an infrequent user of this road.

3 I only use buses to Canterbury occasionally.

2 I regularly use Sturry Road as a driver. I think the effect will be marginal but it might make it a bit less congested between Asda and Vauxhall Road

1 I seldom drive in Canterbury


Response Please tell us why:2 Will not be using that road very often.

1 Do not live in the area and very seldom travel this road

3 I use the bus to and from Herne and Herne Bay and also walk and cycle to the shops in Sturry Road

2 I do not usually travel at high-traffic times but my customers and staff do

2 As the local sports development officer for the Canterbury District. I've worked with local community groups around Vauxhall Avenue and around the Sturry Road Community Gardens. Parents and young people are too frightened to cycle on the main road, so the small section of existing cycle route is not relevent for them. In fact the feedback from residents on cycling from a report conducted by Cycling Age, commissioned by Canterbury City Council was that only the more affluent tended to cycle on the main roads and use the nation cycle routes. The more deprived areas, children would cycle up and down the side roads and in quiet roads but not on the main roads.

4 I regularly travel this route using a variety of transport methods

3 It will make it a lot easier to cycle into Canterbury4 I regularly use this road by car or cycle

5 Hopefully it will decrease the bottleneck of traffic4 it will hopefully make it easier for buses to travel this road, and therefore

make it easier for the remaining traffic

4 Will hopefully make journeys easier


Response Please tell us why:4 Sturry Road is already heavily congested and often at a standstill, at

various times of the day. It is disingenuous to say that houses alongside the bus lane will be less affected by pollution as traffic at an idling standstill outside the bus lane will still produce pollution.The effect of deliveries having to cross such a busy road because they will not be able to park in the bus lane will be chaotic and dangerous. House removals and deliveries of white goods and furniture will bring traffic to a standstill, and may even cause an accident.This is such a short sighted policy given that so much more traffic will be using the Sturry Road post developments in towns and villages to the East as well as the development at Kingsmead. You cannot stop people using cars, and where possible, most people are already using buses if at all possible. For those of us who visit the various retail and business outlets on Sturry Rd and the feeder roads onto Sturry Rd, it is not always possible to use public transport. For those people shopping for instance, public transport is often impractical as so much of Canterbury is just not covered by public transport so how do we get our shopping home?Clarification is needed as to whether the emergency services may also use these bus routes? Given that Sturry Rd is the only direct route out of Canterbury to QEQM Hospital, I can envisage problems if buses, ambulances and taxis are all using the bus lanes and a delivery lorry is parked on the opposite side of Sturry Rd from the bus lane, how will you ensure anything like an adequate traffic flow?Much better had you looked an alternative route, incuding a by-pass. So far as I'm concerned, this is just fiddling with the present sytem, while Canterbury continues to become increasingly grid-locked and polluted.

2 Not in Canterbury much but when I am it's a night mare traveling round

4 I come into Canterbury only when necessary. Like many people, I am often just trying to get to the other side of town. There is no real provision for this.This is a major cause of the congestion.Bus lanes are of limited value in a place like Canterbury, because they cannot be continuous and so do not shorten the bus journey by much but do increase other traffic times and therefore pollution, congestion and annoyance.

2 I rarely have to use this route.

3 It will shorten bus journey times and encourage greater use


Response Please tell us why:4 The cycle lane, where it exists, is little used because it is narrow (1

metre rather than 1.5m or more) and the proposal does not offer a direct replacement. Therefore an alternative cycling route is required before the road changes go ahead. This represents an additional cost, but savings from other amendments will compensate.This road has a reputation of delays for cars and buses, so that other routes are used if available, so this change should alter that.Detailed traffic data is needed to clarify where the most serious problems occur because I am uncertain if the main problems are for the east-bound or west-bound traffic, and in particular the current bus delays in each direction at different times. Without that data it is impossible to tell if amending other parts of the route may be more effective in helping buses.

2 visit rarely now

4 As a frequent car driver and bus passenger I welcome anything that improves journey times and hopefully gets the road resurfaced and the potholes removed.

4 I use the A28 to get to Canterbury from Thanet. I would like to use the 'park and ride' more but it is too slow to get to Canterbury. This has the potential to improve access times to the city centre.

I am also a slow but steady cyclist for fitness and to avoid traffic congestion. I am concerned that this proposal makes the situation worse for cyclists.

3 I can plan bus connections and appointments more accurately

5 I travel along Sturry Road fairly often as either a motorist or bus passenger.

3 It's a good idea and it should help traffic flow

3 I frequently cycle along this route

3 Travelling to Canterbury for work/social.

1 Because as usuall the plan has no thought whatsoever why waste money on a bus lane that goes nowhere except jumps a few cars to cause the local traffic to back up even more makes no sense at all your ideas would be better left and repair the roads instead

2 Will improve traffic flow.Don't know

Do not understand the reason for a bus lane which only serves 2/3 of distance between one roundabout and another. Either make continuous bus lanes through Sturry or don't do it all.

5 I will use the new cycle/bus lane regularly both as a cyclist, pedestrian, bus passenger and car driver.


Response Please tell us why:2 The current sections of the bus lane have resulted in narrow lanes both

for buses and other vehicles. When vehicles park on the north side of Sturry Road by the TA Barracks, traffic has to use the bus lane to allow eastbound traffic to keep moving. Sometimes it is necessary to trespass on the bus lane to avoid on-coming traffic or to avoid potholes as KCC has failed to maintain the carriageway.

Don't know

I am thinking of this alteration in conjunction with the large housing development in Sturry. Living in Sturry I travel to the park and ride in Sturry road and travel direct along A28. At whatever point along the A28 the new proposed link road will join the A28 I imagine the road from that point on will be even busier than it is now. Only the people going into the city can benefit/use the park and ride so the bus lane will not benefit others. I can foresee almost gridlock for cars/etc trying to go through Canterbury. Highways in our area need to be looked at and planned as a whole and not piecemeal with all the planned new housing.

2 It should have a positive effect to ease congestion on the way into town and help speed up public transport. I drive inot Canterbury and I also cycle. There's only a short stretch of cycle lane from Sturry towards Canterbury which is narrow so using the bus lane will make little difference.

5 Parking bays will be removed causing great inconvenience. The roads around the area are already over parked and this will inconvenience residents there as well. Buses will be coming within six feet of front windows which is too close. This will add to noise in an already noisy area. I personally don't believe that this would be of benefit to many people other than a minority that use the bus service. There is also LOADS more room on the opposite side of the road to widen it by one lane then shift everything to the right leaving the parking. The pavements are not very wide there (and poorly maintained) and this project would bring traffic closer to the thin pavements putting pedestrians at unnecessary risk including children like my daughter. Also bus lanes dont reduce congestion in Canterbury because such a small number of vehicles are allowed to use them as to have a negligible impact on traffic severity.


Response Please tell us why:5 I do not believe that the significant disruption to our business whilst the

works are carried out can be justified.The works will discourage customers from vising us whilst the the improvement to the flow of traffic will not be significant enough as the majority of traffic in the road are motor cars and vans, neither of whom will use the lane.I use the road daily and whilst traffic can be heavy as peak times I don't believe it would be improved by this proposal.I am worried that the air quality will decrease both while the works are carried out and afterwards with diesel buses driving closer to my premises.I am very upset that you would consider removing the green verges and trees as the carbon dioxide that they absorb helps to offset the pollution.I suffer with Asthma and does one of my members of staff and I think this proposal would impact on that.It will make the road more dangerous for pedestrians.Customers will have less areas to park to visit local shopsIt will be more dangerous for cyclist

5 There are several reasons why this will impact me.1. Taking away the parking outside our house will both increase the cost of our car insurance and decrease the worth of our house2. In the consultation document it outlines we will need to find a different place to park- having parked on South Street previously my car was damaged having had my tyres let down and damaged so I believe designated parking needs to be outlined3. As a cyclist in Canterbury buses will be pushed out to ongoing traffic to overtake leading to an impact on traffic or bikes will have to move into heavy flowing traffic to move round a bus.4. Some of the houses on Sturry road are 1890's builds and the structure will be negatively impacted with heavy weighted vehicles going so close to the houses

5 We will no longer have anywhere to leave our car or accept deliveries or have any tradespeople to carry out work .We have a 1 yr old baby that we will have to carry to wherever our car is,that's if there is anywhere at all to park .We are extremely concerned about hundreds of buses a week coming past so so close to our house as well as walking on the decrepit pot holed pavement right next to the bus lane.It will be far too close,there simply isn't enough room!!!!.What really needs to be done to ease traffic is to limit the number of large lorries and 4x4's not to mention outragiously loud motorbikes.

5 I am elderly and live alone. My family live in London and will be unable to park when they visit. Tradesmen and taxis that I use will be unable to park. In order to overcome this I will have to demolish my gates and pave over my front garden, which I cannot afford.


Response Please tell us why:5 This will affect due too I live along the New bus line as when the street

lamps are moved back to accommodate the new lane . At the present we get light pollution streaming into my back bedroom from the street lamp. Moving the lamp will make the light pollution even more intolerable.Also moving the bus lane near my house will cause more vibrations throughout the house,we already we get vibration from the road this will make things much worse, moving the traffic closer will increase road traffic pollution i.e. diesel fumes interring my house which could have consequences for our health. also when walking between roundabout and South Street you will be sandwiched on a narrow pavement bet tween the houses ans double / single decker buses doing 30 mph not very safe? And the draft from buses pulls pushes you around

2 I only tend to use this section of Sturry Road in the Inter-peak or Off-peak periods - I don't believe the measures will make too much difference to my journey times as a private car driver.It might help persuade me to start using park and ride at weekends.

4 Increase the time to reach city centre4 I travel into Canterbury from Westbere most days. In the week I travel for

work (usually travelling on to London by train or coach). There are 4 in my household and 1 car. I use the Sturry Road as a bus passenger (8 / 9 bus from Westbere), as a cyclist and as a car driver or passenger (mostly in the evenings and at the weekends).

Our car is used primarily by my wife for school drop offs / local errands mostly in the Westbere / Sturry area.

This bus lane will improve my journeys, improving the flow of traffic and reduce congestion. It will make bus travel more attractive and hopefully support continued investment and frequency improvements.


Response Please tell us why:5 As a business which relies heavily on the ability to load & unload outside

our premises we will be no longer able to do so. For almost 40 years we have loaded & unloaded outside 210 Sturry Road we do not have another option in this matter. Any asumption by KCC that we can use our off road parking facility for the necessary loading & unloading is incorrect. The surface is not suitable for the transporting of heavy goods across it & at frequent times there is only one member of staff in the shop whom obviously cannot leave the premises to load or unload in the car park.

Due to our car park being situated some distance from the premises customers may automatically assume no parking is available with such an obvious obstruction as a bus lane.

Our car park may also become something of a convenience for residence or visitors to residences whose ability to park has been taken away by the bus lane. This will inveitably lead to us have to enforce parking restrictions on non customer vehicles which will in turn totally erode the relationship we have with the local comunity not to mention the cost to us financially in having to enforce parking restrictions.

The detrimental affect on our business with the proposed bus lane is incalculable in the negative at this point in time however we can only come to the conclusion we may forced to move premises or in the event of no suitable new locations being available cease trading entirely.

5 I regularly cycle along Sturry Road.

2 You know why - you propose to remove a cycle path.

3 It should improve my bus journeys along Sturry road

4 I think the Bus lane expansion will help the general traffic flow.5 As a home-owner and resident along the proposed route of this bus lane

extension this proposal will have a major affect on me in a variety of ways:

Access & Parking: The most obvious effect will be the loss of the on-street parking outside our house. There is no obvious alternative place to park in the near vicinity, meaning that loaded/unloading shopping etc will become very difficult. Delivery vans will also have no where near-by to stop so this will also become an issue.There will also be an impact on the ability of refuse disposal trucks to be able to access the bins along that stretch of road in the mornings, which will be the peak time for buses along that route.

Privacy: The top deck of double decker buses are the same height as the first floor windows along that stretch of Sturry road. As the majority of


Response Please tell us why:those rooms are used as bedroom windows there is already a privacy issue as the buses regularly stop at the traffic lights for prolonged periods at regular intervals, especially during the busy morning periods. Creating a bus lane will bring those buses to within 4 feet of the front of the houses which will significantly worsen the issue.

Noise/disturbance: There is already significant traffic noise pollution to residents along that stretch of road. Bringing a bus lane to within 4 feet of the front of the properties will significantly worsen this issue. Heavy traffic along the road already causes the houses to shake, this will become intolerably with double decker buses running regularly just feet from the house.

Pollution: The buses will have to stop regularly at the traffic lights near South street, this means that they will be ticking over and producing exhaust fumes at standstill directly outside those houses just feet from the properties.

5 Devaluing my property and local area.I brought the house because, being able to park my car outside or near just makes life easier.Damage to my property!Makes it impossible to get large items in and out of my house!Where do i put a skip when i get the roof done for example?

5 I brought my house 17 years ago with onstreet parking now you want to de-value the area.I work nights so need transport to work. My house will have buses and taxi's driving pass my front window, when it rains it will be like the fire men are testing their hoses, costing more money to maintain.

5 I would like to communicate my objection in the strongest possible terms to the proposed bus lane expansion in Sturry Road .First, while the parking spaces outside 154 to 216 Sturry Road are not owned by the residents, they do provide a vital access for both deliveries and for parking owned cars. "Parking in other side streets" basically means parking in South Street and parking there is already highly congested. 28 households will be directly and negatively affected as they will have nowhere at all to park. The issue of deliveries is particularly problematic and I can illustrate some examples:. if someone is moving house - how is this possible. if there are large or heavy deliveries as all these houses have gardens (soil/ aggregate/ paving etc) how are they to be taken in. if trees are to be taken down in the houses' gardens, how is all the wood to be removed.There is no realistic parking alternative for the 28 residents in this section of the road.Second, having very heavy vehicles within 5 feet of my front wall is extremely likely to lead to damage and structural issues as well as being


Response Please tell us why:highly unpleasant with noise and dirt from the heavy vehicles. The foundations of these houses are not deep owing to when they were constructed. Coupled with this is the fact that all the houses will have the dirt from road spray constantly on the front of the houses. This will lead to damp penetration inside the houses.Third, the pavement area is below the level of the road and this pavement is already subject to flooding due to no drainage being provided by the council along its length. Heavy traffic will push rain water over the kerb and exacerbate the flooding on this footpath. Pedestrian will then be forced to either walk in the bus lane or on the kerb either of which will be highly dangerous.Fourth, I do not accept that pollution will decrease. My expectation is that pollution will in fact increase as more buses are put on the road and most people travel by car anyway.Fifth, what happens if you are disabled or elderly and have difficulty walking. Disabled parking is a facility that should be available to any resident and will not be possible with a bus lane.Sixth, I do not believe that expanding the road will improve traffic flow significantly. The main source of congestion is in fact the roundabout to the west of South Street and opposite the Asda store and B&Q store and further west by about 20ft is the pedestrian crossing. This combination of roundabout and pedestrian crossing is what clogs up Sturry Road and nothing else.Seven, the value of all the houses along this row will be significantly reduced for all the above reasons - they will be effectively unsaleable.For the above reasons, I believe that spending £700,000 on widening Sturry Road into a bus lane is a colossal waste of money, is fundamentally flawed (it won't work) as well as creating significant issues and lower quality of life for the residents.


Response Please tell us why:5 This will affect me for a number of reasons.

1) I will lose the parking outside my house. This will affect the value of my house should I wish to move (which I expect I will given the proposed changes). It will also prove to be a huge inconvenience, particularly as I have a 1 year old daughter. Finding somewhere to park near my house will be very difficult which will make even the most basic tasks such as shopping much more complicated. It will also affect the roads around which are already over parked.2) The roadworks themselves will cause more problems and delays then the current level of traffic.3) The buses will be travelling much closer to my property which will increase noise pollution, fumes and general dirt. As it is not the most affluent area I have noticed that cleaning the roads and pavements doesn't seem to be a priority to the council. The cars parked along the road are always filthy from the dust and pollution. I presume this will transfer to my house once the traffic is so much closer. The other properties that have bus lanes outside are set much further back from the road so the noise and fumes are reduced.

Given that I am one of many who will be similarly affected I struggle to see that the level of disruption caused is worth it. I don't believe that installing a small section of bus lane is going to make any difference to the traffic levels. A view you yourselves obviously took the last time this was proposed.

5 Due to removal of parking spaces (to be replaced by the bus lane) parking outside my property will be more difficult as drivers are forced to compete for fewer parking spaces.*Parking is a key advantage to the property so if parking is not available outside, the property value will decrease which is of great concern to me as the home owner.

*Competition for parking spaces is already greatly increased since 2014 due to the erection of student flats at the back of the properties (299-307 Sturry road approx). Other developments locally also increase competition. Removal of parking spaces exacerbates this competition greatly.

5 a, Bus driver - ease in doing my jobb, Cyclist - disappointed with the removal of cycle lane toward Sturry!

4 You are going to take away loads of parking spaces from sturry road and that means those people will come and park up my road instead (vauxhall avenue). I don't want to have to be driving around for ages looking for a parking space for myself. Also I know the people from the kent tile centre personally and I don't think it's right that their going to lose their parking outside. I don't see the point of it anyway and its not going to be safe.


Response Please tell us why:5 As council tax payer - this us going to waste lots of money and it would

not make much difference in congestion

4 I travel that route by bus.

5 Living in a rented student property means I will often have people come to visit me who will have no where to park. Also the noise and disruption this work will cause will be very disruptive to my day. I am also not very happy about buses having to drive so close to the house and the potential accidents that could happen.

5 will cause more congestion and traffic as buses try to get out of the lane to join the road effecting my travel time

5 As a cycle trainer working in schools around the area, getting to and from work sites by cycle and training there will be changed greatly. At present, the cycle infrastructure around the Vauxhall road area roundabout in particular is very badly imagined and hazardous to both riders and motor vehicle traffic. This makes for an interesting teaching point around the dangers of poorly conceived lanes but I'd rather it wasn't there in the first place! If this area can be reworked correctly as part of the proposals it will be a huge improvement. As a car driver using this area, I can see giving buses in particular an unbroken lane will have positive effects on the traffic flow in general. The pavement on that side is not widely used by pedestrians so I can't see significant detrimental effects.

4 It is a brilliant idea.It will mean more busses are able to travel easier and quicker than before.It will then encourage more people to catch the buses rather than drive.

5 Because my wife and I often attend the property to do maintenance and gardening.

5 I live along East Street and regularly use the buses and walk along this road. I have a young family and I am concerned about the noise, dust and extra traffic that this work will cause.

I also have concerns that no one has actuall come to talk to us as residents regarding this proposal as we will be directly affected by this.

3 I often need to park at a family member's house along Sturry road and won't be able to if the parking bays turn into a bus lane


Response Please tell us why:4 As a cyclist, who uses the roads rather than the pavement, I need to

know that I have a safe lane. The only area I am concerned about is the section of road leading up to the roundabout, heading out of Canterbury . I would like a small section of road for cyclists to be segregated from the bus lane leading to this junction. If the roundabout is busy and there is a bus behind me, the driver might well get frustrated that I am taking too long to pull out onto the roundabout and this would add pressure to me to pull out before I feel safe enough to do so. There is room on the corner for a small section of cyclist lane and this would then allow the cyclist to pull out at their own speed and join up with the existing cycle on roundabout and the other side.

4 As a motorcyclist using Sturry Road on a regular basis and currently filtering through stopped traffic is possible.

Should there be a bus lane which taxis also use and may be travelling at a much higher speed than the rest of the traffic, along with maybe cutting into and out of the bus lane, then this can increase the danger to motorcyclists who are one of the most vulnerable road users.

In lots of areas, local authorities have noticed the benefits of permitting motorcyclists to use bus lanes and actively encourage motorcycle use to travel into a city centre.

Motorcycles help to reduce pollution over private cars, they take up less road space and are able to filter in otherwise wasted road space and they take up less parking space in the city centre.

By permitting use of bus lanes for motorcyclists, it increases the safety for motorcyclists and helps to increase the use of motorcycles for travelling distances where a pushbike would not be appropriate.

5 As a regular user of Sturry Road, I can't see the need for a bus lane along that stretch as I've never been in a traffic jam there. The Sturry crossing causes tailbacks but once cars are through there they tend to flow fairly freely until you get closer to the Sainsbury's end.

5 Through the loss of parking spaces on story road, these cars will start to park on south street where it is already difficult enough for me to already find parking everyday.

3 I use Sturry Road as a driver and a park and ride bus passenger for work and leisure to get to Canterbury


Response Please tell us why:5 The only place I have to park is South Street which is already well used

and the 20 "displaced cars" that currently park on Sturry Road will make it impossible. No part of the Consultation document addresses this in any meaningful way: where exactly do these cars go? The stretch of Sturry Rd from South St to the Tile Centre is the narrowest part of the road and walking along it with buses and taxis driving past just feet away will be dangerous; on days when bins are out more perilous. A lot of people cycle on that pavement and will continue to do so even though there is a cycle lane there (they do now from South St to B&Q oblivious of the existing cycle lane)

4 I use this Road in both directions up to 10 times a day

5 The proposed bus lane will damage the visual amenity of Sturry Road and increase pollution.

5 I visit my friend and I normally park outside her house.

3 As a resident of South Street, the congestion with parking is going to increase as the residents of Sturry Road find new places to park.

3 I don't use Sturry Road all that often (perhaps once a week) but when I cycle there, the missing stretch of Bus/Cycle lane leaves you a bit vulnerable.

5 The road is often slow flowing and this is sometimes caused by the bus lane that is currently there. The busses do not even remain in the bus lane half of the time and when they see fit, will cut other vehicles up and join the main road.

The new bus route, will make the whole situation worse because there will be an even narrower road for the normal traffic to use and this will result in even more congestion being caused.

5 As someone who drives or takes the bus down sturry road everyday, I believe it will help to relieve congestion on the road.


Response Please tell us why:5 On my side of the road the cycle lane is to be removed where are the

cyclists supposed to ride.On the other side the grass verge and trees are to be removed. How wide exactly will the pavement be on that side.Instead of 2lanes of traffic you propose to make 3 lanes.At the Vauxhall Road roundabout, coming from Sturry to Canterbury, there is currently a filter lane area for traffic coming from Broad Oak or Sturry one pass the R'bout. If you put the bus lane in, then this filter lane will go, and you will be creating a bottle neck as 3 lanes of traffic will be trying to go into one.The bus lane if built won't make the traffic any less, there is still going to be the same amount of noise and pollution (now nearer our houses). In fact probably more because once the proposed housing development(s) are built there's going to be more traffic on Sturry Road.Also aren't trees supposed to help with pollution and yet you cut all of them down along this stretch? Where exactly do you propose to plant the new ones on a reduced pavement.

4 I use the A28 to get to Canterbury from Thanet. I would like to use the'park and ride' more but it is too slow to get to Canterbury. This has the potential to improve access times to the city centre.

I am also a slow but steady cyclist for fitness and to avoid congestion. I am concerned that this proposal makes the situation worse for cyclists.

5 I live in an1870s terraced cottage adjacent to the proposed bus lane.The property is affected by vibrations from passing buses & other large vehicles and this would only be exacerbated if the volume of traffic increased.As it is, there is an undesirable and unhealthy level of noise and pollution from the exhaust fumes. If anything, there should be more trees planted along Sturry Rd, to help combat life shortening pollutants from the incessant traffic, not the removal of mature specimens.

5 The already-poor air quality would get even worse. The noise level from traffic will increase. The house I live in has been underpinned, and suffers from traffic vibration; a new bus lane would only make this worse. I can not see anything good coming out of this scheme.

Question 4To what extent do you agree or disagree with the proposal to construct a new city bound bus lane along Sturry Road between the Vauxhall Roundabout and South Street?

Response CommentsTend to agree

It will be very constraining for local residents. Is it not possible to offer them some sort of alternative parking ?


Response CommentsStrongly agree

The removal of the trees worries me. Their replacements should be planted near to the same corridor, such that they can help clean the air of pollution. As such they must be at least as many and as mature as the trees that they're replacing. For example, some of the replacements could be sited in the grassed area outside the shops at the Sturry Road / Reed Avenue junction and Sturry Road / Vauxhall Avenue junction. Further trees could be planted at the grassed area on the SE side of the Asda / B&Q roundabout near B&Q and 154 Sturry Road. With Lidl's consent, further trees could be planted in the grassed area outside their store at the Old Park Avenue / Sturry Road junction. Some smaller trees can be planted in the existing grassed area outside Green Cloth Mews and Mary Green Walk, and Honeywood Close where they meet Sturry Road.

Where possible, a Sturry-bound bus lane should also be installed, since this will make bus and cycle journey times more reliable in both directions. For example the new development at Kingsmead will allow a bus / cycle lane leaving the city in the vicinity of the existing now-vacated Coldharbour flats.

The Sturry Road / Kingsmead Road / Northgate / Tourtel Road roundabout should be improved to make it more accessible to cyclists, such that they can use the Sturry Road bus lanes for their length and then use the quieter city-centre roads to continue their journey via Northgate.

I welcome the conversion of the existing pelican crossing near to the Sturry Road / Reed Avenue junction to a toucan crossing. This should be combined with its use to create a cycle route between Reed Avenue and Vauxhall Avenue using the crossing to provide access to the riverside cycling and walking route being developed by Canterbury City Council.

In further enabling more sustainable transport usage in the city I would offer the following:

Further lengths of bus and cycle lane should be provided around the ring road, ensuring that there is provision in both directions. For example, shortly after the Pin Hill junction with Castle Row a bus lane can be provided east-bound to join up with the existing lane which only starts partway along Pin Hill.

It would also make sense, perhaps with time restrictions, for one of the two lanes in each direction on both stretches of Rheims Way (both arms from the Tannery / St. Stephen's roundabout) to have a bus / cycle lane.


Response CommentsThese bus and cycle lanes would make journey times by bus and cycle far more reliable, and thus help to encourage a modal towards these modes. The reduction in road capacity to general traffic for the Rheims Way stretches will also help to improve air pollution in this part of the AQMA. This can be pushed further when the extra A2 junctions open by ensuring that the A2 is used to reach the appropriate part of Canterbury by motorists instead of the ring road by removing that ring road capacity from their use and reallocating it permanently for bus and cycle use only.

At the Sturry Road / Barton Mill Road junction an induction-coil-driven cycle phase should be introduced to allow cyclists arriving from the Mary Green Walk cycle / pedestrian path to cycle parallel to Sturry Road for a short distance and then cross Sturry Road directly across to Barton Mill Road. Similarly, cyclists emerging from Barton Mill Road should be able to head straight across Sturry Road to a cycle path where they can reach the Mary Green Walk cycle path. This would create another south-north crossing point of Sturry Road for cyclists to provide access to the riverside cycle / foot path. The route would be particularly useful for CCCU students at the Parham Road Student Village needing to access the CCCU campus at North Holmes Road, or the CCCU library near Old Dover Road, which should be able to be accessed via the gate in Lansdown Road. This allows cyclists to be able to avoid the busiest of the traffic with a relatively direct route, and thus encourage this more sustainable mode to be used. This would integrate well with cycle routes proposed in the Canterbury District Transport Strategy.

With the bus lane only being near-continuous in one direction, the provision of the riverside cycling / walking route is very important to offer a bidirectional option for cyclists and pedestrians that is more also accessible to those intimidated by road environments.

In order to truly achieve the desired modal shift objectives, I believe that the designers and planners should always have the question of "would I let my own child use this facility to commute to / from school?" in their heads. If they wouldn't allow their own child to use the facility unaided then the design still needs improvement. The proposed design is an improvement in this respect, but, as I've pointed out, there's still much more that can and needs to be done before we can expect a modal shift to take hold for everyday journeys.

Tend to agree

The times I use the Sturry Road there is too much traffic in queues so something needs to be done.

Tend to agree

I don't agree with taxis having use of bus lanes.



This should be quickly built prior to more houses being constructed.

Strongly disagree

not a good idea

Strongly disagree

I cannot see that you will force more people into using the bus or cycles by going ahead with this project, if that is the case what advantages does it give ?

Strongly agree

Great to improve the bus routes in Canterbury where they benefit the public significantly.

Strongly disagree

Once again the motorist is penalised on behalf of the privatised Bus Industry. Why doesn't Stagecoach pay for it. By reducing the space for cars, you increase the pollution from stationary vehicles.

Strongly agree

Bus use should be encouraged, and part of that has to include quicker journeys, which this will deliver

Tend to agree

SPOKES strongly supports improvements to bus journey times because we see public transport as an integrated part of the modal shift away from private motor cars. More bus lanes can indirectly contribute towards a more cyclable city. However, we must make it clear that the direct benefit to people on bikes has been overstated in the proposal. Only strong and confident cyclists will want to cycle in a bus lane. Eastbound there will be the removal of cycling facilities. The designers should ask if a school child could make a journey, both directions, along Sturry Road. The proposals offer up National Route 1 from Military Road to Fordwich as a viable alternate route for people on bikes. We strongly disagree with this. This route is poorly maintained, it floods in the winter due to its routing through low land near the river, it runs through an area of high crime, it is not lit at night, female SPOKES committee members said that they would not cycle alone along it, finally it does not help with journeys that start or stop on Sturry Road. As we have stated, we support the bus lane, but it should be introduced with other improvements if it is to directly enable cycling as part of the modal shift aspirations set out in the KCC Active Travel Strategy. In addition, there also needs to be mitigation for the removal of the eastbound cycle lane. SPOKES suggest the following.- Recognise the Stour Riverside Path* as a better alternative for people on bikes than National Cycle Route 1. Help Canterbury City Council to complete it at least as far as Vauxhall Road but preferably to Sturry and beyond.- Find space for an Eastbound cycle lane. There may not be space along the entire length of Sturry Road, but there are sections where space could be found. This would be particularly useful in enabling cycle trips between Vauxhall Avenue and Vauxhall Road where the current


Response Commentsproposals would provide no safe route for people visiting the shops and businesses on and near Vauxhall Road.- Add a cycle phase or Toucan to allow cycles to safely cross Sturry Road at Barton Mill Road and Mary Green Walk, this would take people on bikes and/or foot between the Riverside Route and National Cycle Route 1 on Military Road.- Review the roundabout between Sturry Road and Northgate to examine how people on bikes can safely move between the two roads. The Northgate area was recently improved for people on bikes but it does not connect well to Sturry Road.

*The Canterbury City Council - Canterbury District Transport Strategy 2014-31, adopted in July 2017, shows the Riverside route between Canterbury and Sturry.

Canterbury District Transport Strategy 2014-31:https://www.canterbury.gov.uk/media/1505770/Canterbury-District-Transport-Strategy-adopted-for-web-3.pdf

Alternate route shown here:https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1jWtF-blUQGfrsca6P903HTPHsQk&ll=51.29406733329395%2C1.1074221116710987&z=15

Tend to agree

I think bus routes generally speed up buses and encourage more people to use public transport.

Strongly agree

Will greatly improve this road

Strongly agree

I believe that the number of bus stops in this area could be reduced.

Tend to disagree

As this is likely to increase the ease of buses getting into but not out of the city, the adverse effects will be worse than if the bus lanes were for exiting the city instead which would reduce the strain within the city

Strongly agree

Anything to make the flow to all traffic better..

Strongly agree

By reducing the hold-ups on Sturry Road the air quality for both residents and road users will be improved, as well as a reduction in journey time for thise using the bus service.

Tend to agree

I hope the resulting 3 lane highway will have sufficient width at each lane.



We value any measures to encourage greater use of public transport and better bike lanes.

However, with lots of developments in the area we feel that a bigger, more long-term approach is needed rather than just extending a bus lane. Canterbury is choking with traffic, the air quality is abysmal, so we would very much like to see a solution that bypasses the whole city rather than funnel all traffic through Sturry Road around the ring road.

Strongly agree

I support anything that will help to promote the use of public transport and get people out of their cars. I have reservations about the loss of the outbound cycle lane, as the promotion of cycling is another dimension of the same aspiration.

Strongly agree

I strongly believe in improving public transport to make it a convenient option for as many as possible.

Tend to agree

It will have to be policed. There will be parking on both sides of the road causing chaos, particularly from tradesmen who do not believe the rules apply to them when they are working.

Strongly agree

Strongly approve of the provision of bus lanes and all other means of improving the operation of public bus services, leading to increased provision and use.

Strongly agree

You mention that cyclists coming into Canterbury may use the Fordwich - Military Road route. Someone will point out (as I am doing) that this is two way so could be used either way. However, it is quite hilly and often overgrown as well as being a place where one sometimes encounters unpleasant people. I would not use it after dark or on my own. The riverside route, as far as it has been created, looks rather narrow.

Strongly agree

Anything that eases traffic and encourages the use of public transport or safe cycling is all good.

Tend to agree

Traffic along the Sturry Road is regularly heavy. Much of this seems to be caused by the railway crossing in Sturry itself. Whether a new bypass would relieve the traffic remains to be seen. Alongside these schemes there should be better promotion of the cycle route from Fordwich to Canterbury or from the park and ride to Canterbury. I don't agree with building a bus route in the hope that this will relieve the traffic when so many journeys that people make are relatively short and our convenience culture makes it easy for people to get into their car. What would help is ways to dissuade or persuade people to ditch their car that don't really need to use it.



The plans seem to show that an east bound cycle lane could and should be be retained and incorporated elsewhere along this section of road.

Please make it easier and safer to cycle eastbound as well as westbound!

Strongly agree

Help to reduce the time of journey

Strongly agree

A sensible suggestion as bus lanes appearing and disappearing causes confusion and delays as busses join the main traffic so a continual bus lane along the sturry road makes sense

Strongly disagree

Go back to the drawing board, and draw up a sensible plan for managing transport and traffic for the whole of Canterbury. We need a system whiich takes account of all the devlopments not just the Eastern develoments.

Strongly disagree

See also Q3 answer.

You may be trying to get cars out of Canterbury; most of us do not want to be in the place, but have no choice. We need a proper bypass or ring road especially as the thousands of new houses will contain cars, whether you like it or not. You should try the system that works in Sydney - 2 lanes in, in the morning and 2 lanes out, in the afternoon. Changeover at noon by the simple method of moving cones. It works there in a much bigger city. Simple and effective - probably not expensive or complicated enough for Canterbury.At present , Sturry road has the worst surface in the area. Some potholes and sunken covers have been repaired, bur not all. Places with sunken covers have had the surrounds to the covers filled in, but the covers have not been raised to road level, so the effect is as before. Does nobody supervise the contractors or check their work after? The whole road needs rebuilding.What visitors to this "world heritage city" must think I don't know, but it cannot be good.

Tend to agree

I think the completion of the bus lane along the Sturry Road is necessary.

Tend to agree

IntroductionI welcome the expansion of bus lanes which would improve bus punctuality and thereby increase bus use.However I am very concerned that the scheme as proposed will have some significant adverse effects, and that additional measures are needed to ensure that the full benefit of the scheme are realised.The Consultation Leaflet, "Is there another Option?" section, says there is no other way to fit in a bus lane. However this funding allocation to improve bus flow should look at the wider options apart form the bus lane as proposed, and so where the proposed bus lane cannot be built


Response Commentsbecause of width restrictions, the money saved should be used for providing/improving cycle lanes as cyclists hold up buses, amendments to the roundabouts with dedicated lane and car reduction by bus promoting measures.In this way the dedicated funding can be used to achieve the required aim with less physical road changes.As noted above, detailed traffic for buses as well as other modes, is needed to assess the most effective potential intervention.Adverse effectsThe Proposal requires removal of the existing cycling lane which is completely contrary to the new KCC Local Transport Plan, which requires:

Outcome 3: Safer travelPolicy: Provide a safer road, footway and cycleway network to reduce the likelihood of casualties, and encourage other transport providers to improve safety on their networks.Thus the cycling & pedestrian concerns need to be properly addressed and give an improvement by the Proposal, not a deterioration.The Proposed bus lane is only on one side so that westerly cyclist will have no cycle lane, and the joint use of a 3m wide lane is intimidating for cyclists.The space beside the existing road is very narrow between B&Q/Asda and the Kent Tile Centre car park/Esso petrol station, and therefore imposing the bus lane there would have significant adverse effects, such as buses running very close to residential houses, loss of loading bays for business (eg: Kent Tile centre) and difficulty for residents to load/unload cars with babies/shopping etc.It would also bring the pollution from vehicle emissions and noise much closer to residents, cyclists and pedestrians.One option to mitigate the impact on the residences & businesses in that stretch is to offer to buy the relevant properties at a small premium. This might seem expensive, but the residences would seem easy to sell on, for example, for use by able bodied students, and hence would be a minimal extra cost.In addition, for those people who do not wish to move, KCC should highlight the compensation payable for road schemes which create adverse effects such as noise.Our perception is that roundabouts cause problems, so that amendments to give dedicated lanes could provide significant help.For example, the west-bound traffic going straight on at the B&Q/Asda roundabout could have the left lane through the roundabout with two west-bound lanes on the west side of the roundabout, beside the B&Q car park to enable traffic from Asda to merge after the roundabout, and thus keep the west-bound traffic moving.Similar thinking should be applied for the east-bound traffic and at


Response CommentsVauxhall Road and other roundabouts too.I also consider that bus promotion measures should be used to reduce traffic along this road. Although the dedicated funding is "Capital" it could be used to buy 5 year bus passes for relevant residents and thus take traffic off the road. The great success of the Senior Bus Pass shows how effective this can be.KCC already provides some funding for Young Persons bus passes, and this could be three times more effective, as it would avoid the double journey of parents on the school run, would inculcate bus use in younger people setting up a lifelong use of buses, thus reducing car use over a much wider area.Stage Coach has recently endorsed the long term benefits of a Young persons pass by extending the validity into the evening, further reducing the need for parental transport support.Another option is to offer a scrappage scheme to provide public transport vouchers in exchange for a vehicle, which would also help reduce pollution.What could help on the narrower parts of the proposed scheme is bus lay-bys for bus stops, thus the bus lane could be installed in the wider parts, and the bus lay-bys would enable loading bays and parking etc., to be retained in the narrower parts.Finally it is unclear how the proposed scheme would affect trees: I would expect them to be retained, or equivalent provision made nearby.

Strongly agree

Good Idea!

Park and Ride must be supported for the traffic relief and most especially to improve air quality.

Poor air kills people.

Shame Maidstone wont spend to improve Park and Ride instead of shutting two Park and Ride sites in recent years!

Strongly agree

Hope it includes resurfacing the existing carriageway

Tend to agree

While the principle is good, the execution is short sighted and adds to the danger for cyclists.

1. A cycle lane is required in both directions to reduce the current and future congestion and accidents:

Inbound cyclists will be at greater risk from buses and taxis due to the elimination of the cycle lane as they will in future be sharing a lane. Cyclists will also slow down bus and taxi traffic which defeats the purpose of the bus lane. Frustrated taxi drivers will be tempted to 'squeeze' cyclists leading to injuries or deaths. If a shared lane is


Response Commentsunavoidable, at least the inbound bus lane must be increased in width to allow a bus or taxi to pass a cyclist with a safe amount (3ft/1m) of clearance.

Outbound cyclists will be at greater risk than at present due to the elimination of the cycle lane. Mixing cars, buses and lorries with cyclists will lead to increased injuries and deaths. The outbound cycle lane must be maintained and extended for the full length of this project.

2. The change should provide a full four lanes, two in each direction. The volume of traffic from the massive new developments to the north east will overcome this proposed change in a very short amount of time. Thus the parking close to the Vauxhall roundabout will have to go and the space for the lane will have to come from the commercial properties at the western end: Pets at Home, Motoring World, Lakeside service station, etc.

3. The bus companies must acquire and use zero emission (electric) vehicles. While not specifically related to this proposal, the only way the local residents will not be adversely affected by the increased pollution for all of these extra vehicles is for the majority of the diesel buses to be removed. Given the short cycle of the park and ride buses, they are ideal candidates for electrification.

Strongly agree

There is a real need to bridge the "missing link". It's a shame there isn't space for and out of town lane as well.

Strongly agree

Unfortunate to lose small section of outbound cycle lane

Tend to disagree

The best deal iOS segregation buses from main stream traffic is a good one. However it is my belief that ther e is insuffiecnt space to include what is s effectively a third lane.

Strongly disagree

Waste of money yet again sort the traffic flow first to reduce emissions remember buses have to travel thru Sturry to get to the bus lane and that is where the trouble lays at the crossing fact

Strongly disagree

Why provide a partial solution. Either a full bus lane fir Sturry or none at all.



The existing cycle lane is very narrow and dangerous. At present it is often very difficult to cycle along the stretch between Reed Avenue and South Street because the traffic is often stationary. Very often I am forced to use the pavement and walk as it is dangerous to undertake/overtake the stationary traffic and very often leads to "road rage" from the car drivers. The parked vehicles cause problems for bicycles and hold up the traffic especially when large vehicles are trying to overtake. I feel that buses and bicycles should have priority and that more people should use the Park and Ride. I do feel the City Council should make the Park and Ride fee cheaper to encourage use.

Tend to agree

My issue is with the wider issue of building all these new houses around a City Centre which cannot cope at present. It might have been better to go for satellite townships, thereby reducing dependence on Canterbury. The current proposals (by the Government) are likely to hasten the rise of internet shopping and the decline in the number of local employment.

Strongly disagree

This will inconvenience residents on the main road and the surrounding roads. It will devalue property. It will pose a danger to pedestrians. It will bring buses within a few feet of the front doors of residents.

Strongly disagree

I strongly Disagree with the proposal.The huge cost will not improve the traffic flow significantly but will push up all our bills.It will make the road more dangerous for pedestrians, and cyclists more unhealthy for residents and passerby and reduce the amount of customers who visit the area.

All in all I think its a REALLY BAD IDEA

Strongly disagree

Adding easier cycle or pedestrian routes from train stations and around the city itself will lead to a greener and less congested city, I feel that extending this piece of road will just lead to a higher level of congestionWithout the opportunity to add further bus routes nearer to the city walls increasing the regularity of buses will only negatively impact the congestion in the CityThe addition of this bus route will still lead to a bottle neck effect at both Kingsmead road and Tourtel road.

Strongly disagree

In your leaflet you talk about how this will make life easier for people coming into Canterbury.What about helping people that live here as well instead of just saying we are doing this and we have no solutions for you.

Tend to disagree

It will make it even more dangerous to walk along the road without the protection of the grass verge. You appear also to be removing my nearest bus stop.


Response CommentsStrongly disagree

What a waste of tax payers cash

Tend to agree

I use this road twice a day. Given the volume ob buses and cyclists is not particularly high, I would recommend extending this lane to users of electric vehicles. This need not be a permanent use given the governments plans to eliminate petrol and diesel cars but would be a short term solution to share the traffic flow in this congested area.

I would also suggested continuing this lane through to the city centre.

Strongly agree

Seems a logical, sustainable transport measure.

Strongly disagree

Once again priority to empty expensive buses. Just like having to wait ages at the sturry crossing for expensive empty trains.

Strongly agree

Please could this proposal be used within the Bus Partnership with Stagecoach to seek an additional early morning service into Canterbury to allow connection with the some of the earlier train and coach departures for London? This could be an additional number 8 bus or a new service provided by starting the first Sturry Road P+R services of the day at Hersden.

Also (particularly at the weekend) buses are often delayed on the Riding Gate roundabout or in the entrance to the bus station in Canterbury by cars queuing for parking at Whitefriars or held up at the zebra crossing between Whitefriars and Dane John. A larger yellow box or traffic light system should be provided with an enforcement camera.

Strongly disagree

In our opinion the lack of road width available at certain points of the proposed bus lane, namely the stretch from The Kent Tile Centre car park to South street, will cause major safety concerns to both road users & pedestrians. The buses will be forced to drive with their wheels almost rubbing the curb edge to maintain three lanes of moving traffic, this will put them in worryingly close proximity to pedestrians.

We also stongly feel that this point of Sturry Road the traffic has generally always flowed freely, with the exception of peak morning traffic times , so the proposition of a 24 hour bus lane would have very little effect on the movement of traffic over a 24 hour period. The nature of our business means we are witnesses to the ebb & flow of traffic throughout the working day so in our opinion we have very good experience in this matter & how recent housing developments in the Hernebay & Hersden area have effected traffic volume.

This leads us tp the conclusion that such a significant investment is being proposed to apparently enable bus & taxi traffic to get to the top of


Response CommentsTourtel road marginally quicker to what will become & already is a major bottle neck of four lanes of traffic attempting to merge into one, namely Military road. This will all but guarentee stationary traffic in what is truley the final leg of a journey into Canterbury, this negates any time potentially saved along the proposed bus lane.

Our feelings are that a £700,000 investment would be far better spent addressing the problems Sturry road has now such as pot holes, road markings & general road surface maintenance.

We are firm belivers in public transport & feel that people should be encouraged to use it, however a bus lane is not the way to do it. Until busses become a cost effective, reliable & safe way to get into & around the city then cars will still be the first choice for many. Perhaps this investment could be spent on subsidising the cost of bus travel for many who need it. Affordability, reliability & safety are areas where improvment & investment will see more people using public transport not using their cars & there will be no need to disrupt the road network the busses already use.

Strongly agree

Sturry Road is currently the most dangerous part of my journey into Canterbury. Where there is current provision for cyclists to keep them separate from motor vehicles the ride is safe and pleasant.

Tend to agree

Canterbury needs, as a matter of priority, to vastly improve it provision for cyclists. The focus on the Sturry Road is a missed opportunity to repair and provide a fully sustainable transport system for the area. Removing cycle path provision in order to improve air quality and motorised traffic flow will justify the growing reputation of Canterbury and East Kent as the least cycle friendly (and most dangerous) area in the UK.

Strongly agree

I have no other comment apart from I think these measures are a great idea. We could also really do with one going up the other side too.

Strongly disagree

I have serious safety concerns about this proposal. The stretch of Sturry road in front of the petrol station is already quite narrow. I do not believe that it is wide enough to fit 3 lanes of traffic safely.

I also cannot see the greater benefit of introducing a bus lane along this stretch of road. Without a bus lane along military road, all that will be achieved is to worsen the already severe bottle neck at the Tourtel roundabout.



After talking too a member of canterbury council he did not give me sutible answers to.1.the compensation we may recive for the inconvenience and damage to the property.2. The devaluation of the property.3. The council don't seem to have done any research in self drive shuttle buses!4. When questioned about the narrow lanes it will make outside, and if there's an accident and injures a pedestrain,'o'well i hope it doesn't happen.is i am sorry not a answer!5. Seems to me like all he wants to do is make a name for himself and he does not care how he will affect peoples lifes.P.S. Why do we need a bus lane where traffic flows freely!

Strongly disagree

Why are we investing so much money in a obsoleat transport system when there are driverless cars being developted could be the end of even the railway.

Strongly disagree

Dear Sir/ MadamI would like to communicate my objection in the strongest possible terms to the proposed bus lane expansion in Sturry Road .First, while the parking spaces outside 154 to 216 Sturry Road are not owned by the residents, they do provide a vital access for both deliveries and for parking owned cars. "Parking in other side streets" basically means parking in South Street and parking there is already highly congested. 28 households will be directly and negatively affected as they will have nowhere at all to park. The issue of deliveries is particularly problematic and I can illustrate some examples:. if someone is moving house - how is this possible. if there are large or heavy deliveries as all these houses have gardens (soil/ aggregate/ paving etc) how are they to be taken in. if trees are to be taken down in the houses' gardens, how is all the wood to be removed.There is no realistic parking alternative for the 28 residents in this section of the road.Second, having very heavy vehicles within 5 feet of my front wall is extremely likely to lead to damage and structural issues as well as being highly unpleasant with noise and dirt from the heavy vehicles. The foundations of these houses are not deep owing to when they were constructed. Coupled with this is the fact that all the houses will have the dirt from road spray constantly on the front of the houses. This will lead to damp penetration inside the houses.Third, the pavement area is below the level of the road and this pavement is already subject to flooding due to no drainage being provided by the council along its length. Heavy traffic will push rain water over the kerb and exacerbate the flooding on this footpath. Pedestrian


Response Commentswill then be forced to either walk in the bus lane or on the kerb either of which will be highly dangerous.Fourth, I do not accept that pollution will decrease. My expectation is that pollution will in fact increase as more buses are put on the road and most people travel by car anyway.Fifth, what happens if you are disabled or elderly and have difficulty walking. Disabled parking is a facility that should be available to any resident and will not be possible with a bus lane.Sixth, I do not believe that expanding the road will improve traffic flow significantly. The main source of congestion is in fact the roundabout to the west of South Street and opposite the Asda store and B&Q store and further west by about 20ft is the pedestrian crossing. This combination of roundabout and pedestrian crossing is what clogs up Sturry Road and nothing else.Seven, the value of all the houses along this row will be significantly reduced for all the above reasons - they will be effectively unsaleable.For the above reasons, I believe that spending £700,000 on widening Sturry Road into a bus lane is a colossal waste of money, is fundamentally flawed (it won't work) as well as creating significant issues and lower quality of life for the residents.

Strongly disagree

This will affect me for a number of reasons.1) I will lose the parking outside my house. This will affect the value of my house should I wish to move (which I expect I will given the proposed changes). It will also prove to be a huge inconvenience, particularly as I have a 1 year old daughter. Finding somewhere to park near my house will be very difficult which will make even the most basic tasks such as shopping much more complicated. It will also affect the roads around which are already over parked.2) The roadworks themselves will cause more problems and delays then the current level of traffic.3) The buses will be travelling much closer to my property which will increase noise pollution, fumes and general dirt. As it is not the most affluent area I have noticed that cleaning the roads and pavements doesn't seem to be a priority to the council. The cars parked along the road are always filthy from the dust and pollution. I presume this will transfer to my house once the traffic is so much closer. The other properties that have bus lanes outside are set much further back from the road so the noise and fumes are reduced.

Given that I am one of many who will be similarly affected I struggle to see that the level of disruption caused is worth it. I don't believe that installing a small section of bus lane is going to make any difference to the traffic levels. A view you yourselves obviously took the last time this was proposed.



If the bus lane proceeds then please consider protecting the parking spaces for the occupants e.g. resident parking. in order to protect the property appeal & value and to protect the occupants ability to park outside their homes. Alternatively please do not remove the parking spaces for the bus lane.

Strongly agree

Let's hope the up kept and the quality of the road surface along with drain holes are not like the pot hole - dirt track that drivers and passengers have to endure whilst using the bus lanes at present!!Let's make it a pleasure to use and not a chore to endure

Strongly disagree

Spend the money on something else where it actually matters

Tend to agree

Sorry for the local residents who park there already.

Strongly disagree

The traffic along this part of the road does not seem to be that bad so I cannot understand the need for this lane. The house I live in has no other parking so I will be forced to park either in Asda or in a street further away.

Strongly agree

Generally the proposal can only be beneficial and, while not an ideal scenario in terms of alleviating traffic flow and separating cars from vulnerable road users, it is much better than the existing layout. I agree with the removal of the cycle lane on the Eastbound lane as this was inconsequential and at worst, dangerous, leading cyclists to an unhappy conflict on the left of vehicles cutting across the cycle lane approaching the Vauxhall Rd roundabout. The absence of a lane may make cyclists more likely to take the middle of the lane in queueing traffic, avoiding conflict.Further to this, the disastrous cycle lane around this roundabout must be removed. Inexperienced cyclists (exactly those a cycle lane should be protecting) using the lane for any right turn (third/fourth exit) are forced across oncoming traffic from their right at at least two separate exits, causing stress to themselves and motorists who are not expecting this behaviour. In the absence of continental-style managed and segregated lanes, the safest option is to allow cyclists to ride these junctions as a car, taking the outside lane. Many, of course, will not be confident with this manoeuvre but at least they may consider walking at this point rather than riding with a false sense of security.



Brilliant idea.

More bus lanes are needed to encourage more people onto public transport.We also need far more busses on many routes (the triangle, 6 & Thanet busses are very frequent but many more routes need more busses.)

With more people on the busses it will hopefully have a positive impact on other routes which have heave congestion- ie the A28 from Canterbury to Ashford and the 1/1A/1X NEEDS to be more frequent & on evenings, Sunday's and Bank Holidays to help reduce the congestion through Wincheap.

Strongly disagree

It will affect our ability to park nearby to unload tools and equipment.This amount of money would be better spent on, what we consider the higher priority need to repair and maintain the current roads; i.e. fill in the increasing number of potholes.In our experience it unnecessary as the traffic moves continuously.

Strongly disagree

This bus lane will NOT ease congestion going into Canterbury town centre. The traffic is not cause in this direction the majority of traffic is in the direction towards Herne bay/Margate. For an example of this look at Reims way which is constantly congested with a designated bus lane and 2 lanes entering and exiting the roundabout.

The bus stops along the proposed new bus lane are set back from the road, this means cars are able to continue driving whilst the bus has stopped and this means congestion is not cause by buses so the bus lane appears to be unnessesary

The pavement leading off of South street on to Sturry road is not wide enough for pedestrians to use it safely with moving traffic being so close, the path is not wide enough with the lamp posts, sign posts and telegraph poles making this even narrower but the need for residents to, on a weekly basis, place their rubbish bins on the path to be collected this takes up lots of space, the path is not wide enough for a pushchair, wheelchair or mobility scooter to go down this path and if another pedestrian it walking to pass they must stop or move onto the residents pathways to make room, this is something that will not be recitfied by removing the parking or corner at South street as there is not the space to widen the path and add a bus lane due to the lack of pace the other side of the road..

The preposal has removed the parking for the residents of Sturry road but have not provided any alternative parking for them which means they will have to park their vehicals down the side roads where there is


Response Commentsalready insificiant parking, with residents regularly parking on the paths and, especially in East street, the road narrows making passing space difficult but more cars parking will cause more issues and make passing even harder.

The congestion that this is supposed to be easing is actually caused at the ASDA roundabout,where the roundabout has a 2 lane entrance onto it but very quickly have a one lane exit going into town (2nd exit) the lack of clear road markings does not help with informing commutor and other drivers with correct lane positioning.

Removing the time restrictions through Brymore road to Tourtel road, which are during rush hour, would ease congestion alot more then the proposed bus lane as this would provide drivers the opportunity to by pass the traffic from kingsmead roundabout, as it stands if you wish to go to the sorting office, council offices, courts or the residentual area you have no choice but to go through and add to the congestion there, alternatively turn this route into a designated bus route thus removing the buses entirely from this traffic and easing congestion as they cause many issues turning right at Tourtel roundabout, this is after introducing a bus lane and traffic light system which are not wprking more often then not, and many buses do not use the bus lane to the end.The congestion that this proposal will cause whilst being implimented will be higher then its currently is, the congestion is always higher when road works are being carried out on this road and for such a prolonged period would not be constructive or useful.

The change of crossing is a concern as the lights at Marshwood close are relatively quick to change for drivers and are very quick to change for pedestrians to cross meaning traffic is not help up for long. The Vauxhall road crossing doea not seem to have a regular changeing time for pedestrians but this again does not hold up traffic for too long.

The removal of parking spaces will cause several issues for the businesses along this stretch of road as there will be know where for them to park and unload as they will not be able to enter into the bus lane, as it stand the tile shop would not be able to have deliveries easily to them and when the Big Motoring World has deliveries of cars they currently park on the road to unload directly onto the garage forecourt, with the cars being able to use the parking spaces to allow drivers to pass the lorry whilst maintaining the flow of traffic.

Finally there are proposed plans to construct a passover to avoid the Fordwich turning and Sturry village, when this happens congestion should ease as there will be no need to pass the train crossing or Herne


Response Commentsbay turning, because of these proposed plans it would be logical to await this to be implimented amd then make plans to ease any remaining congestion along Sturry road.

Strongly agree

I imagine this change will also affect the local residents , there is already limited parking especially in side roads such as Glenside Avenue. I used to live there and it was often difficult to find a space to park. A lot of those houses are multiple occupancy and there will be more then one car to a household.

Tend to disagree

Don't think that it will make a difference to traffic flow other than causing disruption to complete it.

Strongly disagree

I object to the widening of the stretch from the Tile Centre to Reed Ave and the consequent removal of the mature trees along there. Any replacement trees will be fragile saplings that will be ripped up by the idiot vandals in this area. Many trees have been planted in Asda, Argos ,Lidl and Subway grounds only to be cut down by the owners because they obscure shop frontages. Sturry Rd is becoming a" tree free" area. I live in this area: how does this benefit me? I can see it benefits people travelling in to Canterbury be saving them a few measly minutes off their journey. The bottom line is that too many vehicles come in to Canterbury and these piecemeal solutions do not address the problem.

Strongly disagree

It would drastically impair the access drives for residents along that road, causing real danger for adults and children especially when people are trying to access their properties by car and will slow traffic along the road increasing fumes and all this for a rush hour only twice a day. The loss of the remaining trees and grass on what is already a road with few green spaces would be a great pity and the increased road noise and diesel smells very unpleasant for residents.

Strongly agree

We are keen to see measures which will reduce car use and encourage people to use other forms of transport. Canterbury already has serious problems with air pollution and congestion. The proposal could help to reduce both along the Sturry Road.

We would add that there are still some problems with the proposal which need further thought. However, when these have been tackled, we are confident that the bus route will add to the convenience and speed of travel for many people, and could contribute to cleaner air.



I agree with public transport, but I disagree strongly with the removal of the cycle path along a very busy outbound stretch of road, coming up to a very busy roundabout. I also understand that there are no other options in order to install this bus route than to remove on-street parking but feel as though the congestion, particularly around a children's centre and an area where many children do play out on the streets could prove problematic.

Strongly agree

I agree with all the reasons given: we know that air quality in Canterbury is dangerously low, and there is really no alternative to persuading more motorists to use other forms of transport.

Strongly disagree

Absolutely pathetic idea! The road needs to be able to handle more normal traffic in the area. A much better idea for road improvements in the are would be to run a new road from Sturry Road Park and ride up onto the Littlebourne Road the other side of the Old Park. This would have the advantage of wicking traffic away from the Sturry Road.

Another idea that would improve traffic flow would be to open up some of the smaller roads in Canterbury that were closed off years ago.

Strongly disagree

Will this be the 2nd, 3rd or 4th proposal for a bus lane along this portion of Sturry Rd. It seems to me KCC won't be happy until this 'missing link' in the bus lane is completed. I feel this has nothing to do with us residents but it is all about Stagecoach meeting its targets.I have your public consultation to hand and in it you advise cyclists to either cycle in the main traffic or re route to the Military Road-Fordwich cycle lane. Really, its that easy? Wasn't the cycle lane put along Sturry Road because it was considered too dangerous for cyclists in main traffic and why should cyclists have to detour 1-2 miles just so Stagecoach can arrive 5 minutes earlier.And it's very king to provide safer crossing areas but first you have to avoid being hit by the buses that will be passing probably within 2 feet of you.Also you have reduced the on street parking to practically nothing, then have the cheek to say its because we can't have the on street parking and the bus lane. I know which one I will be voting for.I also disagree with the restrictions on loading/unloading - I am lucky, I have off street parking I pity anyone who doesn't because its going to be very difficult to have anything picked up or delivered.

Tend to agree

While the principle is good, the execution is short sighted and adds to the danger for cyclists.

1. A cycle lane is required in both directions to reduce the current and future congestion and accidents:

Inbound cyclists will be at greater risk from buses and taxis due to the elimination of the cycle lane as they will in future be sharing a lane.


Response CommentsCyclists will also slow down bus and taxi traffic which defeats the purpose of the bus lane. Frustrated taxi drivers will be tempted to 'squeeze' cyclists leading to injuries or deaths. If a shared lane is unavoidable, at least the inbound bus lane must be increased in width to allow a bus or taxi to pass a cyclist with a safe amount (3ft/1m) of clearance.

Outbound cyclists will be at greater risk than at present due to the elimination of the cycle lane. Mixing cars, buses and lorries with cyclists will lead to increased injuries and deaths. The outbound cycle lane must be maintained and extended for the full length of this project.

2. The change should provide a full four lanes, two in each direction. The volume of traffic from the massive new developments to the north east will overcome this proposed change in a very short amount of time. Thus the parking close to the Vauxhall roundabout will have to go and the space for the lane will have to come from the commercial properties at the western end: Pets at Home, Motoring World, Lakeside service station, etc.

3. The bus companies must acquire and use zero emission (electric) vehicles. While not specifically related to this proposal, the only way the local residents will not be adversely affected by the increased pollution for all of these extra vehicles is for the majority of the diesel buses to be removed. Given the short cycle of the park and ride buses, they are ideal candidates for electrification.

Strongly disagree

I oppose this proposal, in the strongest possible terms.There is already a high level of noise and air pollution from the existing two lanes of traffic, which also induce intermittent ground-borne vibrations throughout adjacent dwellings.The implementation of this proposal would most certainly have a deleterious effect on the health & wellbeing of local residents.

Strongly disagree

I cannot accept that this is the best solution for transporting people from the new housing at Sturry, Hersden, Herne Bay in to Canterbury.I was hoping that the Council would actually reduce the volume of traffic along Sturry Road as part of the cleaner air initiative rather than seeking to increase it

Individual Letter ResponsesMy concern about the proposed alterations to the road outside my bungalow *** Sturry Road is causing me a lot of anguish.I am in my 89th year, also disabled with a hip problem which can’t be operated on. I have to rely on taxis and hired cars, also have frequent visits from family who come from Fareham Hants and London, a gardener and window cleaner visit every month and he has transport.


Response CommentsI feel not enough thought has gone into this project, also what about deliveries of household goods and where will they be able to park.The pavement outside the bungalows is not very wide and we have people on motorised scooters going to the shops as well as pedestrians, not a lot of room for them.I have written my piece and so be it.Since I don’t have either email or mobile, I’m writing this the old fashioned way. I visited the council on Tuesday Sept 19th and also phoned but of course no answer. I and many others have great concerns over this proposed bus lane, the pollution will intensify not decrease.PedestriansHow can the council be so arrogant, and not consider the people that live here.You say pedestrians will not be affected, of course they will. The path is not wide enough for a buggy or a mobile scooter. If one of us is behind or in front, you have to step out of the way to let them pass and that’s why the grass verge is so useful, so now we will have to step on-to the bus lane.BusinessesIf one buys a w/machine of f/freezer they have to park opposite just to deliver and cross a busy road, I don’t think so.And what about the dustmen are they having to park in the layby, to collect our bin, or will we have to drag them over ourself. Yes I’m being sarcastic, but do you blame me it’s a stupid idea.Its enough we have the buses, but why do we have to put up with these huge lorries and containers, they should have built a bypass as this road was not built for all this traffic. I really could go on, but its making me and others very angryPlease take the time to read my letter listing my objections to the proposed bus lane between the roundabout at Vauxhall road and South Street.

Safety concernsA lot of residents along this stretch of road are elderly and have health issues, they have their shopping delivered also taxis to get about, also with online shopping on the increase we all have parcels delivered by independent delivery companies. Where will they stop?

Along by the petrol station on the opposite side of the road are cottages with no frontage, where will they park? In fact where will they unload their shopping? Worse still where will the removals vans park if they were to move?

I’m a builder and what happens when the bungalows etc. have work done to them like the extension I’m undertaking right now at *** Sturry Road, I have deliveries from Jewson’s and Travis Perkins.Where will they unload things like packs of bricks and one ton bags of sand and ballast? Reed Avenue as informed byKCC, are you serious!

Apart from the fact that it’s a narrow footpath and there is already a cycle lane everyone cycles down the path towards Vauxhall road on our side of the road, this I guess saves them the effort of navigating the roundabout to get to Macdonald’s. So where will our wheelie bins go now on collection day? How will pushchairs, mobility scooters and elderly pass them without an accident that’s waiting to happen?


Response CommentsThere is as you know an infant school close by, some of these children are unfortunately unaccompanied and more interested in the sweetshop than road safety as was demonstrated a few years ago when one nearly died.

WhyIt appears its more important to get people into the city centre than the cost of the environment, listen I’m a builder and if I wanted to get one of those trees removed to get a dropped kerb it wouldn’t happen, I’m having issues right now about something similar.

The cost£700,000 of central government money wasted, if you want to build something, build a new car park behind Macdonald’s and TK Maxx. Around Christmas time you cannot get along Sturry Road anyway where all the cars are stacked around the roundabout!

If the bus lane was continuous from the park and ride into the bus station there would be a little argument but its fragmented with the amount of roundabouts, traffic lights and pedestrian crossings, it strikes me there’s not much thought attached to this.

EnvironmentI’ve lived here in this bungalow for 40 years and in that time C.C.C. Planners have managed to turn Sturry Road into a town all of its own, we have probably got more shops of value here than in the city centre itself. I have enclosed a list of the businesses that have sprung up around here of recent years and choked up the A28 which is a Trunk Road. Definition of a Trunk Road I’m reliably informed is a Free Flowing 30MPH road between two cities or towns. This is a jokes yes?

As planners you will know the term Visual Amenity and its Visual Impact to the neighbourhood, well our properties will in fact suffer as a result of this prosed venture including added traffic noise. Why is it then necessary to actually go to Canterbury I wonder? What you have done is to allow the centre to become a student and tourist village what with every other premises becoming a pub, coffee bar, restaurant or some fancy eatery, brilliant for council tax I guess.

DamageThese bungalows were built around the 1930s and the foundations are perilously near to ground level, even now we get vibrations from Lorries and buses, bringing then ever closer will damage our homes, this will inevitably devalue the properties and increase the building insurance.

In 2002 the council passed our application allowing us to extend our drop kerb and a tarmac hardstand, the work was carried out by Serco at a cost of £863.01, this was so I could pull onto it allowing me to reverse into my drive safely without stopping the traffic. That will go if this goes ahead, well I shall be looking for reimbursement for the amount paid, I will enclose a copy of the bill.

I have proposed on many occasions that Sturry Road should become a one way road up to the roundabout by the Northgate doctor’s surgery and the Broadoak road one way back to Vauxhall road with the bus service circumnavigate the two roads. It may take a little longer but that’s the sacrifice of progress. And that’s where we are, progress, you want to build more and more homes around Canterbury city even though we are struggling to cope now.Either build a proper bypass or make the drastic measures to facilitate everyone and not just penalize the residents of this nice area.

Finally I noticed that it has been made as hard as was possible to allow some of the residents from making comments either way. Not everyone has access to electronic communication, I tried


Response Commentsseveral times ringing the number with no luck, also there’s no postal box number to send a written letter. Some of my neighbours are well into their eighties and would have no concept of emails or websites.

I have a relative who is the Editor of the Kentish Gazette and I shall forward to him my letter hoping he will take an interest in this proposal.

Appendix D: Journey time survey carried out by a local resident

On two occasions I set up a camera in the upstairs bedroom of my house during peak hours, in order to record the road outside. 13 October 2017

Recording took place between 08.38 and 09.10.In that entire period one car paused for five seconds. Other than that there was not a single other incidence where a vehicle stopped or paused outside my house. The traffic flowed freely the entire time and that is despite the fact there is a pedestrian crossing a few doors down the road from my house.

26 October 2017

Recording took place between 08.52 and 09.09. During this period no vehicle stopped or paused.

Prior to that, on 16 occasions I recorded my journey from my house driving westbound along Sturry Road towards town. The aim was to see at which point the traffic started getting heavier and forced me to slow down or stop. Obviously there is already a bus lane in operation (intermittently) from South Street to the top of Tourtel Road.

Friday 15 September 2017

Start point 208 Sturry Road Time at start 08.37

Pause at traffic lights by Barton Mill Road, then free-flowing until Honeywood Close

Journey time to Kingsmead roundabout 5m 18s

Saturday 16 September 2017


Pause due to pedestrian crossing at South Street, pause due to pedestrian crossing at Lidl, pause at traffic lights by Barton Mill Road; other than that free-flowing up to Kingsmead roundabout


Sunday 17 September 2017


No delays, completely free-flowing to Kingsmead roundabout


Monday 18 September 2017


Pause due to pedestrian crossing at Lidl, pause due to pedestrian crossing at Starle Close, no other congestion

Journey time to Stare Close 2m 5s

Tuesday 19 September 2017


Traffic got heavier by Parham Road

Journey time to Parham Road 1m 11s

Wednesday 20 September 2017


Pause at traffic lights by Barton Mill Road, then free-flowing to Kingsmead roundabout


Wednesday 27 September 2017


Pause at traffic lights by Barton Mill Road, traffic started getting heavier between Brymore Road and Glenside Avenue; didn’t proceed past Barton Mill Road

Total journey time to Barton Mill Road 1m 48s

Friday 29 September 2017


Pause at traffic lights by Barton Mill Road, then free-flowing until Kingsmead roundabout


Monday 2 October 2017


Traffic gets heavy by New Town Street, did not proceed any further

Journey time to New Town Street 1m 40s

Tuesday 3 October 2017


Free-flowing all the way to Kingsmead roundabout


Thursday 5 October 2017

Start point Lidl, Sturry Road Time at start 11.39

Free-flowing traffic all the way to Kingsmead roundabout


Friday 6 October 2017


Pause at pedestrian crossing at Starle Close


Monday 9 October 2017


Pause at traffic lights by Barton Mill Road, then free-flowing until Kingsmead roundabout. Followed a taxi all the way down the road, which stayed in the regular traffic lane, presumably because there was no advantage in the driver using the taxi lane!


Tuesday 10 October 2017


Pause for a reason I could not determine, then free-flowing until Starle Close


Wednesday 11 October 2017


Pause for a car to turn right, then free-flowing to Kingsmead roundabout


Thursday 12 October 2017


Pause for pedestrian crossing at Lidl, pause at traffic lights by Barton Mill Road then free-flowing to Kingsmead roundabout


Appendix E

Full response received from Ward Councillors Alan Baldock and Jean Butcher

“Over the past few weeks we have visited the families that will be severely impacted should this proposal be finalised and discussed the impact of the works, with just a few fairly non-comital replies the responses have been far from favourable.

No doubt you will have already received a considerable number of responses to the consultation, be they written or verbally communicated at the open sessions held. We hope that you will spend some time reflection on those comments from residents and addressing those concerns. Indeed, we have assured residents concerned that their voice will not be heard that due process and consideration will be given to their views as we know it will by you and your colleagues.

Our experience during the many conversations over those weeks point us to some fundamental issues that have, regrettably failed to be addressed at this initial design stage and certainly do not appear to be well understood by yourselves, this compromises the credibility of the scheme from the very outset.

We will seek to summarise those concerns as we see them, we also acknowledge the written responses from residents that we have been copied into which eloquently also set out the concerns we share and contributes greatly to the overall.

Road Safety: -

The proposed bus lane is achieved in the main by reworking the existing road width, creating three lanes of about three meters, that dimension being I understand the very minimum design standard, a more realistic road width being more like twelve meters. It is difficult to see where this more appropriate and safer width can be archived in the design submitted for consultation

The combination of an existing narrow footpath outside the terrace of houses between South Street and say 224 Sturry Road, limited at around 1.5m, and the proposed bus lane to be situated immediately adjacent presents a considerable risk to pedestrians in our opinion. The dangers are of course obvious the footpath is obstruction weekly by wheelie bins (inevitable under current CCC waste collection arrangements). With the future loss of the parking acting as the “buffer between the moving vehicles and pedestrians, should this scheme be adopted, pedestrians would be forced into the bus lane to navigate the footpath. The risk to push chairs, mobility scooters and wheelchairs users for example are obvious. Indeed, now it is a tight squeeze if a push chair and pedestrian meet on the path. As such the implications on the safety of road users and those using the remaining inadequate footpath, being used under very different circumstances is in itself reason enough to reject this design.

Parking: -

Regrettably your consultation document is somewhat dismissive of the potential implication of the loss of parking in Sturry Road in front of properties 182 to 216.

This proposal fails to offer any mitigation for residents. It is well known that parking in adjacent streets such as South Street and East Street are already oversubscribed. I would suggest that a solution may lay in negotiation with B&Q and perhaps ASDA or the retail units opposite (Pets at Home etc.) a resolution is required before the scheme moves forward. This location in general is well served with retail parking, however as residents parking has been compromised here the use of private parking seem a very sensible solution that should be organised by KCC in mitigation. Perhaps we should be using this sort of option a great deal more than we do currently? It is not I think, unreasonable to expect that consideration of this loss of parking as an amenity is factored into such a project.

Loss of Trees

Many residents of the bungalows on Sturry Road are concerned and saddened by the proposed loss of trees and the verge, the proposal starts that re-planting will be carried out. However, it is not clear to us were that new trees will be planted following any bus lane works, residents would look to have the amenity restored for their community’s benefit and in the immediate locality, it is difficult to see how that can be achieved as the proposal stands. This issue has failed to be addresses adequately in this proposal.

Delivery and Taxi’s: -

The consultation points out that this proposal will not allow for stopping of delivery vehicles or taxis at any time.

It has been pointed out to us on many occasions that this single issue will create huge problems for people. Those in particular who require a Taxi for appointments or perhaps to allow family to drop elderly parents off outside their house will be badly impacted. If you live in bungalows between 224 and 250 then taxi parking on the opposite side of the A28, even if space were available, is not an attractive option for an elderly person who will now have to cross the busy A28 with a walking aid and assistance!

Delivery of goods to a home on the proposed bus lane route would also, under these proposed rules becomes almost impossible. Pushing a washing machine half, a mile along streets may seem to be an option deemed acceptable even if a company can be found to do that but I do fail to see how the delivery of “ready-mix concrete” or bricks is on the same page.

The impact on the Kent Tile Centre business of this loading/unloading rule is extremely troubling, the business is very successful and set for a good future, we believe that it is not unreasonable to believe that this proposal places that future into doubt. The restriction this will impose on their customers and suppliers is we think unacceptable.

It is perhaps worth considering creating a short term “stopping area” off the bus lane in the grass area in front of the shops at 252 to 254? However, that would not solve this issue satisfactorily for Kent Tile Centre, elderly residents or goods delivery just assists quick courier drop offs etc.

“Missing Link” and “Bottleneck”: -

The consultation sets out the case that the proposed bus lane will complete the missing link along Sturry Road and prevent a bottleneck. Unfortunately, we cannot subscribe to that arguments on two issues.

Firstly, the bus lane will not be continuous from the Park and Ride to say Kingsmead Road, a key point made in the case for this proposal is the opportunity to avoid bottlenecks. You will recall that just off the proposal plan circulated is a section of the A28 from the ASDA roundabout on the B&Q side to Old Park Avenue (in front of Subway/Greggs) that is not yet a bus lane and is not proposed to have one as far as I am aware. It is not shown on the consultation document plans as “future” as far as I can see.

The bus lane proposals at Kingsmead Roundabout (in the area of Jesus Hospital) and forming part of the Kingsmead development are also I understand, far from finalised. Indeed, it may well not be delivered in the scheme (on inspection of the consultation plans for the development no works were shown)

Of particular concern to us now is the omission of the short section I describe above which would join the proposed Bus Lane to the existing one, this seems almost unbelievable not to be included. We can only guess this omission is linked to land ownership, however that should have been resolved before this current proposal was summited for consultation. To build a bus route with a section such as this missing with the obvious implications to the traffic flow if it remains incomplete is unnecessarily speculative and potentially a scandalous waste of public money.

These omissions to the A28 Bus Lane concept make any works carried out now somewhat ineffectual and falling well short of the continuous route intimated in this consultation. Such a claim is we believe disingenuous to our residents that are severely affected by this current proposal.

In conclusion, we believe this proposal is premature, the immediate need for the bus lane is unconvincing. It is noted that the delivery of new housing will stretch over perhaps more than twenty years, the Sturry Link Road is not due for delivery for several years at least and vehicle movements along Sturry Road are not significantly rising for around ten years according to recent figures. As such it is difficult to see how the impact on what is the key issue of peak time congestion will be assisted so much as to warrant the expenditure on a route that is not continuous at this time.

As such we ask that considerably more work needs to be done to resolve the very real concerns of the residents of Sturry Road and the streets impacted by the “knock on” effect of this scheme. In the main that of an adequate road width to ensure the safety of vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians. Also, that of parking and delivery and pick /drop off. We also stress that any proposal in the future achieves a continuous route not a piecemeal proposal as now

We would strongly suggest that this scheme is not progressed until the need can be justified and the design creates a safe and continuous route, unlike this current proposal.”

Documents

REPORT FORMAT INCLUDING DECISION NOTICE FOR CABINET€¦ · Web viewConsiders that this project should be installed before any new houses are built . 1. Does not believe more people