Over the coming years, it is forecast that most residents will work in the area where they live. However, particularly in the west of the county, 17% of all new commuting trips will be destined for London, a large proportion of which will be by rail, and therefore additional rail capacity is needed. It is vital that national government looks at strategic transport issues in Kent and the wider UK holistically and seeks alternative solutions, such as increasing the proportion of freight carried by rail. Freight trains can reduce pressure on the road network, and produce far fewer carbon emissions and air pollutants per tonne of haulage. We support the growth of rail freight on HS1 and mainline wherever possible, although we acknowledge that there is limited scope for freight transport by rail, partly due to capacity limitations on the rail network for additional paths for freight trains. Our county is the Gateway to continental Europe and a reliable and connected transport network is needed to maintain this status so Kent, as a vital part of the greater South East, can compete on an international stage and complement London as a growth corridor. Efficient transport that reliably connects places is vital for economic Growth without Gridlock. [Image Description: An image of which Ebbsfleet Valley might look in 2035] Roles and Responsibilities We are responsible for the management and maintenance of all of Kent’s local roads and public rights of way (excluding motorways and trunk roads that are managed by Highways England). We have an obligation to promote and improve the economic, social and environmental wellbeing of the county, and to do this we implement local transport schemes that support these long term objectives. We also articulate the county’s needs for major transport infrastructure, such as a new Lower Thames Crossing, an alternative to Operation Stack, a solution for inappropriate overnight lorry parking, and improvements to bus and rail services. We have a strong record of delivery since 2011 when the previous Local Transport Plan (LTP) and the strategic transport delivery plan ‘Growth without Gridlock’ were published; and we will continue to work through this latest LTP to get greater investment in transport infrastructure for the benefit of the residents and business of Kent. To date, we has successfully secured almost £120m of Local Growth Funding from central Government and we will continue to put the case forward for further investment. [Image Description: A worker filling in a pothole.] [Image Description:
are robustly opposed to the proposals for a new hub airport in the Thames Estuary. We are also opposed to a second runway at Gatwick; one of the reasons for this is the doubling of the already unacceptable noise impacts. There needs to be an immediate reduction in overflight and noise in West Kent and so we oppose proposed airspace changes that would not share the burden of overflight equitably between communities. Multiple arrival and departure routes should be used to provide periods of respite. Additionally, the level of night flights should be reduced at Gatwick to a level comparable with Heathrow. As part of our view on long-term aviation capacity issues, we are pressing Government for immediate action to keep UK airports competitive with European airports in terms of Air Passenger Duty (APD). This currently has a negative impact on the UK’s global connectivity and is therefore damaging UK business and tourism. Differential charging of APD at uncongested airports could also help to stimulate growth at regional airports and free up capacity at congested airports. District Priorities These are the infrastructure requirements in each district to support growth sustainably. These priorities have been highlighted in the GIF and will be updated as the evidence in the GIF is updated. [Image Description: A map of Kent displaying seven cross district priorities. These are split between SEP Schemes, such as East Kent Local Sustainable Transport Fund – making sustainable travel easier for Kent’s residents Schemes Awarded Local Growth Fund (LGF) Funding, such as
carefully prioritise how we spend them. The methodology for prioritising is available in Annexe 1. Not all interventions vital for growth fall within the remit of KCC as the Local Transport and Highway Authority. A number of key projects fall under the responsibility of Highways England or Network Rail. We are therefore committed to working closely with both of these agencies to influence their future delivery programmes, and to ensure these schemes are given the highest priority for delivery. As a Council, what we want to achieve from transport for our residents, businesses and visitors is clearly set out in the outcomes described in this LTP4. These are: Outcome 1: Economic growth and minimised congestion Outcome 2: Affordable and accessible door-to-door journeys Outcome 3: Safer travel Outcome 4: Enhanced environment Outcome 5: Better health and wellbeing From our own work, and from liaising closely with our district council partners in supporting the development of their Local Plans and, more specifically, the transport strategies needed to deliver that growth, we have built up a detailed knowledge of transport needs across the county. We will continue to build on this relationship to ensure that our transport priorities use the latest forecasts for housing and population growth. Above all, we are committed to delivering Growth without Gridlock. [Image Description: three pictures together, showing an individual cycling along the Dover waterfront; an empty motorway at night; a full bicycle rack at a rail station platform]. Annexe 1 – Prioritisation for the Integrated Transport Programme Background and overview A robust method of appraising and prioritising local transport schemes is required to ensure that those delivered help to achieve the outcomes specified by this fourth Local Transport Plan (LTP4). The previous prioritisation methodology, developed as a result of the third Local Transport Plan (LTP3), has been updated and modified to enable Kent County Council (KCC) to generate a score for every proposed scheme, with the highest scoring schemes representing the highest possible value for money and contributing towards the LTP4 outcomes. This methodology applies to schemes seeking Integrated Transport Block funding and used to form the Integrated Transport Programme (ITP). In addition to the ITP, KCC implements a Crash Remedial Measure (CRM) programme, which identifies locations
Outcome 4: Enhanced environment Sustainable travel – what impact will the scheme have on sustainable travel (e.g. modal shift)? Strong negative impact Negative impact Neutral Positive impact Strong positive impact Townscape and heritage – what impacts will the scheme have on the historic and built environment (including severance)? Strong negative impact Negative impact Neutral Positive impact Strong positive impact Environment – what impact will the scheme have on the natural environment? Strong negative impact Negative impact Neutral Positive impact Strong positive impact Outcome 5: Better health and wellbeing Air quality – what impact will the scheme have on air quality? Strong negative impact Negative impact Neutral Positive impact Strong positive impact Active travel – what impact will the scheme have on promoting active travel? Strong negative impact Negative impact Neutral Positive impact Strong positive impact Scale of impact How wide an impact will the scheme have? N/A Localised impact – few people benefit Wider impact – a substantial number of people benefit Very wide impact – many people benefit The second part of the assessment deals with scheme deliverability, producing a deliverability score. -1 1 3 6 Scheme endorsement N/A – scheme should not Derived from a recognised Scheme has been to JTB Scheme derived from an