Footpath in Rusthall

The following is from the minutes of Rusthall Parish Council meeting held on 8th August.  Cllr Edwards (Conservative) lost his seat on Tunbridge Wells Borough Council to Cllr Webb (UKIP).  John Davies is the county councillor for the area.

8. Still Green Boardwalk

8.1 The item was introduced by Cllr Barry Edwards


8.2 Discussed the footpath, namely:

a) The issue of dog fouling;
b) Flooding;
c) Mud slides covering the footpath;
d) Weather (sic) it was a safe route to walk



8.3 KCC in 2003 had designated the footpath as dangerous. John Davies wrote to find out why and it was reported that according to the database the route was listed as too hazardous for children to walk in safety. Now however, it was worried that predators would jump out on children/young persons. Questions were asked of KCC in respect of making safe but no progress made.



8.4 On a Western Area Planning committee a site visit was made to Benenden School and one noticed a ‘boardwalk’, a company called ‘Blue Forest’ built it and one could look at doing the same for Still Green.



8.5 The company showed a ‘good’ presentation which was delivered at the Bishops Down School and had produced a pack detailing the proposed routes, one partial and one full, together with plans and costings. This has not cost anything.

a) Full route would cost aprox (sic) £250,000;
b) Partial route (70m) would cost aprox (sic) £45-50,000;
c) Route will be raised on stilts but he exact height is unknown
d) Path would be 2.5m wide, enough for push chairs and wheelchairs etc
e) Path would have raised sides
f) Path is fairly straight and will not have any ‘hiding spots’ for predators.
g) Very substantial construction – stilts are set into concrete blocks to stop rot

  8.6 Next stage is to do drilling into land to assess the structure and construction of it e.g. posts etc. This will cost £2,500.


8.7 TWBC have not been very helpful in respect of the funds needed for stage two, William Benson has not been very helpful.


8.8 The question of maintenance of the path was raised – Councillor Edwards stated that KCC will maintain footpath as it their footpath that is being ‘raised’.


8.9 Cost of path could be raised through sponsorship, e.g. personalise the planks, or have a conservation side to it, a view point halfway and get a grant for this.


8.10 Cycle path on route could link up with Tunbridge Wells perhaps.


8.11 John Davies is meeting with the School Governors and the Head Master to review the matter.


8.12 Walking bus route would have an impact- it is deemed safe enough for that.


8.13 Although the path is cleared when complaints made to KCC, it is not a long term solution and when flooded push chairs cannot get through.


8.14 Route is thought to be a vast improvement (Subject to caveats).


8.15 Moving forward:
a) Wait for discussion re the walking bus route in Autumn;
b) Revisit the matter in Autumn;
c) Consolidate information to hand re path status with KCC.


11. Questions form (sic) the Public:

11.1 Cllr Webb made a statement in respect of the Boardwalk namely:

a) There is no danger of predators or getting attacked when using the path at the moment;
b) There is very limited flooding;
c) Raising the path would be cheaper than building a ‘Bridge to nowhere’;
d) Is against the Council spending any money on exploratory works;
e) Total costs are unknown;
f) Maintenance is unclear;
g) Waste of money.

The mind boggles.  £250,000 approx. for the full route or £45,000-£50,000 approx. for 70 metres of the route.  And there was me thinking that we live in a period of austerity. Kent County Council along with others is making major service cuts.  Someone is living in a fantasy world.  Top marks to Cllr Webb for his common-sense approach.

I walk often along the path. Whilst I was a borough councillor I arranged for the pavement at the end of Coniston Avenue to be 'dropped' to enable people to push wheelchairs onto the pavement.  I pressed for the path to be lit and a few years later lighting was installed.  The path has been re-surfaced at its steepest point.  Mud-slides causing blocked drains and occasional flooding is a problem but this could be resolved by digging a drainage ditch to the stream.   Pedestrians will have to run the gauntlet of mud coming from the privately owned Bishops Down Park Road and vehicular access has to be maintained to the pumping station. This access is often covered in mud.

The walking-bus route has not been plagued by serious injuries and predators.  In any event there is the issue of parental responsibility.  Parents should collect their children from school or make arrangements for them to be collected. There is of course another school in Rusthall children could attend.

I know there is the issue of older children being attacked. The proposals will do nothing to deter a determined assailant.