Park users should respect each other

With reference to the article regarding parkrun (Forum hears worries over ‘inconsiderate’ runners, KE, September 28), which results from the minutes of South Ashford Community Forum’s (SACF) June meeting.

SACF recognise that parkrun is the type of activity for which public parks, including Victoria Park, are suited. We do, however, believe that all users of Victoria Park should respect other users.

However, it appears that some parkrun participants are not giving other users that respect. This is illustrated by the reports we have received from some users and by the comments of some parkrun supporters on the article on the Kent Online Facebook page and Kent Online website that imply that other park users should not use the park while parkrun is in progress.

It may not be possible for more than 200 runners to use the park’s main foot/cycle paths at a time when many other people are using them as part of their regular journey from South Ashford and Singleton into the town centre without causing some difficulties for both groups.

As a result of Ashford Borough Council’s successful bid for funds from the Heritage Lottery Fund, we are looking forward to the formation of a community group that will provide a practical contribution to the maintenance of the park, and act as a forum for discussions on how the park can be developed and used by all parties. We hope that all user groups, including parkrun, will actively participate in that forum helping to promote understanding between users and make the park a safer and more enjoyable place for everyone. Bob Shrubb Chair, South Ashford Community Forum Kent County Council Highways or is it the responsibilty of the local borough council’s highways department?

Lack of maintenance of both drains and roadside ditches leads to flooding and areas of standing water or puddles which present a hazard for road users, be they motorists, cyclists or pedestrians. This standing water in turn soaks into the surface of the road where, in the winter, it freezes and breaks up the surface of the road resulting in the extremely hated potholes. The edge of the road also breaks up due to the same problem with frost leading to even more potholes.

Kent Highways are responsible for the maintenance and repair of the roads under their control which by and large is the majority of roads in the county.

A large proportion of council tax is set aside for just this purpose, highway maintenance and repair.

Why then do water companies charge their bill payers a fee for highway drainage when in fact they have nothing to do with the maintenance and repair of the roads?

Kent Highways are responsible for the draining of the highways and once the water is off the road and into the ditches it becomes the responsibility of the land owner over whose land the ditches run. Once the water reaches the main drainage system it becomes the responsibility of the Environment Agency and has nothing whatsoever to do with the water companies.

On taking this up with Southern Water, I was given four different reasons as to why this charge was made, the final one being that it was a community charge to benefit the community as a whole. This charge currently stands at approximately £10 per year per bill payer. Trivial, you might think, and I would agree with you in this day and age, what is £10 – until you factor in the five million customers involved. Not so trivial now is it? The charge has been in place since privatisation. Why is