Meeting documents

Swale Joint Transportation Board
Monday, 9 June 2014

swale joint transportation board

MINUTES of the Meeting held in the Council Chamber, Swale House, East Street, Sittingbourne on Monday 9 June 2014 from 5:30 pm to 8:00 pm.

Present: Councillors Mike Haywood (substitute for Councillor Tony Winckless), Bryan Mulhern, Prescott, Ken Pugh, Pat Sandle, Ghlin Whelan and Mike Whiting (Vice-Chairman). Kent County Councillors: Tom Gates (Chairman), Mike Baldock, Bowles, Lee Burgess, Adrian Crowther, Harrison and Roger Truelove. Kent Association of Local Councils: Councillors Keith Johnson, Peter Macdonald and Richard Palmer.

Officers Present: Joanne Hammond, Michael Knowles, Lyn Newton and Brian Planner (Swale Borough Council) and Alan Blackburn and Steve Darling (Kent County Council).

Also In Attendance: Councillors Mike Cosgrove, Mike Henderson and David Simmons. Mr Mike Gibson, Public Affairs Manager, Southeastern.

Apologies: Councillor Tony Winckless.

64  

confirmation of chairman

RESOLVED:

(1) That Kent County Councillor Tom Gates be confirmed as Chairman for the 2014/15 Municipal Year.
 
65  

appointment of vice-chairman

RESOLVED:

(1) That Councillor Mike Whiting be elected as Vice-Chairman for the 2014/15 Municipal Year.
 
66  

minutes

A Member referred to the need for roadway improvements at The Broadway, Sheerness, as minuted under Highway Works Programme 2013/14, Minute No. 626/03/14.

RESOLVED:

(1) The Minutes of the Meeting held on 10 March 2014 (Minute Nos. 621 - 630) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.
 
67  

declarations of interest

No interests were declared.

 
 

part a minutes for recommendation to cabinet

 
68  

public session

No members of the public had registered to speak at this meeting.

The Engineer, Swale Borough Council, advised that he had received a petition relating to road markings in London Road, Sittingbourne, in the vicinity of Reynolds Gym. He advised that he would carry out a public consultation in response to the petition and report back to a future meeting of the Board.

 
69  

train services in swale

The Chairman welcomed Mr Mike Gibson, Public Affairs Manager, Southeastern, to the meeting.

Mr Gibson explained that Southeastern had held the franchise since 2006, and from October 2014 they would be entering into a direct award period with the Department for Transport until 2018. Under Southeastern, train punctuality had increased to 92 per cent, which was the highest since records began in 1991/92. He explained that there had been a dip in performance in 2013 due to infrastructure-related issues, but performance was increasing again. All statistics were independently monitored and passengers could seek compensation for delays of 30 minutes or more. The High Speed service accounted for seven per cent of the train services operated by Southeastern and therefore only had a small impact on the overall statistics. He outlined the proposals for remodelling of London Bridge station and the long-term benefit it would bring for Swale residents travelling on services into London.

A Member considered that it was disheartening to hear of future disruption and on-going issues for Swale residents travelling into London. He advised that residents were keen for the reinstatement of services from Newington to Cannon Street and direct trains from Sheerness to London. He also considered that Teynham and Newington were being treated like branch line stations.

Mr Gibson explained that the South East rail network had historic infrastructure constraints; and that due to a historic shortage of funding the network was only dual tracked, as opposed to quadruple track-lines in most other areas. This resulted in all trains, including stopping trains and freight trains, having to use the same lines. He stressed the need for Local Authorities to press Network Rail for incremental improvements. He also advised that when proposals were made to remove stops, to reduce overall journey times, it met with too much local opposition.

A Member commented on the frustration experienced by passengers when the train did not stop at stations it was timetabled to, to allow the train to catch-up on its time, just to improve the punctuality statistics. He also queried why the High Speed train stopped at so many stations in the Medway towns, as it reduced the overall benefit of a High Speed service?

Mr Gibson advised that whilst train operators can set the timetable, the Department for Transport set the service pattern, which determines how many trains each station should receive in a day. He advised that Local Authorities needed to lobby the Department for Transport on the case for a better High Speed service. He explained that when there were disruptions to the service it was important to restore the timetable as quickly as possible, to ensure connections could be met and to minimise on-going disruption for passengers. He advised that train drivers would try to make-up time during a journey where possible. He acknowledged that customer satisfaction was not always about punctuality, and it was a difficult balance.

A Member reported that previous statistics for the number of passengers at Sheerness were flawed, as there had been no staff or barriers to ensure passengers bought tickets. He had raised this with the operator and it had been rectified. He also raised concern that the boards did not mention Sheerness, but he welcomed the announcement at a recent Swale Rail meeting that Southeastern was proposing to provide two peak-time trains to Sheerness.

Mr Gibson advised that he was unable to comment on the proposals regarding Sheerness, but any timetable changes would be circulated to stakeholders and posted on Southeastern's website.

A Member considered that other services were suffering so that the High Speed service could achieve good punctuality scores. He also raised concern at the turnaround time in London.

A Member stressed the need to press Government to improve the rail infrastructure to enable a better service for residents. He asked why there was no trolley buffet service on the High Speed trains, and Mr Gibson explained that it had not been considered to be commercially viable.

A Member commented on the lifts at Faversham station and asked if there was any update on the Access for All funding to install new lifts.

Mr Gibson advised that he was not aware of any update. He suggested that representations should be encouraged from local users, the Council, and the MP for Faversham and Mid Kent, to be sent to the Department for Transport, as this might assist Faversham in being selected for funding. He referred to successful lobbying campaigns in other areas and stressed the need to encourage as many representations as possible.

The Chairman thanked Mr Gibson for his attendance.

 
70  

proposed relocation of sittingbourne market

The Economy and Community Services Manager introduced the report which provided a further update on the proposed relocation of Sittingbourne market, and the informal consultation that had been undertaken since November 2013. She advised that the report identified a revised location for the street market at the top of the High Street and set out the next steps. She considered that the feedback following informal consultation with all individuals and organisations on the revised proposal had been more positive.

Members made the following comments: this was a compromise solution which demonstrated that the Council was listening to views and feedback; this was a workable solution and should be welcomed; the process had taken a long time and would like to see quicker progress over the coming months; welcome the report; not convinced engineering work was required at the corner of Central Avenue and the High Street, and it could just result in unnecessary delays; Kent County Council Highways had been very helpful; welcome the more positive dialogue with the bus companies on the new proposal; concern regarding the increased traffic on the Albany Road bend and the difficulty for pedestrians crossing at this point; the proposed engineering works related to signage and the possibility of having to move bollards; and important that the project was done properly.

A Member proposed that the project be split into two phases with the Saturday market to be progressed first, and the Friday market to be considered separately to establish whether it could be implemented sooner. The proposal was seconded.

In response to questions, the Economy and Community Services Manager advised that the bus companies had not raised any specific concerns or made any informal representations, but they reserved the right to comment at the formal consultation stage. She also confirmed that a full safety audit would address any issues regarding pedestrian safety and traffic modelling would be undertaken to consider the impact on Albany Road.

The proposal was then put to the vote and agreed.

RECOMMENDED:
(1) That the preferred option for the relocation of Sittingbourne market at the top of the High Street be noted and that consideration be given to a phased approach to the project with the Saturday market to be progressed first, and the Friday market to be addressed separately to facilitate quicker progress.
(2) That Officers proceed to the stage of drafting a Traffic Regulation Order and the procurement of services to support this work and preparation for formal consultation.
 
71  

proposed waiting restrictions - church road, eurolink industrial estate, sittingbourne

The Board considered the report which provided a summary of a recent consultation carried out for proposed waiting restrictions in Church Road, Eurolink Industrial Estate, Sittingbourne.

RECOMMENDED:
(1) That the objections/comments made by the consultees be noted and that waiting restrictions be introduced as detailed in the consultation plan.
 
72  

a2 / a251 junction, faversham highway improvement scheme

The Traffic Engineer (Ashford and Swale) introduced the report which set out proposals for the A2/A251 junction to tackle congestion and improve safety, following the results of the public consultation.

Members made the following comments: Faversham Town Council voted in favour of traffic lights; finely balanced but cost of traffic lights was considerable; traffic lights created a build-up of traffic; many residents in favour of traffic lights, as it would make it easier and safer for pedestrians to cross the road; there was only a problem at rush hour - could the traffic lights be part-time, to only operate at peak times?; not convinced there was a need for any highways works at this junction; traffic lights would enable better access from side roads; a roundabout would generate better flow of traffic, especially outside of peak times when there was less of a problem; and research showed traffic lights reduced the capacity at junctions.

The Traffic Engineer (Ashford and Swale) responded to some of the issues raised by Members, and made the following comments: it was a finely balanced decision, but the junction was severely over-capacity at peak times and there was an accident history, demonstrating the need for improvements; he would re-consult with the Fire Station on the traffic light proposal as they would be given the ability to control the traffic lights, when they needed to access the road in emergency situations; a roundabout would require twice as much private land as traffic lights; part-time signal operation was not safe for the visually impaired; traffic lights would result in less risk of traffic conflict and potential accidents and was safer for pedestrians and cyclists; and no change was being proposed to the road layout at Preston Grove.

The Chairman then proposed option A (traffic lights), which was seconded, and upon being put to the vote this proposal was lost.

Councillor Mike Haywood proposed that the report be deferred to the next meeting to gather more information and allow the Board time to consider the options more fully. This was seconded and upon being put to the vote was lost.

Councillor Mulhern proposed that temporary traffic lights be placed at the junction on a trial basis. The Traffic Engineer (Ashford and Swale) and the District Manager for Swale advised that temporary lights were not sophisticated enough to react to traffic flow and replicate the conditions of permanent lights. In addition, the permit needed to place temporary lights at the junction would have a condition requiring manual operation at peak times.

The proposal for Option B (roundabout) was then put to the vote and agreed.

RECOMMENDED:
(1) That Option B (roundabout) be progressed as the preferred option for the A2/A251 junction, Faversham.
 
73  

junction improvements barton hill drive, minster

The Board considered the report which provided an update on the proposed improvements for the traffic signal junction at Lower Road and Barton Hill Drive, Minster.

Members spoke strongly against the proposal to ban right turn movements from the eastern approach of Lower Road.

Members also made the following comments: traffic lights at the junction did not work as they cause unacceptable build-up of traffic; when the traffic lights were not working the traffic flowed well; needed to consider a roundabout at the junction; volume of traffic along the Lower Road is greater than the design capacity of the road and the Thistle Hill development should not have been approved.

The District Manager for Swale advised that a report would be prepared for the next meeting outlining options with traffic modelling.

Councillor Pat Sandle proposed that a roundabout be explored as the preferred option. This was seconded and upon being put to the vote was agreed.

RECOMMENDED:
(1) That a report be submitted to the next meeting on junction improvements at Barton Hill Drive, Minster and that a roundabout be explored as the preferred option.
 
74  

highway works programme 2014/15

The Board considered the Highway Works Programme which updated Members on the identified schemes approved for construction in 2014/15. Members went through the report and made the following comments:

Appendix A

Remove references to "Manor Way" and change spelling of Thompsett to "Thomsett Way".

Whiteway Road, Queenborough - issues with puddling.

Appendix E

Oare Road, Faversham - traffic signals did not work. The Engineer confirmed that the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) for yellow lines at this site had been completed and the developer was now responsible for extending the lines.

Mill Way, Sittingbourne - disappointing that the works were deemed to be complete as it had not resulted in a satisfactory outcome.

Leysdown Road - the upgrading of the school junction / access was marked as complete, but the pedestrian crossing had not materialised, what was the reason for this?

The Traffic Engineer (Ashford and Swale) explained that a school safety zone for Eastchurch Primary School had been added into Appendix F and they would be consulting with Kent Police, the County and Ward Members, Parish Council and the school on the options available.

Request to extend the yellow lines in Plover Road for safety reasons around the hospital.

Remove reference to Barton Hill Drive - TRO to ban right-turn.

Appendix F

B2005 Swale Way/Lloyd Drive - pleased that this work was in progress.

Appendix H

Rushenden Road, Queenborough - pleased that bridge works were programmed for the Autumn.

Bridge Road, Faversham - date of programmed works changed to 22 June 2014.

Appendix I

Westfield Gardens and Oak Close, Danaway - disappointing that the double yellow lines were not complete. The District Manager for Swale explained that it was often difficult to carry out such lining works due to the presence of parked vehicles but that the contractor would make return visits to the site until the planned works have been completed.

St Georges Avenue - concern raised regarding the cost of the removal of the mini roundabout.

A Member requested an update on the Sittingbourne Relief Road, which the District Manager for Swale undertook to provide for a future meeting.

District Manager for Swale
 
 
RECOMMENDED:
(1) That the report be noted.
 
75  

progress update report

The Board considered the report that gave an update on the progress made in relation to previous recommendations made by the Board.

590/03/12 - the 30mph sign needed to be moved to the west side of the school to comply with the Department for Transport's requirements. The Traffic Engineer (Ashford and Swale) undertook to follow this up after the meeting.

Traffic Engineer (Ashford and Swale)
 
 

610/03/13 - the Board agreed that sites chosen for the switch-off of street lighting should be reviewed after six months, not a year.

 
All Minutes are draft until agreed at the next meeting of the Committee/Panel

View the Agenda for this meeting