The Chairman will advise the meeting of the evacuation procedures to follow in the event of an emergency.

The Chairman drew attention to the evacuation procedure.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 7 December 2015 (Minute Nos. 373 - 385) as a correct record, subject to an amendment on the top of page 411, to read ‘double yellow lines’, rather than ‘double yellow lanes’.

Cabinet on 3 February 2016 resolved:

That the report ‘Parking in Swale’ – Minute No. 376 be considered further at the next Swale Joint Transportation Board on 7 March 2016.  This is reported at item 6 on the agenda ‘Verge and Footway Parking in Swale’.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 7 December 2015 (Minute Nos. 373 – 385) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record, subject to an amendment on the top of page 411, to read ‘double yellow lines’, rather than ‘double yellow lanes’, and to include Councillor Mike Whiting in the recorded vote for that item.

Parish Councillor Peter Macdonald reminded Members that he had requested that several roads in Minster be included within the Quiet Lanes scheme.

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves or their spouse, civil partner or person with whom they are living with as a spouse or civil partner.  They must declare and resolve any interests and relationships.

The Chairman will ask Members if they have any interests to declare in respect of items on this agenda, under the following headings:

(a)          Disclosable Pecuniary Interests (DPI) under the Localism Act 2011.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DPI, the Member must leave the meeting and not take part in the discussion or vote.  This applies even if there is provision for public speaking.

(b)          Disclosable Non Pecuniary (DNPI) under the Code of Conduct adopted by the Council in May 2012.  The nature as well as the existence of any such interest must be declared.  After declaring a DNPI interest, the Member may stay, speak and vote on the matter.

Advice to Members:  If any Councillor has any doubt about the existence or nature of any DPI or DNPI which he/she may have in any item on this agenda, he/she should seek advice from the Director of Corporate Services as Monitoring Officer, the Head of Legal or from other Solicitors in Legal Services as early as possible, and in advance of the Meeting.

Parish Councillor Peter Macdonald declared a Disclosable Non-Pecuniary Interest on the ‘Swale Rail Line between Sittingbourne and Sheerness-on-Sea’ item reported in the Progress Update Item on page 132 of the report.

Members of the public have the opportunity to speak at this meeting.  Anyone wishing to present a petition or speak on this item is required to register with the Democratic Services Section by noon on Friday 4 March 2016.  Questions that have not been submitted by this deadline will not be accepted.  Only two people will be allowed to speak on each item and each person is limited to asking two questions.  Each speaker will have a maximum of three minutes to speak.

Petitions, questions and statements will only be accepted if they are in relation to an item being considered at this meeting.

A representative from ‘20’s Plenty’ is presenting to request that a working group is set-up to examine how 20mph could be implemented throughout all residential streets in Faversham.

The Chairman welcomed the members of the public who had registered to speak at the meeting.  He advised that those items further down the agenda, where members of the public had registered to speak, would be brought forward.

Kent County Councillor Roger Truelove presented a petition to the Board from residents of Lime Grove, Sittingbourne.  The petition was handed to the Seafront & Engineering Manager for a report to be submitted at the next meeting of the Board on 4 July 2016.

Mrs Amanda Russell gave a presentation as representative of the Faversham ‘20’s Plenty’ campaign group.  She explained that she had a petition with 150 signatures so far, in support of 20 is plenty.  Mrs Russell advised that 25% of the UK population lived in Boroughs where 20mph zones had been implemented or were about to be implemented.  She outlined the cost implications and explained that 20mph was more popular after implementation, with 66% of drivers saying that 20mph was a good idea.  Faversham Town Council and the Faversham Society supported 20 is plenty in Faversham.  Mrs Russell reported that in September 2015, KCC had refused to fund the scheme as they considered it too expensive, and that Faversham had the wrong qualifying indicators for the scheme to go ahead.  She outlined the crash statistics in Faversham; 140 incidents included two fatalities.  Mrs Russell outlined how 20mph could benefit KCC and Faversham by creating safer streets and she provided data on the decrease in injuries as a result in slower speeds.   Mrs Russell explained that a reduction in speed could significantly reduce the injuries on pedestrians and cyclists.  She explained that having a 20mph limit also helped to encourage more walking and cycling, created cleaner streets and reduced pollution.  Mrs Russell requested that a working group be set-up to examine how 20mph could be implemented throughout all residential streets in Faversham.

Members commented on the presentation as follows: support the reduction in the speed limit; this could be introduced Borough-wide, not just within Faversham; a working group should be set-up; by choosing to go Borough-wide, this could delay the implementation in Faversham; and maybe start in Faversham, then develop it further throughout the Borough.

Councillor Bryan Mulhern moved a motion to set up a working group.  This was seconded by Kent County Councillor Harrison.

Kent County Councillor Mike Baldock moved an amendment that the working group first looked at a 20mph limit in Faversham, with a remit to then look Borough-wide.  This was seconded by Councillor Bryan Mulhern.  On being put to the vote the amendment was agreed.

Recommended: 

(1)       That a working group be set-up to examine how a 20mph limit could be implemented in Faversham and then rolled-out Borough-wide.

Mr Lynch spoke on Item 9 of the agenda, Fairview Road Area, Sittingbourne – Parking Review.  He highlighted problems of safety, and of access, particularly to emergency vehicles, caused by commuter parking on both sides of the road.

Mrs Kelsy-Jansen did not speak on this item.

Mr  ...  view the full minutes text for item 564.

This report provided an update of options and relative implications following the decision by Cabinet on 3 February 2016 that in view of the significant implications of changing the current byelaw to include footway parking, that the matter be referred back to the JTB for further consideration.

The Seafront and Engineering Manager reported that under Paragraph 2.4 in the report, the voting should have been recorded as being eight votes to five in favour of Swale’s current byelaw covering parking on grassed verges to be extended to include footway parking.

The Chairman moved the following motion:   That the previous decision made by the Board be reversed, so there was not a Borough-wide ban on parking on footways, but that existing byelaws and enforcement powers be used to address specific issues. This was seconded by Councillor Cameron Beart.

Members made the following comments: parking issues like this were a common problem throughout the urban Wards in the Borough; people who parked consistently on footways should be targeted; if residents parked correctly, some roads would be impassable; enforcement was an issue; if parked totally on road, parking restrictions would be needed on the other side; could sensibly apply the byelaw; enforcement was very labour intensive; and a line could be put on the footpath as a guide to where vehicles could park to still allow access for pedestrians, but this was an expensive option as it meant that footpaths had to be ‘made up’ to be able to cope with the additional weight of  a vehicle.

Recommended:

(1)       That the previous decision made by the Board be reversed, so there was not a Borough-wide ban on parking on footways, but that existing byelaws and enforcement powers be used to address specific issues. 

This report provided a summary of formal objections received in relation to the recently advertised TRO to accommodate the proposed re-location of the Sittingbourne Market into the High Street.

The Economic and Community Services Manager reminded Members that this project had commenced in 2012, with informal consultation in 2013.  It had originally been proposed that the market would be held in the entire length of the High Street, but this had been amended to relocate it to the upper part only, and this had also been consulted on.  She explained that this was part of the wider vision for the regeneration of Sittingbourne.

Members made the following comments:  consider that the alternative route for the buses was suitable; the success of the market would be a ‘crowd puller’; the bus companies needed to be more flexible and be prepared to alter their routes/timetables, which the public would adapt to; amending bus routes was a protracted process; the whole of Sittingbourne transport routes needed to be looked at; some members of the public were not happy with the changes to the timetable; there were already alternative bus routes when the Saturday market was in place; and the market would increase the viability of the High Street.

The Cabinet Member for Regeneration explained that the market re-location was part of the regeneration of Sittingbourne and he welcomed the move from its present location into the High Street, with synergy between the market traders and the shops in the High Street.  He acknowledged the changes that the bus companies faced, but considered over time people would adapt.  There was a need to be flexible and he considered the increased footfall generated by the change in location of the market could benefit the bus companies as well.

Recommended:

(1)       That the report be noted and the proposed Traffic Regulation Order be progressed.

This report provided a summary of formal objections received in relation to the recently advertised TRO Swale Amendment 17.

Recommended:

(1)       That the report be noted and the proposed Traffic Regulation Order be progressed.

Following an initial reported submitted to the Joint Transportation Board in December 2015, this report provided a more detailed analysis of the recent informal consultation with residents and property owners in the Fairview Road, Lavender Court, Aubretia Walk, Heather Close and East Street areas in Sittingbourne. 

In response to the comments made by Mr Lynch in the Public Session, the Seafront and Engineering Manager reported that he had contacted the Watch Manager at Sittingbourne Fire Station regarding access issues in this area for fire engines.  He particularly highlighted the S-bend at Chilton Avenue/Fairview Road.  Discussions with the Fire Service were ongoing, and the Seafront and Engineering Manager reported that there would be further consultation on this matter.

A Member supported the recommendations in the report and stated that a solution was needed to the parking problem.  He acknowledged that residents were not keen to have a residents’ parking scheme, and suggested that an alternative public car parking facility should be funded in the area which could help to address commuter parking. Another Member suggested that the vacant land next to East Street be looked at for a possible site for a car park.

Recommended:

(1)       That a Residents’ Parking Scheme is not implemented in the Fairview Road area due to the percentages of support received.

(2)       That officers continue to liaise with Kent Fire and Rescue and carry out further consultation with residents in the vicinity of any subsequent proposed restrictions in Fairview Road.

(3)       That officers report the enforcement comments to the Parking Enforcement Team to ensure resource is committed when required.

This report provides a summary of informal consultation results with residents and statutory consultees on proposals to install waiting restrictions in Wildish Road, Faversham and The Street/Canterbury Road in Boughton-under-Blean and Dunkirk.

This report provided a summary of informal consultation results with residents and statutory consultees on proposals to install waiting restrictions in Wildish Road, Faversham and The Street/Canterbury Road in Boughton-under-Blean and Dunkirk.

A Ward Member spoke of the local support for the proposed restrictions in Boughton-under-Blean and Dunkirk.

A Member spoke in support of the bus stand in Wildish Road.

Recommended:

(1)       That the comments from the consultation be taken back to the Swale Quality Bus Partnership for further discussion prior to implementing restrictions in Wildish Road, Faversham.

(2)       That the proposed restrictions in The Street/Canterbury Road in Boughton-under-Blean and Dunkirk be progressed but with the amendments suggested by Kent County Council and subject  to the agreement of both Parish Councils who are funding the works.

To receive a presentation on the junction improvements.

Tabled Paper added 8 March 2016.

The Project Manager (Schemes Planning and Delivery, Highways, Transportation & Waste) drew Members’ attention to the tabled report for this item which outlined the costs of the diversion of utilities in the area.  Negotiations were ongoing and the project was now on hold pending the outcome of negotiations with the utility companies.

A Member spoke in support of the traffic light option and explained that this option enabled the implementation of pedestrian crossings and cycle lanes.  Another Member questioned the costs for moving utilities if traffic lights were installed, rather than a roundabout. Another Member explained that the Perry Court planning application could have an impact on the junction.

Recommended: 

(1)       That the tabled report be noted.

This report provided an update following the receipt of a petition from the Lower Road Campaign Group, and proposals for Lower Road/Barton Hill Drive.

A Member paid tribute to Mrs Knell and the campaign for their commitment.

Members made the following comments:  this road was dangerous for both pedestrians and cyclists; the report’s response was not substantial, would like to see a more positive response to the issue; improvements to the road were required; there were other funding bids that could be used; this was long overdue, safe cycle routes were needed; this road was designated as an ‘A’ road, but it did not meet the minimum standards; and cycling routes should be included as part of the Transport Plan/Local Plan.

The Chairman suggested that the Cycling Strategy be brought to a future JTB meeting.

Resolved: 

(1)       That the report be noted.

Tabled Papers added 8 March 2016.

The Board considered the report which provided an update on the identified schemes approved for consultation in 2014/15.

Members went through the report and the following comments and responses were made:

Page 117

The District Manager confirmed that there would be a further site meeting at Dawes Road, Dunkirk, and that works on Park Road, Sittingbourne would take place overnight on 13/14 April 2016.

Page 121

The District Manager advised that he was aware of the issues at Stickfast Lane, Bobbing and confirmed that no KCC funding had been used.

Page 125

A Member confirmed that negotiations were ongoing for the release of land to create a new footway at Highsted Road, Sittingbourne.

The Chairman drew Members’ attention to the tabled papers that provided an update on LED street lighting, and HGV parking.

Resolved:

(1)       That the report and tabled papers be noted.

To note progress made following recommendations and agreed action at previous meetings.

Members considered the report that gave an update on the progress made regarding various schemes in the Borough.

Resolved:

(1)       That the report be noted.

The Chairman drew Members’ attention to the Department of Transport response to the closure of the A249.

During discussion of the item, the Chairman advised that  Southern Water were attending the Sheppey Local Engagement Forum on Tuesday 8 March 2016.

Resolved:

(1)       That the response be noted.