The Chairman will advise the meeting of the evacuation procedures to follow in the event of an emergency. This is particularly important for visitors and members of the public who will be unfamiliar with the building and procedures.

The Chairman will inform the meeting whether there is a planned evacuation drill due to take place, what the alarm sounds like (i.e. ringing bells), where the closest emergency exit route is, and where the second closest emergency exit route is, in the event that the closest exit or route is blocked.

The Chairman will inform the meeting that:

(a) in the event of the alarm sounding, everybody must leave the building via the nearest safe available exit and gather at the Assembly points at the far side of the Car Park; and

(b) the lifts must not be used in the event of an evacuation.

Any officers present at the meeting will aid with the evacuation.

It is important that the Chairman is informed of any person attending who is disabled or unable to use the stairs, so that suitable arrangements may be made in the event of an emergency.

The Chairman drew attention to the evacuation procedure.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 4 July 2016 (Minute Nos. 766 - 773) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 4 July 2016 (Minute Nos. 766 – 773) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

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.

(c)          Where it is possible that a fair-minded and informed observer, having considered the facts would conclude that there was a real possibility that the Member might be predetermined or biased the Member should declare their predetermination or bias and then leave the room while that item is considered.

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.

No interests were declared.

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 9 September 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.

Mr Hope, a local resident from Teynham, submitted a petition to the Chairman.  Mr Hope spoke on the traffic issues along the A2 in Teynham and referred to a serious accident at the beginning of the year when two people were killed, and two seriously injured.  He considered the A2 to be dangerous and stated that there had been a number of accidents over the years in the area.

Mr Hope explained that the petition had been signed by 350 people and an online petition signed by 200 people.  The petition requested that traffic calming measures be implemented so that the start of the 30mph speed limit be from Nouds Lane, Lynsted, to give more warning; that enforceable speed cameras at either end of Teynham be implemented; and the speed limit be reduced to 50mph from Judds Folly, Faversham to Nouds Lane, Lynsted.  Mr Hope considered these measures would increase driver awareness, especially with the expansion of housing and businesses with increasing traffic flows.

The Chairman advised that he would present the petition to the Kent County Council Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport.

Mr Peto, Dunkirk Parish Council, spoke on item 7 of the agenda, Formal Objections to Traffic Regulation Order Swale Amendment 1, in relation to the proposed restrictions in The Street/Canterbury Road, Boughton-under-Blean/Dunkirk.  Mr Peto outlined the history of parking in this area and explained that the parking affected the sight lines.  Mr Peto requested that the restrictions be progressed.

This item was discussed by Members later in the meeting.

The Chairman welcomed consultants Mr John Elliott and Mr Mike Talbot to the meeting.

The report set-out the Swale Freight Management Plan (FMP) whereby the successful DEFRA Grant application made by the Environmental Protection Team in 2013 for the development of a Plan, included the proviso that the plan was completed by the end of 2016.  John Elliott Consultancy and Mike Talbot Associates had been appointed to produce the Plan by the end of 2016 in line with the funding requirements from DEFRA.

Mr Talbot gave a presentation to the Board.  His presentation included the following points:

Adverse affects of freight transport:- pollution; congestion; lorry parking; noise and vibration; and damage to highways;

Cause of problems:- volume of traffic; proportion of heavy goods vehicles in traffic; different types of lorries; lack of parking facilities; and not much resilience or options in Swale for freight movement alternatives;

The FMP originated from air quality work, and the issue was not just all about lorries, i.e. vans were also a problem.

Impact on Swale:- problems on junctions of M2 (junction 5) and other A249 junctions; poor air quality; issues on some local roads, with roads not being able to cope with additional traffic; and additional growth would add to the problem.

Mr Talbot outlined the role of Swale Borough Council (SBC) within the FMP by direct intervention using planning powers and licensing conditions; influencing behaviour of lorry drivers and companies; and working with other parties to promote lorry parking; improve A249 junctions; improve the M2 at junctions 5 and 7, plus an additional junction; alternatives to freight traffic; local road management changes; and improved freight route planners to keep lorries off unsuitable roads.

Mr Talbot welcomed the views of the Board.

Councillor Mike Whiting proposed the following tabled recommendations, in addition to those set-out in the report, as below:

(1) That the JTB notes the officers’ report and agrees the value of rail freight as part of a multi-modal integrated transport policy for the Borough to help bring further economic benefit.

(2)  That the JTB recommends the provision of an international rail head on the Sheerness Branch Line be included within the Swale Freight Management Plan to be delivered by DEFRA in December 2016, as a necessary part of the Borough and Kent’s freight transport infrastructure.

(3)  That the JTB recommends the provision of an international rail head on the Sheerness Branch Line be included within the Swale Transportation Strategy 2014 – 31 as a necessary part of the Borough and Kent’s freight transport infrastructure.

(4)  That the JTB recommends officers prepare and submit, in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Board, a response on behalf of the Board and Swale Borough Council to Kent County Council’s Local Transport Plan 4:  Delivering Growth without Gridlock 2016 – 31 consultation, and the Freight Plan consultation, highlighting the benefit of an international rail head in the county and proposing the Sheerness Branch Line as the preferred site due to proximity  ...  view the full minutes text for item 866.

This report provided a summary of formal objections and support received in relation to the recently advertised Traffic Regulation Order Amendment 1.

Members welcomed Recommendation (1), The Street/Canterbury Road, Boughton-under-Blean/Dunkirk.

Members raised the following points in relation to Recommendation (2), rear of St. Michael’s House, Sittingbourne: considered yellow lines should not be implemented to facilitate a car park, people should not be prevented from parking along the road; lines should be added to the opening of the road, not on its entire length; were further measures required, if the highway was being blocked, the Police should be enforcing penalties?; and tickets could be issued, but it was likely the vehicle would be there for the rest of the day obstructing the highway.

Kent County Councillor Mike Baldock moved a motion not to progress Recommendation (2) and to wait for Kent County Council Highways & Transportation to come back with further proposals for the road.  This was seconded by Kent County Councillor Lee Burgess and upon being put to the vote the motion to not progress was agreed.

Members raised the following points in relation to Recommendation (3), Cook’s Lane, Milton Regis: this issue had become worse over the last few months; and the road was unsafe and dangerous at this location.  A visiting Ward Member advised that the situation had become untenable for local residents, with vehicles parking entirely on the footpath.

Recommended:

(1)          That the proposed restrictions in The Street/Canterbury Road, Boughton-under-Blean/Dunkirk be progressed.

(2)          That the proposed restrictions to the rear of St. Michael’s House in Sittingbourne not be progressed and to wait for Kent County Council Highways & Transportation to come back with further proposals for the road. 

(3)          That the proposed restrictions in Cooks Lane, Milton Regis be progressed and Biffa be reminded of their comments for the Planning Application at their Gas Road site.

This report provided a summary of informal consultation results with residents and statutory consultees on proposals to install waiting restrictions in Love Lane, Faversham and Capel Road (west), Sittingbourne.

Members raised the following points in relation to Recommendation (1), Love Lane, Faversham: the problem was getting worse, welcomed the proposal; and this was important so that people could visit the cemetery safely.

Members raised the following point in relation to Recommendation (2), Capel Road (west), Sittingbourne:  Ward Members should be informed, so that more residents were encouraged to respond to the consultation.

Recommended:

(1)          That the proposed restrictions in Love Lane, Faversham, including the amendments suggested by a resident to add further restrictions at the vehicle entrance to the flats near the cemetery be progressed.

(2)          That the proposed restrictions in Capel Road (west), Sittingbourne be deferred to the December meeting of the JTB so that Ward Members could encourage more residents to respond to the consultation.

This report detailed the purpose and content of KCC’s draft Local Transport Plan 4:  Delivering Growth without Gridlock and focused on the priorities for Swale, and invited the JTB to consider responding to the survey.

The Principal Transport Planner (Strategy) advised that KCC had a statutory duty to have a Local Transport Plan (LTP), which incorporated a refresh of Growth without Gridlock.  She drew Members’ attention to the local priorities at the end of the report and advised that there was a 12-week public consultation up to 30 October 2016, followed by a revised LTP being adopted by KCC in 2017.

Members raised points which included:  urge KCC to use 20s plenty to provide safer travel in towns and villages; M2 needed to be widened at Faversham end; Northern Relief Road needed to be completed on eastern side of Sittingbourne, if not completely, an interim measure of a one-way road accepting traffic from Teynham; school transport options should be included in the consultation; would like to see Barton Hill Drive/Lower Road, Minster and increased rail structure  included in the Growth and Infrastructure Framework; welcomed upgrade to A249 junction; would like to see better road network on the Isle of Sheppey as a priority, especially beyond Eastchurch on the rural roads; cycle lanes needed to be improved; more frequent train services to rural destinations; and 20s plenty schemes increased pollution.

The Chairman proposed that due to the timescale, delegated powers be given to him, the Vice-Chairman and the Cabinet Member for Environment and Rural Affairs, following meetings with the Economy and Community Services Manager and Spatial Planning Manager, to report back to the consultation with issues that the Board had raised.  This was seconded by Councillor Mike Whiting.

The Principal Transport Planner (Strategy) advised that she would take the comments received at the meeting, back to KCC, and encouraged further responses to be submitted.

Resolved:

(1)          That the report be noted and delegated powers be given to the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman and the Cabinet Member for Environment and Rural Affairs, following meetings with the Economy and Community Services Manager and Spatial Planning Manager, to report back to the consultation with issues that the Board had raised.

The Board considered the report which provided an update on the identified schemes approved for consultation in 2016/17.

The District Manager for Swale agreed to provide further updates on the following:

Page 61 – Wards Hill Road, Minster – one side completed, not done very well, would like it to be inspected.

Page 62 – North Street, Queenborough – conflicting notices, improved information requested.

Page 71 - Ospringe School, Water Lane, Faversham – there had been problems with the works, investigation needed.

Page 72 – Staplehurst Road, Sittingbourne – timescale requested  for the Agreement to be signed.

Page 72 - Selling Road, Faversham – clarification as to whether the access had been re-aligned.

Page 73 – Whitstable Road, Faversham – status of kerb work required.

Page 74 – A2/A251 junction, Faversham – information sought on previous consideration of a roundabout at the top of The Mall, with a slip road at the back of the Fire Station, Faversham.

Page 74 – A2500 Lower Road/Queenborough Road – confirmation sought on funding from County Member to move the 30mph sign in Leysdown to Eastchurch side of the school.

Page 75 – The Brents, Faversham – more information on the status of the provision of dropped kerbs.

Resolved:

(1)      That the report be noted.

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

A Member requested an update on Minute No. 218/09/14, Lower Road junction with Barton Hill Drive, Isle of Sheppey, and requested a copy of the consultation.  The District Manager for Swale agreed to follow this up.

Resolved:

(1)      That the report be noted.