Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber, Swale House, East Street, Sittingbourne, ME10 3HT. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services, 01795 417330 

Note: Moved from 2 December 2019 

Items
No. Item

Audio Recording

432.

Emergency Evacuation Procedure

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.

 

Minutes:

The Chairman ensured that those present were aware of the emergency evacuation procedure.

433.

Minutes

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 9 September 2019 (Minute Nos. 202  -211) as a correct record.

Minutes:

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 9 September 2019 (Minute Nos. 202 – 211) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

434.

Declarations of Interest

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 Monitoring Officer, the Head of Legal or from other Solicitors in Legal Services as early as possible, and in advance of the Meeting.

 

Minutes:

Councillor Benjamin Martin declared a non-pecuniary interest in respect of item 9, Proposed Loading Bay – The Mall/Nelson Street, Faversham – Update.

435.

Public Session

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 10 January 2020. 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.

Minutes:

There were no requests from the public to speak at this meeting.

436.

Petition to prevent over 7.5T vehicles using The Street, Boughton and Dunkirk

Minutes:

Councillor Alastair Gould presented a petition for a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) restricting HGVs (above 7.5t) through Dunkirk, Boughton Street and Staplestreet.  HGVs had been using the route when the A2 was blocked, resulting in gridlock, and becoming inaccessible for emergency vehicles.  He said that if a TRO could be implemented to restrict HGVs this would greatly reduce the number of vehicles using this route.  Councillor Gould reported that 600 signatures had been received on the paper version of the petition, and 500 on the online version.  He added that there was clear local support for the addition of a TRO.  Councillor Gould had  recently met with Kent County Council (KCC) to discuss the matter.

 

The Swale District Manager confirmed that a meeting had taken place and officers were looking at extending the existing scheme, and to bring a report back to the next Joint Transportation Board (JTB) meeting.  The following statement was issued from the Programme Manager, Schemes, Planning and Delivery Team:

 

‘The Schemes, Planning and Delivery (SPD) Team have been contacted directly by Boughton and Dunkirk Parish Councils in advance of receiving the petition, and have agreed that an extended weight limit will be investigated.  The SPD team will begin the formal consultation process by February 2020 to amend the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) to extend the weight limit, as has been discussed in details with the parish councils, local county member and local borough councillors.  A further update outlining progress, and if required a detailed report, will be provided at the next JTB.’

 

The Swale District Manager apologised on behalf of KCC for the time it had taken to look into resolving this matter.

 

Councillor Alaistair Gould proposed that the petition be formally accepted and that KCC take the matter forward and submit a report to the next JTB meeting.  This was seconded by Kent County Councillor Bowles.  A Kent Association of Local Council (KALC) representative welcomed the proposal and said that this was a workable solution.  On being put to the vote Members agreed with the proposal.

 

Resolved:

 

(1)      That the petition be formally accepted and a report from the KCC Schemes Planning and Delivery Team be submitted to the next JTB meeting. 

Recommendations to Swale Borough Council's Cabinet

437.

Formal Objections to TRO Swale Amendment 7 - Proposed Double Yellow Lines, Cormorant Road, Iwade pdf icon PDF 57 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members considered the report of the Seafront and Engineering Manager which provided details of objections received to the advertised Traffic Regulation Order, Swale Amendment 7, which included the installation of double yellow lines in Cormorant Road, Iwade.  He reminded Members that the proposed double yellow lines at Cormorant Road in Iwade were abandoned at the JTB meeting held in September 2019, but Cabinet had decided that the proposals should be re-submitted to the JTB for further consideration.

 

Members raised the following points:

 

·         With reference to paragraph 3.7 in the report, it was often the case that Parish Councils did not respond to consultations; 

·         suggest double yellow lines be added to all three arms of the junction;

·         pleased that this had come back for re-consideration; and

·         important to get the balance right, but not have too many double yellow lines on this development.

 

Councillor Mike Baldock proposed that the TRO went ahead and the Seafront and Engineering Manager consult with Councillor Baldock and Kent County Councillor Mike Whiting to consider whether all three roads at this junction be installed with double yellow lines.  This was seconded by Kent County Councillor Mike Whiting.  On being put to the vote, the proposal was agreed.

 

Recommended to Swale Borough Council Cabinet:

 

(1)      That Members note the formal objections received to the advertised Traffic Regulation Order and that the proposed double yellow lines in Cormorant Road, Iwade be progressed and the Seafront and Engineering Manager consult with Councillor  Mike Baldock and Kent County Councillor Mike Whiting to consider whether all three roads at this junction be installed with double yellow lines. 

438.

Informal Consultation Results - Proposed Waiting Restrictions at The Street, Oare pdf icon PDF 70 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members considered the report of the Seafront and Engineering Manager which provided details of recent informal consultations undertaken on proposals to install two short sections of double yellow lines in The Street and Colegates Road, Oare.  The Seafront and Engineering Manager explained that on-street capacity for parking was already limited in this location.  Following consultation with local residents, three had supported the proposals and two had objected.

 

Kent County Councillor Bowles moved the proposal in the report and this was seconded by Kent County Councillor Mike Whiting.  On being put to the vote, Members agreed.

 

Recommended to Swale Borough Council Cabinet:

 

(1)       That Members note the results of the recent informal consultation and officers proceed with the Traffic Regulation Order to install the double yellow lines.

439.

Proposed Loading Ban - The Mall/Nelson Street, Faversham - Update pdf icon PDF 79 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members considered the report of the Seafront and Engineering Manager which provided an update on the proposed loading/unloading ban in The Mall/Nelson Street, Faversham, following the previous JTB recommendation from the June 2019 meeting.  He referred to the discussions with local businesses as noted in the report.

 

Councillor Benjamin Martin moved the second proposal in the report: that officers proceed with the loading ban at a revised length of 10 metres on the north side of the Nelson Street junction, with loading permitted between 10am – 11am and 4pm – 5pm and this was seconded by Councillor Mike Baldock. On being put to the vote the proposal was agreed.

 

Recommended to Swale Borough Council’s Cabinet:

 

(1)       That Members note the contents of the report and officers proceed with the installation of the loading ban at a revised length of 10 metres on the north side of the Nelson Street junction in The Mall, with loading permitted between 10am-11am and 4pm-5pm.

440.

Joint Transportation Board Agreement - verbal update

Minutes:

The Chairman advised that this matter was with the Cabinet Member and would be presented to the General Purposes Committee and then Full Council for ratification.

 

Resolved:

 

(1)      That the verbal update be noted.

Information Items

441.

30mph Signs, Lynsted - deferred to next meeting

Minutes:

This item was deferred to the next JTB meeting on 2 March 2020.

442.

Bus only lane - Eaves Drive to Oak Road, Sittingbourne pdf icon PDF 2 MB

Minutes:

Members considered the report of the Director of Highways, Transportation and Waste which considered a request by a Ward Member to allow general traffic to use the bus-only link between Oak Road and the Great Easthall housing development.

 

A Ward Member spoke against opening the road to general traffic and considered it impossible to implement as there was an electrical sub-station nearby.  He explained that many drivers were using the bus-link illegally. Another Ward Member also spoke against opening the road to general traffic.  She raised concern with the impact on other roads in Murston if the link road was used for general traffic.  The Ward Member also raised issues of increased traffic on other routes; and increased parking on both sides of the road, restricting access for emergency vehicles.  She also referred to the Climate Change Emergency declared by the Council in June 2019, and considered the whole ethos of the Great Easthall housing development should be looked at, with the encouragement for bus use, and as such the link should remain buses only.

 

Members raised the following points:

 

·         Support the comments from the Ward Members;

·         the link needed to remain for buses only;

·         bus use needed to be encouraged;

·         the junction of Oak Road was dangerous, with parked cars there;

·         a number of residents had requested the road be opened to general traffic;

·         this was a very thorough report and clearly outlined the difficulties of opening up the road;

·         a solution was needed so that buses could safely use the link;

·         an alternative route out of the estate for general traffic was needed;

·         could not leave it as it was as buses were not using the link;

·         suggested other options, such as retractable bollards;

·         a report was needed to look at possible ways the road could be used by buses again;

·         a feasibility study with costings should be carried out on alternative routes out for residents only, such as from Great Easthall, via Tonge Road to Stones Farm; and

·         needed to be aware that the link road was un-adopted.

 

The Chairman summarised and said that the route should remain for buses only, with no general traffic, which Member agreed.  She suggested there be a meeting with the developers, KCC and the bus company in order to move forward and ensure that buses could use the link road.  The Swale District Manager advised that the Bus Quality Partnership look at the issue and that the support of the bus company was needed first.  The Seafront and Engineering Manager stated that the bus operators would welcome any interaction and would be happy to engage in the process.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(1)      That the report be noted and no further action be taken in respect of removing the current vehicle restrictions.

 

(2)      That the KCC Public Transport Team and the Seafront and Engineering Manager meet with the Quality Bus Partnership to look into finding a solution to ensure that buses were able to use the link, and to report back to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 442.

443.

Highways Work Programme pdf icon PDF 140 KB

Minutes:

Members considered the report which provided updates on the identified schemes approved for construction.

 

A Member reported that some micro-surfacing had not been completed in a section of layby on Sittingbourne High Street as they were digging-up the road for gas repairs and there was still some masking over one of the drains opposite The George Public House.  The Swale District Manager agreed to meet with the Member to get more details.  He further advised that there was a job in place to continue the works at this location as there had been a gas emergency.

 

A Member referred to page 81, A2 Canterbury Road, Snipeshill, Sittingbourne.  He had met with the drainage team for ideas of improving the drainage and utilising the green spaces as a sink.  The Member said he had not received a plan for the scheme which he would like to see before the scheme was commissioned.  The Swale District Manager agreed to get a plan sent to the Member.  The Member welcomed the drainage mitigation works being carried out at Glovers Crescent, Sittingbourne and said that the landscaping work now needed to be completed.

 

A Member referred to page 85 and requested further details on the work being undertaken on the casualty reduction measures on the A2500 Lower Road junction with the B2008 Eastchurch Road, Eastchurch.  He also noted a typo on page 79 where the road number for Eastchurch Road should be A2500, not A2050.  The Member requested an update on the Lower Road, Eastchurch, where there were ‘caution’ signs because of road subsidence on the north bank eastbound.

 

Resolved:

 

(1)      That the report be noted.

444.

School Buses - Adelaide Drive, Sittingbourne pdf icon PDF 101 KB

Appendices added 6.1.20

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Members considered the report which provided an update on the revised school bus arrangements for Westlands School, Sittingbourne.  The Chairman advised that the issues in Sydney Avenue would also be considered.

 

The Swale District Manager referred to the tabled papers for this item and explained that the length of each of the clearways would be 25 yards (23 metres). 

 

A Member asked about the term-time TRO on Sydney Avenue.  The Chairman understood the law had changed and it was not possible to have term-time only parking restrictions.  The Swale District Manager confirmed that Sydney Avenue had not recently been considered by officers.

 

A Ward Member understood that both Sydney Avenue and Adelaide Drive were being considered at the meeting.  He gave an overview of the issues of children getting to Westlands School now that there was no longer the facility for a pick-up/drop-off area for buses at the school.  The Ward Member spoke about the lack of consultation with Swale Borough Council (SBC), and inadequate consultation with residents, on the bus stop clearway markings.  He considered the length of the clearways would effect some residents’ access to their driveways.  Buses were arriving too early at the bus stops, and were running their engines whilst stationary.   The Ward Member was disappointed that there was no scheme in place for Sydney Avenue.  He referred to the TRO made in relation to Sydney Avenue in December 2018 for term-time only, and he raised concern that term-time only was now not possible to do, and residents had felt let down.  The Ward Member said that residents needed to be communicated with directly.

 

Councillor Roger Truelove proposed that the clearways not be agreed and that consultation be carried out with residents of Adelaide Drive and Sydney Avenue, and communication be had with residents of Sydney Avenue to let them know about term-time only restrictions, and then to report back to the JTB.

 

Members raised the following points:

 

·         The TRO at Sydney Avenue had been completed prior to buses not being at the school for pick-up/drop-off;

·         there were pedestrian safety issues for the school children;

·         was a TRO in Sydney Avenue still required as the buses did not need to go along this road;

·         residents should be consulted upon and notified about the bus clearways;

·         did the clearways need to be so long?

·         clearways opposite each other was not a good idea, could not agree Figure 1, this was not what was agreed on-site; and

·         buses were arriving too early at the clearways which caused access problems to residents’ driveways.

 

 

Kent County Councillor John Wright proposed that residents be properly consulted on the bus clearways and they be reduced in size and not be located opposite each other, and residents be re-consulted on the TRO in Sydney Avenue as the buses were no longer using that road.  These views were supported by the Ward Member.

 

The Ward Member explained that the TRO in Sydney Avenue was because parents parked there.  The proposer said that parking needed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 444.

445.

Progress Update Report pdf icon PDF 126 KB

To consider the Progress Update which outlines progress made following recommendations and agreed action at previous meetings.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chairman advised that Highsted Road, Sittingbourne proposed footway – report on the results from the public consultation exercise would be dealt with as a separate item.

 

A Ward Member gave an overview on the issues on Highsted Road and reminded Members that the matter had been considered by the JTB in March 2019 and Option 1 had been the preferred option to make the road one-way southbound, and that KCC looked at other options as well, and there had been no further action.  The Ward Member explained that the issues were getting worse, and whilst Option 1 was the preferred option, there was a problem obtaining the land to enable this to happen.  He considered the speed limit should be reduced to 20mph and the road width narrowed to 6’6’’.

 

Members raised points which included:

 

·         Disappointed in having to wait for this answer to come back to us; and

·         most people supported a footpath, that was why the JTB chose Option 1.

 

Kent County Councillor John Wright proposed that the matter be considered by the JTB again, to confirm Option 1, with costs of bollards and a TRO for one-way traffic.  This was seconded by Kent County Councillor Ken Pugh.

 

Further comments included:

 

·         It was mean-spirited of the Highsted Academy not to supply land options to provide a footpath;

·         a compulsory purchase order (CPO) should be implemented to get the strip of land to achieve the safest option; and

·         the CPO could be implemented on the opposite side of the road, for 1.8 metres, to provide a footpath where the majority of people walked.

 

The Proposer was happy for the above to be added to his proposal.  The Chairman also advised that KCC officers had been talking with Highsted School.  She suggested that the KCC Education Area Officer be asked to discuss this matter with the school, as to-date, discussions had only taken place with Highways officers.

 

Resolved:

 

(1)      That  the matter be considered by the JTB again, to confirm Option 1, with costs of bollards, a TRO for one-way traffic, and to also consider the option of a CPO and to ask the KCC Education Area Officer to discuss the matter with the school.

 

Members then discussed the remainder of the Progress Update report.

 

A Member asked about the response to three petitions, on page 107 of the report, which had the response as reading ‘KCC will be responding to the lead petitioner’.  The Swale District Manager advised that discussions were ongoing with the petitioners and the matters were not closed.

 

Members made the following comments:

 

·         Appalled by these standard responses that were sent out;

·         lack of consultation with Members regarding the petitions;

·         the Cabinet Member should not have responded without input from the JTB; and

·         the JTB Agreement set-out the procedure for dealing with petitions.

 

Members made the following points on other parts of the report:

 

Page 105 – Lower Road Junction with Barton Hill Drive, Isle of Sheppey – this scheme was not called ‘Phase  ...  view the full minutes text for item 445.

446.

Winter Report pdf icon PDF 55 KB

Minutes:

Members considered the report which outlined the arrangements that had been made between KCC and SBC to provide a local winter service in the event of an operational snow alert in the Borough.

 

Resolved:

 

(1)      That the report be noted.

447.

Date of Next Meeting

The next meeting will be held at 5.30pm on Monday 2 March 2020.

Minutes:

The next meeting will be held at 5.30pm on Monday 2 March 2020.