Audio Recording

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 7 December 2020 (Minute Nos. 302 - 316) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held 7 December 2020 (Minute Nos. 302 – 316) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

A Member drew attention to Minute No. 307, Bus Parking in Swale.  He explained that following the update to Members in December 2020 which stated that a consultation would take place, residents of Adelaide Drive and Sydney Avenue, Sittingbourne had not received any communication.  The Member asked why the consultation had not taken place.  The Swale District Manager said that he would speak to the relevant officers and respond to the Member, and he would also copy the Chairman and Vice-Chairman into the response.

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.

Councillor Simon Clark declared a disclosable non-pecuniary interest in respect of item 7, Extension to Sittingbourne Residents’ Parking Scheme.  Councillor Clark explained that as he had campaigned in favour of the extension, he would leave the meeting during consideration of this item.

Councillor Benjamin Martin declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in respect of item 10, A251 Ashford Road and A2 Canterbury Road, Faversham – Junction Improvements Scheme.  Councillor Martin said he would leave the meeting during consideration of this item.

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 26 February 2021.  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.

The Chairman welcomed the speaker to the meeting.

Mr Tim Stonor spoke on item 10 of the agenda, A251 Ashford Road and A2 Canterbury Road, Faversham – Junction Improvements Scheme.  He asked for significantly improved facilities for pedestrians and cyclists on all arms of the junction; and to significantly improve the overall quality of urban design to reflect the future central setting of the junction.  Mr Stonor asked Kent County Council (KCC) to engage with the transport planning and urban design experts.  He said the current design did nothing for the importance of the place, and welcomed the pedestrian crossings on three out of the four arms of the junction, but added that there were barely any facilities for cyclists.  He referred to Local Transport Note (LTN) 1/20 guidance introduced by the Government in July 2020 in terms of cycle infrastructure and he considered the design was not consistent with these guidelines, and the junction would encourage more car travel.  Mr Stonor requested that the Joint Transportation Board (JTB) asked KCC to engage with this group, hold a workshop and work on the design together.

The Seafront and Engineering Manager introduced the report which provided details of an objection and comments received in relation to the recently advertised Traffic Regulation Order (TRO), Swale Amendment 21, which proposed the introduction of a Residents’ Parking Scheme in Fox Hill, Bapchild.

Recommended:

(1)      That the formal objection and comments received to the advertised Traffic Regulation Order be noted and the Order be progressed as advertised.

The Seafront and Engineering Manager introduced the report which provided details of objections and comments received in relation to the recently advertised TRO, Swale Amendment 20, which covered various amendments to on-street waiting restrictions in the Swale Area.

A Member welcomed progression of recommendation (1).

Members spoke in support of recommendation (2).  A Member explained that this was a very dangerous junction and said the second part of the recommendation (consideration be given to additional lining in a future Traffic Regulation Order (TRO)) should not be pursued at the moment.

Recommended:

(1)       That the proposed double yellow lines in Cormorant Road and Wigeon Road, Iwade, be progressed.

(2)      That the proposed double yellow lines in Dark Hill, Faversham, be progressed.

(3)     That the proposed extension to the double yellow lines, and reduction of residents’ parking bay at the side of 6 East Street, in St Mary’s Road, Faversham, be progressed.

(4)      That the proposed double yellow lines in Nutfields, Sittingbourne, be abandoned.

(5)      That the proposed formalising of the existing disabled persons’ parking bay in Invicta Road, Sheerness, be progressed.

The Seafront and Engineering Manager introduced the report which summarised action to-date following the submission of a petition to the Swale Joint Transportation Board in June 2019, for an extension to the existing Sittingbourne Residents’ Parking Scheme, and sought a definitive recommendation from Members as to whether to proceed with this extension.

A visiting Ward Member spoke in support of the extension and said that a large part of Park Road was already part of a Residents’ Parking Scheme which had resulted in displacement of vehicles onto other roads that were not within the scheme.

A KCC Member agreed with the Ward Member, and noted that the consultation responses were in support of the scheme going ahead.  The Member asked about the layout of the scheme in Park Road which residents appeared to be against.  The Seafront and Engineering Manager explained that the majority of objections received during the consultation on the proposed scheme layout were against the implementation of the scheme itself rather than the layout design.

Recommended:

(1)      That the report be noted and that officers proceed with drafting a Traffic Regulation Order to extend the current Sittingbourne Residents’ Parking Scheme to include all of Park Road and Ufton Lane.

The Seafront and Engineering Manager introduced the report which provided details of recent informal consultations undertaken on various proposed amendments to waiting restrictions in the Borough.

A Kent Association of Local Councils (KALC) Member spoke in support of Recommendation (1) being progressed.  He said that parking was a problem in this location, with the road being both narrow and a dead-end, and he explained that parked vehicles obstructed pedestrian access to the properties in the road. 

A Ward Member spoke in support of Recommendation (2) being progressed and explained that this part of St Catherine’s Drive did not have off-street parking.

Recommended:

(1)       That the proposed double yellow lines in Clarence Row, Sheerness, be progressed.

(2)      That the proposed reduction of the existing single yellow line outside Nos.2-8 St Catherine’s Drive, Faversham, be progressed.

(3)      That the proposed double yellow lines in Monarch Drive, Sittingbourne, be abandoned.

(4)      That the proposed double yellow lines in Attlee Way, Milton Regis, be progressed.

The Seafront and Engineering Manager introduced the report which advised of a Ward Member’s request for consideration of parking controls in Edith Road, Faversham, and the possible undertaking of a consultation with residents.

A Visiting Ward Member spoke in support of the recommendation.

Recommended:

(1)      That the report be noted and that officers proceed with an informal consultation with residents of Edith Road on a possible extension to the Residents’ Parking Scheme.

The Senior Programme Manager introduced the report which summarised the actions and results of a consultation carried out between August and September 2020 and outlined the proposed highway junction improvements on the A251 Ashford Road and the A2 Canterbury Road, Faversham. 

He explained that the adopted Swale Local Plan included significant development in Faversham, much of which had already commenced.  Funding from the developments, through Section 106 Agreements, would go towards mitigating the developments’ impact on the A2/A251 junction.  Highways England had also required that improvements were made to the current junction due to concerns on the safe operation of junction 6 of the M2.  The proposed scheme reduced queuing on the A251 and reduced any backing-up of traffic which would prevent traffic from exiting the high speed M20.  He said it was imperative to deliver the scheme as early as possible in terms of the safety and operation of these junctions.

The Senior Programme Manager drew attention to the Consultation Report; Annex 1, Consultation Report summary; Annex 2, List of Consultation responses and Annex 3, Proposed design to be progressed to construction.  He said the aim of the scheme was to control traffic to allow the A251 to operate safely and to provide a safe crossing of both roads for vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists.  The Senior Programme Manager explained that on the revised design, following the consultation, there were crossings on all approaches.  A shared footway/cycleway was also being incorporated from the A251and Abbey School entrance, and a footway from the A251 heading east along the A2 was also included.   He said there was insufficient land on the A251 and A2 for a cycle lane and it was not possible to link-up with The Mall because of the distance between the junctions.  Traffic would also be controlled at this point on the A2 by traffic lights and yellow box section. He said the scheme was a medium-term solution. The Senior Programme Manager outlined the different phases, as set-out on page 96 of the report pack.  The A251 needed to be closed for 11 weeks whilst the work was being carried out.  Temporary two-way lights would be installed and there would also be diversions, followed by three-way lights which would mimic the end scenario.  He summarised by saying that the Board was requested to approve the recommendation to proceed to construction, and for the programme of works to start immediately to take advantage of the available road space, increase in daylight hours and the allocated funding.

Mr Tim Stonor spoke on this item and this is recorded in the Public Session part of the minutes.

In the debate which followed, Members raised points which included:

·         The scheme had improved a bit, with the pedestrian crossings;

·         would like to see improvements for cyclists, particularly on the westbound carriageway, and suggested incorporating an advanced stop line for cyclists, which would make a big difference, and help when turning down into The Mall;

·         using the footway as a shared space on the south  ...  view the full minutes text for item 493.

The Capital Projects Manager introduced the report which was in response to the questions raised by a County Member, and provided details on what decisions had been made, by whom, and when, taking into account what factors, detailing Equality Impact Assessments, had been part of the process and what medical or public health evidence informed the decisions in relation to the town centre closures in Sittingbourne, Faversham and Sheerness.  He explained that these measures had been implemented in June 2020 to support Government social distancing guidelines.  The closures were extended in January 2021 for a further year, up to the maximum period of 18 months allowed for a Temporary Traffic Regulation Order (TTRO).  An informal consultation had been carried to gauge the appetite of local stakeholders to continue with the closures.  The TTROs did not have to be used, but were in place if required.

In the debate that followed, Members raised points which included:

·         Regular comments were received by Members on the road closures in Sheerness;

·         considered there had been a lack of consultation;

·         did not see the justification for the road closures;

·         request that the JTB sees the Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) for this;

·         unfortunate that Faversham Town Council were not advised of the consultation, this was a missed opportunity;

·         needed to know when and who decided to extend the closures;

·         more openness was need in the process;

·         public health evidence was needed to back-up the justification for the closures;

·         expert advice needed to be identified;

·         issue with emergency services accessing the closed-off roads;

·         a request was made for some modification of the hours of closure in Faversham, but this was refused by KCC;

·         needed to know why KCC turned this down;

·         the closures were an issue with people with disabilities and shop owners; and

·         would like to see more information on any disadvantages the road closures had, not just the benefits.

The Director of Regeneration responded to questions and comments as noted below:

·         The EIA was carried out internally and could be shared with the Board (post meeting note:  this was emailed to the JTB on 2 March 2021);

·         SBC asked KCC to extend the then emergency TRO to a temporary TRO in November 2020;

·         there was no particular medical evidence for the TTRO, but since June 2020, officers had followed Government guidelines to make sure users of the high street were as safe as possible;

·         emergency access had been reviewed, with those who needed to use it having a coded lock;

·         revised time scales were considered by SBC but KCC did not want the times to be amended; and

·         there could be more permanent TROs in the future, and following consultation all the issues would be looked into.

Members made further comments which included:

·         It was important to remember that Swale was going through a major health crisis;

·         a consistent and long-term approach had been sensible;

·         welcomed process of looking into pedestrianisation in the future;

·         this needed to be progressed as fast as possible now to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 494.

The Swale District Manager introduced the report which provided an update on identified schemes approved for construction.  He advised that work on Norton Crossroads on page 155 of the report had been delayed because of the snow, but the work was now complete.

The Chairman said there was not a parish called ‘Staplestreet’, as listed under ‘Parish’ on the same page, and on page 157, it should say ‘Church Road, Sittingbourne’.

Resolved:

(1)      That the report be noted.

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

Page 180

410/03/19 – A Member provided an update and advised that land was being obtained through a Section 106 agreement for the addition of a footpath.

Page 181

404/02/20 – A Member requested an update.

Page 183

306/12/20 – A Member requested further information on Plough Road, Eastchurch.

Resolved:

(1)      That the report be noted.

A Member wished the Chairman a happy retirement and acknowledged his work over the years, with his significant impact on the people and communities of Swale.

The Chairman thanked Members and officers and wished them well in the future.

The next meeting will be held on 21 June 2021 at 5.30pm – date to be confirmed at Full Council on 24 February 2021.

The next meeting of the Swale JTB would be at 5.30 pm on Monday 21 June 2021.