The Head of Planning Services introduced the report which set out the results of the strategic transport modelling which had been undertaken as part of the Local Plan Review.  He said that broad conclusions would be given at the end on what the data had indicated and he recommended that further testing should be carried out on some of the scenarios at lower housing numbers of 550 dwellings per annum (dpa), and the 776 dpa in the current Local Plan, to assess their impacts on the local and strategic highway networks.  This would form some of the Local Plan evidence base and help identify what required further research.  The Council was not yet in the position to rule out any sites on highways and transportation grounds.  Many of the results indicated that they needed to be refined and a great deal more work was needed to identify highway mitigations, including public transport, and including what might arise from any specific site allocations.  A lot more work was to be done on transport modelling.  This was a strategic look at alternative ways of distributing the housing requirements around the Borough.  The evidence would form part of the technical evidence base for the Local Plan Review.  It would inform the transport strategy of the Local Plan, identify mitigation and might help with public funding bids.

The Principal Transport & Development Planner (Canterbury & Swale) gave a presentation on the Transport Modelling Evidence which covered the following themes:

·         Purpose of Transport Modelling

·         What modelling had been undertaken and by whom?

·         What does the model do?

·         Model dates and Study Area

·         Map of Study Area

·         Model inputs

·         Highways Improvements in all future scenarios tested

·         Development Quantities in future scenario testing

·         Scenario Testing: Future Reference Case

·         Scenario Testing: Future Reference Case: Results

·         Future Scenario Testing: Scenario 1, 2, 3 and 4, plus results

·         Sittingbourne Area Traffic Flows at 2037 morning peak

·         Faversham Area Traffic Flows at 2037 morning peak

·         Sheppey Area Traffic Flows at 2037 morning peak

·         Summary and Conclusions

·         Next Steps

The Chairman invited Members to ask questions.  In response, the Principal Transport & Development Planner explained that the M2 required three lanes in all four scenarios to support Local Plan growth and to accommodate increased traffic as a result of the Lower Thames Crossing.  He added that the modelling highlighted where issues were and where solutions had to be sought.  Interventions and mitigations would enable growth and there needed to be a shift towards walking, cycling and public transport.  The traffic modelling also took into account growth outside the Borough.

There was some discussion on the recommendations in the report which included:

·         This was a stark message;

·         it was pointed out that whilst there was always the suggestion that public transport could mitigate the problem, in reality services were constantly being cut;

·         the best option was significantly worse than it was at the moment;

·         more local employment was needed;

·         there needed to be a modal shift;

·         there should be more town centre developments;

·         lack of secondary schools increased travel to other towns;

·         roadworks needed upgrading in Kent;

·         coordination was needed with bus and train companies;

·         public transport alternatives would help; and

·         issues with air quality needed to be more explicit in the modelling.

The Chairman moved the followed motion:  That work also be carried out on non-road traffic modelling.  This was seconded by Councillor Benjamin Martin and on being to the vote the motion was agreed as the fourth recommendation.

Recommended:

(1)      That the strategic transport modelling results at Appendix I and II be noted.

(2)      That it be recommended to Cabinet that this work be part of the body of evidence used to inform the Issues and Alternative Options stage of the Local Plan Review.

(3)      That it be agreed that additional modelling runs be undertaken for scenarios 1, 2 and 3 to test the impacts of lower housing numbers as explained in paragraph 3.37.

(4)      That work also be carried out on non-road traffic modelling.