To confirm the Chair and Vice-chair for the municipal year 2023/24.

Councillor Simon Clark was confirmed as Chair and Kent County Councillor John Wright was confirmed as Vice-Chair for the Municipal Year 2023-24.

Visitors and members of the public who are unfamiliar with the building and procedures are advised that:

(a)      The fire alarm is a continuous loud ringing. In the event that a fire drill is planned during the meeting, the Chair will advise of this.

(b)      Exit routes from the chamber are located on each side of the room, one directly to a fire escape, the other to the stairs opposite the lifts.

(c)      In the event of the alarm sounding, leave the building via the nearest safe exit and gather at the assembly point on the far side of the car park. Do not leave the assembly point or re-enter the building until advised to do so. Do not use the lifts.

(d)      Anyone unable to use the stairs should make themselves known during this agenda item.

The Chair outlined the emergency evacuation procedure.

Councillors should not act or take decisions in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their families or friends.

The Chair will ask Members if they have any disclosable pecuniary interests (DPIs) or disclosable non-pecuniary interests (DNPIs) to declare in respect of items on the agenda. Members with a DPI in an item must leave the room for that item and may not participate in the debate or vote. 

Aside from disclosable interests, where a fair-minded and informed observer would think there was a real possibility that a Member might be biased or predetermined on an item, the Member should declare this and leave the room while that item is considered.

Members who are in any doubt about interests, bias or predetermination should contact the monitoring officer for advice prior to the meeting.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 27 February 2023 (Minute Nos. 718 - 731) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 27 February 2023 (Minute Nos. 718 – 731) were taken as read, agreed and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

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 23 June 2023.  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.

There were no registered speakers.

The Chair altered the order of business as minuted.

The National Highways (NH) Project Manager for M2 Junction 5 Improvement works gave a verbal update on the progress of the works.

The Chair invited Members to ask questions and points raised included:

·         Congratulated NH on how they had progressed the works and considered that that communication with the local community was much improved;

·         raised safety concerns in respect of the Oad Street, Borden T-junction once motorists had left the A249 (Maidstone Road).  Drivers were confronted with traffic travelling from Tunstall on the right-hand side over the brow of a very steep hill with very short sightlines.  Could traffic from the A249 (Maidstone Road) travelling up the new hill be given right of way?;

·         traffic management was poor in respect of the flow from Maidstone.  The left hand-lane should also be going north to Sittingbourne and the Isle of Sheppey which would help to ease traffic congestion;

·         travelling from the M2 (Medway direction) the bend turning north on the eastbound slip road was too sharp for HGVs and needed to be altered;

·         why was work taking so long? the contractors should be working 24/7 to reduced costs of the works;

·         Kent County Council (KCC) Planning Committee had met the contractors on-site which had been very beneficial, and another visit was planned;

·         would the A249 be closed during the Kent County Show weekend, 7 to 9 July 2023?; and

·         concerned that drivers travelling from Maidstone were not getting in lane and cutting-in at the last minute.  Could lane delineation be put in at this point?

In response to points raised the NH Project Manager said in respect of the Oad Street, T-junction it would have been assessed and passed a safety audit.  He agreed to speak to the Safety Auditor and KCC about the Member’s concerns.  The northbound traffic lane set-up approaching the roundabout was the only safe option and traffic modelling indicated that it was currently an even-split in terms of traffic and he agreed to forward the relevant reasoning for the traffic flows to the relevant Member.  The NH Project Manager said that with regard to concerns about the sharp bend on the eastbound slip road a Swept Path Analysis, safety audit and risk assessment had been carried out and it was shown to be a safe road and complied with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) standards.  He said that despite challenges outside of their control they maintained the end date of the works on a very sensitive junction which was a huge achievement.  He said that it was not always efficient or feasible to work 24/7 and it was commercially beneficial to the contractor to work as efficiently and cost effectively as they could.

The NH Project Manager confirmed that the A249 would not be closed during the Kent County Show weekend in July 2023.  He appreciated the frustration in respect of some driver’s not staying in-line however it was not safe to put in a hard barrier and it would be difficult to enforce.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 139.

The Seafront and Engineering Manager introduced the report.

The Chair invited Members to ask questions.  Comments and questions raised included:

·         Would there be sufficient turning space in Church Road for coaches?;

·         the bays would be adjacent to the Bramble Hill Road junction and on a very strange bend and considered it was a “peculiar” location for a coach bay;

·         aware of parking problems in the location;

·         double yellow lines should be installed opposite the bays in Church Road/Upper Brents, rather than single yellow lines, if the proposed parking bay was going to be retained;

·         prudent comments had been raised within the consultation response;

·         traffic turning left out of The Brents car park could meet traffic travelling north-east along Church Road and did not support the proposal;

·         considered a wider consultation should be undertaken;

·         concerned about the location and considered that Love Lane, Faversham was more appropriate as it was wider; and

·         suggested that the item be referred back to the Faversham Destination Marketing Group to review the proposed location and consider other options including Love Lane, Faversham.  Also to consult with Faversham Football Club to establish whether any of their land was available in Salters Lane.

In response the Seafront and Engineering Manager said sufficient turning space had been raised as a concern following the consultation as set-out in Annex B of the report.  He said that he would liaise with the relevant KCC officer about this concern prior to any Traffic Regulation Order (TRO).  He did not believe the location of the bays was directly on Bramble Hill Road junction, which he considered was further south.  He said it was opposite the Brents Car Park but agreed to investigate the exact location and inform the relevant Member.  The Active Travel Co-Ordinator confirmed the location was outside the Church.  The Seafront and Engineering Manager explained that a single yellow line could be timed which would help to minimise the impact on on-street parking.  The Seafront and Engineering Manager said that if this was to progress to a TRO then it would be advertised on-site and via the local press, but if a wider consultation was deemed appropriate then officers could pursue.  He said he was unaware of the current arrangements for the Macknade coach parking trial and there was some urgency to resolving the issue of coach parking but it was important that whatever was agreed worked and was going to be used.  Once the location of the bays had been agreed then a formal TRO would be progressed which would take approximately 12 months from start to finish.  Any formal objections received would be reported back to the JTB.

KCC Andy Booth moved the following amendment:  That the proposed coach parking bay in Church Road/Upper Brents, Faversham be not progressed, and an alternative location be found.  This was seconded by KCC Councillor Mike Dendor.

Councillor Angela Harrison moved the following addendum to the amendment:  That the proposed coach parking bay in Church Road/Upper Brents, Faversham be held in abeyance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 140.

The Seafront and Engineering Manager introduced the report as set out in the agenda papers.

Recommended:

(1)      That the report be noted and the proposed double yellow lines in Recreation Way, Sittingbourne be progressed.

The Project Manager (Major Capital Programme Team, KCC) introduced the report which provided updates on the A249 Junction Improvement Schemes at Key Street and Grovehurst Road, Sittingbourne.

The Chair invited questions from Members and points raised included:

Key Street Roundabout

·         What was happening to the land to the north of Chestnut Street and the A249?;

·         how would people be able to access the Tudor Rose, Chestnut Street, Borden?;

·         would pedestrian lighting be installed on the controlled crossing?;

·         astounded that the pedestrian crossing across the slip road would not be lit or controlled;

·         thanked the officer for the report and KCC for securing the funding for the improvements and requested a six monthly update report on progress;

·         had every faith that the planners at KCC had both pedestrian and driver interests to ensure that both could use the roundabout in a safe manner without hold-ups;

·         what would be the route for cyclists heading north up Chestnut Street and would the proposed footway be shared footway/cycleway?;

·         would there be crossings to enable cyclists to cross the roundabout?; and

·         was there anything that could be done to improve the desired line across the last piece of verge as it was a long detour, and could the road be narrowed to allow more room for the footway/cycleway?;

In response the Project Manager said that there was no proposal for pedestrian lighting on the controlled crossings which would be standard tactile crossings, he added that there was no intention to encourage pedestrians to cross the slip road, the design was for pedestrians to walk up Chestnut Street past The Tudor Rose and cross on the east side of Chestnut Street and then across the access road into the new development.  He agreed to circulate to Members of the Board details of how vehicles could access The Tudor Rose as it was not intended to isolate that venue.  The piece of land referred to north of Chestnut Street was probably going to landscaped by the developer. 

The Project Manager advised that the footway on the east side of Chestnut Street would be a combined footway/cycleway.  He said the intention was that cyclists travelling up Chestnut Street towards Key Street would be on the existing Chestnut Street as they approached the roundabout and there was a footway/cycleway all the way through the housing development and footway/cycleway provisions around the whole of Key Street.  He agreed to confirm the footway/cycleway widths.

Grovehurst Road Roundabout

KCC Mike Whiting said that often too many traffic lights led to traffic congestion.  The roundabout at Key Street was a good example of how traffic flow worked well on a roundabout with only two of sets of traffic lights at the correct location points. The Grovehurst Roundabout would work better with two sets of traffic lights, one controlling the off-slip northbound off the A249 and one controlling the south slip off the A249.

KCC Andy Booth agreed that only two sets of traffic lights were required.  The biggest issue would be tail backs  ...  view the full minutes text for item 142.

The Swale District Manager introduced the report which provided an update and summarised schemes programmed for delivery in 2022/23 and 2023/24.  He asked Members to contact him after the meeting if they had any questions on particular schemes.  He would then forward their question to the appropriate KCC officer.

The Chair invited comments from Members.

·         KCC Mike Whiting sought clarification that the A250 Halfway Road machine resurfacing works on page 39 of Appendix A of the report fell under Queenborough which was an unparished area and not Minster-on-Sea parish as stated?;

·         Parish Councillor Jeff Tutt referred to page 39 of Annex A which stated that the Canterbury Road (Boughton Hill) Machine Resurfacing works would be completed by June 2023, but they were not.  They were meant to be completed early May 2023 and now not until 21 July 2023.  It was now open, with single file traffic lights and the joint between the new and old pieces of road was appalling so KCC need to look at;

·         Parish Councillor Peter MacDonald referred to SW/003090 (Preston Skreens) Minster Road, Minster on page 52 of Appendix E (Developer Funded Works) following the works the road drain has been blocked and needs exploring;

·         Parish Cllr Peter MacDonald referred to SW/003108 Chequers Road, Minster also on page 52, the footway was incomplete.  The Member asked to meet someone on-site to progress.  Also SW/003469 Danedale Stables, Minster-on-Sea the footway was also incomplete;

·         Councillor Angela Harrison referred to Appendix F (Bridge Works) on page 61 and said the posts were sinking and needed to be inspected urgently on the bridge over Brielle Way, Sheerness; and

·         KCC Mike Dendor referred to North Street, Milton Regis and said work from the original design had not been completed and asked to speak to the relevant KCC officers about this.

The Swale District Manager noted all comments and agreed to liaise with the relevant officers as requested.

Resolved:

(1)      That the report be noted.

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

KCC Mike Dendor queried why parking concerns on Eurolink Way, Sittingbourne near the scrap metal site, were not included as an item on the agenda as requested at the previous meeting?  The Swale District Manager said that there had been a Stage 2 Safety Audit visit with KCC’s Agreements Engineer at the site and so it was not appropriate for it to be considered at this time.  The parking issue was now being considered by the relevant team at KCC to resolve the issue.

Town Parish Councillor Eddie Thomas requested an update on the proposed parking bays and double yellow lines on Forbes Road, Faversham.  In response, the Seafront & Engineering Manager said that following consultation with the Ward Member and Faversham Town Council, a TRO (Swale Amendment 46) had been drafted and was currently being considered by KCC’s Parking Manager.

Resolved:

(1)      That the report be noted.

The next meeting will be held on 2 October 2023.

The next meeting of the Swale Joint Transportation Board would be at 5.30 pm on Monday 2 October 2023.