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.

To approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 2 December 2024 (Minute Nos. 428 - 440) as a correct record.

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 2 December 2024 (Minute Nos. 428 – 440) were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

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.

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 28 February 2025.  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 Seafront & Engineering Manager introduced the report as set out in the agenda papers.

Parish Councillor Julian Saunders proposed the recommendation and this was seconded by Kent County Councillor Antony Hook.

Resolved:

(1) That the results of the recent informal consultation with residents of Belmond Road, Faversham be noted and that the existing Faversham Residents’ Parking Scheme be extended to include Belmond Road.

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

Kent County Councillor Antony Hook said that he agreed with the removal of yellow lines directly outside 1 Park Road, Faversham. However, there were concerns with the removal of yellow lines outside the recreation ground because trucks often parked across the entrance to the recreation ground which could make it difficult for emergency vehicles to gain access. He proposed the following motion: “That the yellow lines directly outside 1 Park Road, Faversham be removed but officers consult with the fire service before the removal of yellow lines outside the recreational ground.” This was seconded by Parish Councillor Julian Saunders and on being put to the vote agreed.

Resolved:

(1)   That the results of the recent informal consultation with residents of Park Road, Faversham be noted and the proposed double yellow lines directly outside 1 Park Road, Faversham be abandoned.

(2)   That officers consult the fire service before the removal of yellow lines outside the entrance to the recreational ground.

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

The Chair invited Members to make comments, which included:

·      Glad to see the proposals as parking in Strode Crescent, Sheerness and other areas across Sheerness was a real problem;

·      the Isle of Sheppey did not have sufficient parking for the number of cars;

·      noted that there was not a lot of public interest so why was this particular traffic order being explored?;

·      received several complaints about the disabled bays at Strode Crescent but wondered if better enforcement was needed, rather than the removal of the bays; and

·      double yellow lines would improve public safety, so this proposal was a sensible option.

The Seafront & Engineering Manager responded to the points raised and said that the original proposals to remove the disabled bays came from the local Police. With regard to better enforcement in Strode Crescent, he said that parking enforcement could only operate in areas with restrictions and that currently vehicles were parking in areas with no restrictions so the extension of double yellow lines would help enforce the restrictions.

Councillor Angela Harrison proposed the recommendation and this was seconded by Councillor Karen Watson.

Resolved:

(1)  That the formal objection received during the consultation period for the Traffic Regulation Order Amendment 11 2025 be noted and the two disabled persons’ parking bays in Strode Crescent, Sheerness, be removed and the double yellow lines be extended as detailed in the advertised Traffic Order.

Amendment to recommendation two (2) published 27.02.2025

The Head of Environment and Leisure introduced the report as set out in the agenda papers. Whilst the proposals were unlikely to resolve all of the issues, it was a way of trialing a different approach and could be reviewed continuely.

Parish Councillor Julian Saunders proposed recommendation one and this was seconded by Councillor Karen Watson.

Parish Councillor Julian Saunders proposed the following amendment to recommendation two: “Members are asked to agree not to proceed with the implementation of the current Faversham Town Centre scheme for the moment and to take the opportunity to review future options when resources allow.” This was seconded by Councillor Karen Watson.

A visiting Ward Member was invited to speak and congratulated officers on their hard work on the proposals. The Ward Member was supportive of the amendments and asked officers if it was possible to include double yellow lines at Court Street, Faversham in the formal consultation as market traders were now having issues with getting access to the market square due to parking issues along Court Street.

In response, the Head of Environment and Leisure said that Court Street was entirely a cobbled street which meant it was difficult to paint double yellow lines, it was therefore not possible for Court Street to be included within the consultation.

The Chair invited Members to make comments, which included:

·           Painting double yellow lines directly onto the block paving was a better option than painting on the cobbled stones;

·           the Faversham Town Centre demographic was changing and there was a need for more street space in the Town Centre;

·           why were officers not exploring the option of designating the area as a non-parking zone in a conservation area? As it could be applied without the need for double yellow lines;

·           parking was a premium in Faversham and did not want residents parking in busy public places that would prevent the market trade; and

·           did not want to deter new businesses from coming to Faversham Town Centre.

The Seafront & Engineering Manager responded and said that the Traffic Management Act had allowed a change to parking zones in conservation areas. However, there were complications around distinguishing the areas that allowed temporary parking, against those areas that allowed no parking at all. He stated that there would be a need for large signage and additional costs to properly advertise which areas residents could park in and he considered double yellow lines were the most suitable way to enforce parking in the Town Centre. In addition, there was an uncertainty about how disabled badge holders would be impacted by this approach.

The Head of Environment and Leisure reminded Members that the Swale Joint Transportation Board was making a recommendation to the Policy and Resources Committee and it was the Policy and Resources Committee that would make the final decision as to how any future project on pedestrianisation would be properly funded.

Recommended:

(1)   That the report be noted.

(2)   That officers proceeded with the drafting of a Traffic Regulation Order  ...  view the full minutes text for item 705.

The Major Capital Programme Project Manager gave a verbal update on the A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road projects.  

The Chair asked that Members contacted the relevant officer direct if they had any queries on the report.

Resolved:

(1)   That the report be noted.

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

The Chair asked if officers could provide an update on the following items at the next Swale JTB:

·      ANPR Cameras;

·      Resurfacing works at Brenchley Corner;

·      Rural lanes; and

·      Speed Camera policy for Parish Councils.

Resolved:

(1)   That the report be noted.

The date of the next meeting will be confirmed at Annual Council on 14 May 2025.

The next meeting of the Swale Joint Transportation Board would be confirmed at Swale Borough Council’s Annual Council meeting on 14 May 2025.