Agenda and minutes

1.    RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 12 June 2014 be approved as a correct record and that they be signed by the Chairman.

1.    The Chairman summarised the issue being considered by the Scrutiny Committee in terms of the following two points:

-       Why was the plan and decision to implement the post consultation changes not taken to the Canterbury Joint Transportation board on 10 June 2014?

-       Under what authority was the decision made after the consultation?

2.    Under the process of formal submission of questions and by prior agreement, the Chairman invited Mr MacDowall to ask Mr Brazier three questions;

a)    Why was a full report published not after the consultation?

b)    Were the minutes of the St Dunstan’s Regeneration Scheme Steering Group made publicly available?

c)    Have the local area elected members from district and county councils have been given an opportunity to comment on the proposals for the scheme?

3.    Mr Brazier provided an overview, beginning with the instigation of a trial traffic management scheme on 27 March 2012 which prevented any vehicular travel through the Westgate Towers.  The trial had been requested by Canterbury City Council and was put in place without any formal decision being taken.  The Joint Transportation Board was informed of progress during the trial but did not take a formal role in approving the scheme.  The trial was ended after 12 months by KCC’s Leader Paul Carter due to local reaction against the impact of the traffic management.

4.    To address the unsustainable post-trial situation, Mr Brazier set up the St Dunstan’s Regeneration Scheme Steering Group to review the matter in partnership with senior stakeholders in the area with a view to developing a formal public consultation on possible traffic management options.  The Steering Group included KCC, Canterbury City Council, local business groups and community interests.  The consultation was launched in September 2013 and closed in December 2013.  The initial results of the consultation were taken to Cabinet in December where they were considered by the Leader and all Cabinet members.  The overwhelming support for Option E (allowing traffic through Westgate Towers) convinced Cabinet to announce that KCC would be supporting its implementation while the peripheral issues included in the consultation such as 20 mph limits and weight restrictions would be considered after further analysis had been conducted when the Steering Group next met in January 2014.

5.    Mr Brazier emphasised that this Traffic Scheme, like others of its kind, fall within delegated power and could be implemented without a formal cabinet decision by senior Highways Officers.  It was emphasised that the current scheme is reflective of the proposal endorsed in the public consultation and the scheme should already have been implemented but was delayed due to design work.  Mr Brazier had decided against taking the proposed scheme to the Joint Transportation Board for further comment due to the need for progress to be made after earlier delays and the concern that it would raise expectation that JTB and CCC comments would have a significant impact on the scheme when the formal consultation had already taken place.

6.    Mr Latchford thanked Mr Brazier for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

1.    The Chairman summarised the issue under consideration as a perceived failure for Highways to include a Drainage report in the recent Cabinet paper despite assurances to Mrs Dean that such a report would be present.  A supplementary report has since been provided to the Scrutiny Committee.  Mr Brazier was asked to comment on why Highways and Transportation did not provide the report in the Cabinet paper.

2.    Mr Brazier explained that Highways had not been asked to contribute to the Flood Risk Management Committee Report and that the previous Scrutiny Committee records did not indicate a requirement for any Highways action to contribute to the Cabinet paper.  This was to clarify that he believed that there had been no failure on the part of Highways and to confirm that the final Cabinet Paper will feature a drainage section.  There was a request made at Cabinet that Highways and Transportation look into the issue of Highways drainage in future which is being done with support of the KCC Drainage & Flood Manager, Katie Lewis, who will be attending the next committee meeting.  Highway drainage will feature in the next Highways and Transportation committee meeting.

3.    Mrs Dean stated that the concern was one that had been raised to Members from the community with regards to smaller scale, anecdotal flood experiences that were perceived to be caused by silting, calcification and highway drainage issues.  An assurance had been given by officers to Mrs Dean that these issues would be addressed in the Cabinet paper.  The following questions had been prepared for Mr Haratbar with a view to addressing these concerns.

4.    Mrs Dean welcomed Behdad Haratbar’s report.  Clarification was requested on what the enhanced cleansing regime for identified gullies was and whether it now more targeted.  What is the cleansing schedule and how is calcification of pipes being managed? 

5.       BehdadHaratbar explained that areas identified as hotspots are cleansed every three months or six months depending on severity of issues.  Hotspot data is reviewed regularly based on a range on information from quantitative data to anecdotal reports.  Calcification was among several maintenance issues that were dealt with on a case by case basis.

6.    Mrs Dean highlighted a perceived discrepancy between the surface water scheme plans for her division and where the local residents have reported incidents of flooding and evidence of surface water.  It was asked how the surface water scheme is updated and whether a priority list for planned works existed.

7.    BehdadHaratbar stated that such local issues are better addressed outside the meeting on a case by case basis and that work was prioritised based on needs assessments.  Long term work was planned but was contingent on funding available which prevented a formal schedule being published.  Local members are welcome to raise issues with Highways for consideration and potential inclusion in works schedules; a schedule of proposed works have for the financial year 2014/15 was disseminated to Members in March for comment and information.  Mr Haratbar explained  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.