Tabled paper published 27 January 2026.

The Head of Environment and Leisure introduced the report as set out in the agenda papers.  He acknowledged the level of responses objecting to the proposals and the petitions received.  He reported that with regard to the ownership of Queenborough Library car park, he had that day requested the relevant documents from the Land Registry, and they had confirmed that there were three Title Deeds for the area and each of them showed Swale Borough Council (SBC) as the proprietor of the land.  The Legal and Property teams would, however, do a more detailed investigation in due course.

The Chair thanked all those that had responded to the consultation.

A representative of Queenborough Town Council (QTC) was invited to speak.  She raised the following points:  Land Registry documents K5555380 and K555381 showed that QTC were owners of part of Queenborough Library car park; there had been over 4,000 objections from residents; the proposals were ‘damning’ and would destroy the Isle of Sheppey; how would the Council attract visitors to the Isle of Sheppey by imposing these car parking charges?; the Isle of Sheppey had poor public services and transport; this would lead to shop closures in Queenborough and Halfway; and please rethink as the Council would not generate any revenue from this but ‘push’ the car parking into the already congested local streets.

A Ward Member spoke against the proposals and raised the following points: the parking charges had been approved and the funds allocated prior to the public consultation, which was contrary to the Council’s own Consultation Policy; the ownership issues around the Queenborough Library car park needed to be resolved prior to any decision being made to avoid any subsequent legal charges against the Council; residents would have to park in the streets which would make it difficult for refuse vehicles to navigate; and it would make it difficult for residents to access frontline services such as GPs and pharmacies; and also make parking difficult for local volunteers.

The Ward Member drew attention to the minutes of the meeting held on 12 November 2025 and noted in one paragraph it stated that a decision would not be made until the consultation had taken place.  However, in a later paragraph it stated that the decision had already been made. 

Councillor Ashley Shiel made the following proposal:  That the Traffic Regulation Order be withdrawn.  This was not seconded.

In response, the Head of Environment and Leisure stated that the consultation was not carried out under the formal SBC consultation because it had to follow the national process for the off-street parking order consultation as written in legislation in terms of the order of the consultation.  With regard, to the legal ownership of the Library car park, he noted the comments from QTC however the Council had made their decisions based on what they saw from the Land Registry.  With regard to the impacts to residents, this was also the case for residents in Faversham, Sittingbourne, and other areas of the Isle of Sheppey where similar car parks were chargeable.  The car parks cost the Council money and by levying charges the Council could recover some of the income to enable them to become self-sufficient. 

Following a short adjournment to consider the point from the Ward Member regarding the minutes of the previous meeting, the Monitoring Officer referred to Minute No. 455 and the final paragraph of page 330 which stated “parking order consultation would ensure views of local people were taken into account and a final decision would then be made by councillors; subject to the comments received, there could be amendments such as variables of times that charges could be levied.”  So, the minute was clear that it was a consultation on the parking order and whether it needed amending, and not a consultation on the principle of charging generally.

A Member asked whether the operation of the Queenborough car parks had been offered to QTC?  The Head of Environment and Leisure explained that giving them away would not meet the necessary property legislation under ‘Best Consideration, which was explained in the first committee when the decisions were taken’.

A Ward Member said she was not against the charges so long as they were fair and the same across the borough.  She referred to the Front Brents car park, Faversham, which was in the most deprived area of Faversham.  She explained it had 14 car parking spaces and was used by parents to drop-off their children at the nursery located opposite.  She said it was only fair that if concessions were to be made at the Halfway car park, Minster Road then they should be at the Front Brents car park as well. 

At this point, the Chief Executive reminded the Committee they had already agreed to implement charging at the six car parks referred to under paragraph 2.2 of the report at the November 2025 meeting.  Members were being asked to consider any amendments to the Off-Street Parking Order as set out at paragraph 2.13 of the report. 

Councillor James Hunt proposed the amendments to the Off-Street Order set out at paragraph 2.13 of the report, but with the following amendment (bold):  a) Remove charges for the period 8.30 am – 9.30 am and 2.30 pm – 3.30 pm at Halfway car park, Minster Road and the Front Brents car park, Faversham to help alleviate school safety concerns; and b) Implement seasonal charges at Little Oyster and Queenborough, Park Road car park operating from 1 March to 30 September each year to ensure that peak season availability is controlled, but the car park is available for resident use through the quieter periods of the year.  This was seconded by Councillor Lloyd Bowen.

Following advice from the Chair regarding the differing operating hours of nurseries compared to schools, Councillor Hunt proposed the following amendment to the motion, that point a) includes:  Remove charges for the period 8.30 am – 9.30 am and 2.30 pm – 3.30 pm at Halfway car park, Minster Road and that delegated authority be given to officers in consultation with the Chair of the Environmental Services and Climate Change Committee, and Ward Members to remove charges during the appropriate hours at Front Brents car park, Faversham to help alleviate school safety concerns.  This was seconded by Councillor Bowen.

A visiting Ward Member spoke against the proposals and presented a petition to the Chair.  He spoke in objection and raised points which included:  the Little Oyster car park was a ‘community asset’ and the parking charges should not be enforced; what had been the cost to the taxpayer for the consultation?; the public consultation had been a ‘pointless’ exercise and the objections of local residents were being ‘sidelined’; considered bringing a motion to Full Council during consideration of fees and charges to have the parking fees removed at the Little Oyster car park; and if the car parking charges were inevitable then the current use of the car parks needed to be considered.

The Chair stated that all responses to the consultation had been considered.  With regard to costs to the taxpayer in respect of the consultation, the Head of Environment and Leisure reported that the only cost was for the consultation advertisement in the local newspaper, under £500 for the order cost, and officers had printed the posters for each of the car parks.  There had been no additional costs to analyse the consultation responses. 

Another visiting Ward member spoke against the proposals.  He raised points which included: members of the Committee should vote against the recommendation, and the proposed amendments at paragraph 2.13 of the report; concerned that there had been no public consultation prior to the agreement to impose the parking charges; asked that the four car parks on the Isle of Sheppey be removed from the list; 4,000 residents had written objecting to the proposal, with nobody writing in support; the charges would have a detrimental impact on local businesses and schools; it would be detrimental to the local tourism economy; would detrimentally impact road safety due to increased congestion; and in the first two years of the proposals the Council would spend £84,000 and achieve a £56,000 income, so with a £28,000 loss it was not ‘best value’ to run these car parks.

In response, the Head of Environment and Leisure stated that due to the existing off-street parking orders free car parks still needed to be inspected and maintained, so a lot of the costs already existed, and by applying the charges the Council would be able to recoup some of those costs.  The income targets set out in the report were an ‘estimate’, and would be reviewed over time.  

The Monitoring Officer advised members of the Committee that if they voted against the recommendation, then the Off-Street Parking Order would proceed without the amendments, which had been included following the consultation responses.  The Chief Executive stated that the consultation was on the Off-Street Parking Order, and not whether the Council should introduce parking charges.  She added that in the event that a motion or decision for Members was submitted, officers would ensure that details of any relevant petitions that had been submitted in respect of the off-street parking order would be included within any future report to Members.  

The Chair referred Members back to the earlier amendment which had been seconded.  Councillor Hunt, the proposer of the amendment, proposed the recommendation set out at page 47 of the report.  Following advice from the Monitoring Officer he withdrew that proposal.

Councillor Elliott Jayes asked the proposer and seconder of the original amendment if they would consider including the following amendment to amendment a) (bold) that the charges be removed from 7 am – 9.30 am at Halfway car park. The proposer and seconder of the original amendments agreed to the amendment.  The proposer of the original amendment requested that amendment a) include the following further amendment:  “….Remove charges for the period 7 am – 9.30 am and 2.30 pm – 4 pm at Halfway car park, Minster….”.  

On being put to the vote the amendment to the amendment was agreed.

A Ward Member spoke against the proposals and considered that local residents had been ‘let-down’ and so he would abstain from voting on the proposals.

The Chair invited further comments from Members and these included:

·         This would encourage parking in local roads;

·         needed to explore and ‘push’ parking permit schemes;

·         should look at more seasonal parking;

·         would result in some residents becoming more isolated;

·         the car parks were poorly maintained and the Council was not spending a lot of money on their upkeep;

·         cashless payments had not been considered at the previous meeting;

·         the report was not financially driven but ‘ideologically’ driven;

·         Minster Parish Council had still not heard back from the Council about their request to ‘take-on’ Little Oyster Car park; and

·         the item should be deferred and have been considered by the working group.

Councillor Jayes proposed the following motion:  That the item be deferred to allow the working group to review the Off-Street Parking Order Consultation.  This was seconded by Councillor Ashley Shiel. 

The Monitoring Officer stated that deferring the amendments to the parking order was not practicable and would mean that following the Committee’s previous decision to impose the parking charges, the Head of Environment and Leisure would use his delegated powers to make the parking order without any amendments. 

The Head of Environment and Leisure considered that officers had responded to the key points raised through the consultation and had based the recommendations accordingly.  He asked the proposer of the motion to defer, to clarify what the working group would be considering beyond what was in the report.  The Member stated that the working group would work to provide a cross-party motion moving forwards.

In response to comments regarding the report, the Chair stated that the officer had put a lot of work into the proposals and it was understandable that it would be a contentious issue. 

The seconder of the motion to defer spoke in support of the motion, and stated that he was confused on what had been amended.  The Member considered the consultation had been carried out in the wrong order and understood why members of the public were also confused.  He said the Council needed to withdraw the implication of the parking order until the legal frameworks with QTC and the borough council regarding the ownership of the Library car park, Queenborough had been clarified.

On being put to the vote the motion to defer was lost.

At the request of the Chair, the Head of Environment and Leisure provided a visual presentation of the land registry documents with regard to the library car park, Queenborough.  He stated that of the four designated areas: one was in KCC ownership; three were showing SBC as the proprietor and that KCC and Queenborough Community Association Limited had rights of passage, both vehicular and pedestrian across the titles, and to bring utility services into the building. 

The Chair stated that she would provide an update at the next meeting under ‘Chair’s Briefing’, to confirm that the information provided by the Land Registry had been shared with QTC and there was a clear understanding regarding the land ownership at the library car park, Queenborough.

Councillor Elliott Jayes proposed the following amendment to amendment b):  That Halfway Road, Halfway and the Library Car Park, Queenborough be included.  That the Council only charges £1 per hour for the next three years, and that charging stopped at 6 pm at all six car parks.

Following advice from the Head of Environment and Leisure that the Policy and Resources Committee were responsible for the amounts charged, the proposer of the amendment to the amendment b) amended the amendment to the amendment to (bold):  To implement seasonal charges at Little Oyster car park, Minster, Park Road car park, Queenborough, Halfway car park, Halfway and the library car park, Queenborough operating from 1 March to 30 September each year to ensure that peak season availability is controlled, but the car park is available for resident use through the quieter periods of the year, with charging stopping at 6 pm at all six car parks.  This was seconded by Councillor Shiel.

The Chief Executive stated that stopping charging at 6 pm had not been a request made as part of the consultation and what would be the budget implications of imposing it.  The proposer of the amendment to the amendment considered it would make it more ‘palatable’ to residents and more successful.

In accordance with Procedure Rule 3.1.19(2), a recorded vote was taken and voting was as follows:

For: Cheesman, Jayes, Marchington, MacDonald and Shiel.  Total = 5

Against: Hunt, Jackson, Bowen, P Stephen, Thompson and Wooster.  Total = 6

Abstain: Eyre, Miller and S Stephen.  Total = 3

The amendment to amendment b) was lost.

Councillor Hunt proposed the recommendation, as amended, and this was seconded by Councillor Thompson.

In accordance with Procedure Rule 3.1.19(2), a recorded vote was taken and voting was as follows:

For: Cheesman, Eyre, Hunt, Jackson, Marchington, Miller, Bowen, P Stephen, Thompson and Wooster.  Total = 10

Against: Jayes, MacDonald and Shiel.  Total = 3

Abstain: S Stephen.  Total = 1

Resolved:

(1)    That the Off-Street Parking Order be approved, as minuted, and delegated authority be given to officers to proceed to ‘Has Made order’ for variation no. 10.