All Members present are required to
declare, at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible
thereafter
(i)Any disclosable pecuniary interests and /
or
(ii)Other interests arising under the Code of Conduct in
respect of any item(s) of business being considered at this
meeting
NOTES:
·Members are reminded that they must not participate
in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary
interest
·As well as an interest of the Member, this includes
any interest, of which the Member is aware, that relates to the
Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the
Member is living as a spouse or civil partner)
·Members with a significant personal interest may
participate in the discussion and vote on that matter unless that
interest could be reasonably regarded as prejudicial.
Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning
Manager
Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal
Solicitor
Speakers:
Alan Hustings, a local resident, made the following
points:
The
Independent Safety Audit in the traffic survey was based on the
October 2014 Traffic Management Plan (TMP). Therefore, considering the outdated 1100 Heavy
Goods Vehicle (HGV) movements and not the 1500-1600 currently
considered he raised concerns about potential further inaccuracies
in the outdated traffic survey.
He stated
that Coldharbour Lane was a very popular recreational cycle route
all through the year and therefore would benefit from the
recommendations outlined by the Safety Audit. He also raised a
concern about the TMP making no provision for pedestrians using
Coldharbour Lane due to inconclusive surveying of pedestrians in
the Lane.
Pam Pulling Smith, a Local
resident, made the following points:
Residents
of Coldharbour Lane felt they had not been properly
consulted.
Concern was
raised about restricted access to local businesses that would be
caused by the road closures and HGV use of the Lane. Elderly and unwell residents would also be
restricted to attend hospital appointments and recreational
activities in the area.
The
Committee were asked to consider the residents that would be
directly affected by the TMP and were asked to drive on Coldharbour
Lane to allow for proper consideration.
Pat Smith, a Local resident,
made the following points:
That no
Traffic Survey had been completed in Dorking or Flint
Hill. Concern was raised as traffic
issues were already severe in the area and further HGV movements
would only add additional traffic problems.
She had
conducted her own survey which showed a large variety of road users
using Flint Hill at sometimes dangerous speeds which highlighted
the need for a formal traffic survey to be completed and
considered. The current traffic survey was said to be insufficient
due to it covering a limited area. She requested that a traffic
survey be completed in Flint Hill and other affected Dorking
roads.
Charlotte Nolan, a Local
resident, made the following points:
That there
were inaccuracies in the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) due
to it being based on an outdated version of the TMP. It was further
stated that the socio-economic impacts of the TMP had not be
considered within the Traffic Survey. Many local businesses had
expressed concern about impacts and had forwarded these to Surrey
County Council. Members were informed of further impacts that had
not be considered in the traffic survey which would have a negative
affect on local businesses.
She had
noted that Europa conducted a survey in the area and discovered
that a large number of cyclists used the road on a Saturday and
therefore decided that it would not be appropriate to continue
operations on this day. It was then stressed that cyclists were
extremely active all through the week but this had not been
considered due to the surveys being very outdated.
Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning
Manager
Nancy El-Shatoury, Principal
Solicitor
Speakers:
Pat Smith, a Local resident,
made the following points:
The TMP was deficient
as it failed to mention the impacts on Flint Hill, the designated
route to Knoll Road. It was said that this route would be
unworkable due to the road being extremely narrow with a single
footpath. She stated that Flint Hill was a major access point to
Dorking as well as the single access point for the residents of
Goodwin estate which was not considered in the TMP.
That concerns raised
by residents around impacts had not been addressed in the TMP and
that made it unworkable.
JanetHousden, a Local resident, made the
following points:
That the west end of Knoll Road would be used as a
parking bay for HGVs waiting to be dispatched. She stated that
previously, a three minute time limit had been set for the HGVs but
in the latest TMP this time limit had been classified as unworkable
and instead HGVs should instead move as soon as
practicable. This was said to have an
impact on the quality of life for Knoll Road residents as well as
causing dangerous traffic conditions for cars, cyclists and
pedestrians.
She also raised a concern that the banksmen would not have a sufficient view of Knoll
Road to properly control the flow of traffic which could result in
a severe casualty.
Concerns were raised regarding efficiency of radio
contact with drivers.
Vicky Elcoate, a Local resident, made the following
points:
A petition of over
2000 signatories was to be presented at Mole Valley Local Committee
which sought to protect the historic trees found on Coldharbour
Lane. It was explained that residents were concerned by the damage
that could be caused by HGVs to the tree and banks on the
Lane.
Members noted a tree
report previously submitted to the Committee by tMrsElcoate which
stated that any damage to the overhanging and intertwined root
systems of the historic trees would be irreversible. It was
stressed that the TMP did not consider these issues nor provide
mitigation measures to the environmental impacts.
She stated that Leith
Hill Action Group had shown a 3D analysis that showed HGVs could
not clear humps in the road without causing damage to tree
canopies.
Further concerns of
the environmental impacts of the TMP were raised and she asked the
Committee to reject the TMP.
Max Rosenberg, a Local
resident, made the following points:
That the TMP did not
provide sufficient risk management and mitigation as well as not
including vital information of road users. The Committee should not
ignore equestrians because they did not show up in the
survey. He also asked how pedestrians,
which did show up in the survey, were put as a nil
risk.
There was no mention
of the radioactive material being transported.
PDF 259 KB