Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 673 KBVenue: Reigate Town Hall, Castlefield Road, Reigate, Surrey RH2 0SH
Contact: Sarah Quinn, Community Partnership and Committee Officer Reigate Town Hall, Castlefield Road, Reigate, Surrey, RH2 0SH
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE (AGENDA ITEM ONLY)
To receive any apologies for absence. Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Mr Bob Gardner, Ms Barbara Thomson, Cllr Victor Broad, Cllr Adam De Save, Cllr Julian Ellacott and Cllr Mrs Rachel Turner. |
|
|
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING (AGENDA ITEM ONLY)
To approve the minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record. The minutes will be available in the committee room half an hour before the start of the meeting, and are also available online at www.surreycc.gov.uk/reigateandbanstead or by contacting the Community Partnership and Committee Officer. Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes were agreed as a true and accurate record of the meeting. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST (AGENDA ITEM ONLY)
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
Notes: · Each Member must declare any interest that is disclosable under the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, unless it is already listed for that Member in the Council’s Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests.
· 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).
· If the interest has not yet been disclosed in that Register, the Member must, as well as disclosing it at the meeting, notify the Monitoring Officer of it within 28 days.
· If a Member has a disclosable interest, the Member must not vote or speak on the agenda item in which it arises, or do anything to influence other Members in regard to that item. Minutes: There were no declarations of interest. |
|
|
PETITIONS (AGENDA ITEM ONLY)
To receive any petitions in accordance with Standing Order 68. Notice should be given in writing or by email to the Community Partnership and Committee Officer at least 14 days before the meeting. Alternatively, the petition can be submitted on-line through Surrey County Council’s e-petitions website as long as the minimum number of signatures (30) has been reached 14 days before the meeting.
Two petitions received
Minutes: Two petitions were received. |
|
|
Petition - Carshalton Road, Woodmansterne
Response attached Minutes: The Committee received a petition signed by 84 residents, requesting that Surrey County Council put in place a zebra crossing for school children on Carshalton Road, Woodmansterne.
The Committee NOTED the response of the Area Team Manager. |
|
|
Petition - Somers Road, Reigate
Response attached Minutes: A petition was presented by Mrs Katrina Millard, signed by 249 residents, calling for safety measures in Somers Road, Reigate.
The Committee NOTED the response of the Area Team Manager. |
|
|
FORMAL PUBLIC QUESTIONS (AGENDA ITEM ONLY)
To answer any questions from residents or businesses within the Reigate and Banstead Borough area in accordance with Standing Order 69. Notice should be given in writing or by email to the Community Partnership and Committee Officer by 12 noon 4 working days before the meeting. Minutes: Three formal public questions/statements were received. Responses were tabled and are attached to the minutes as Appendix A.
[Professor Swanson asked a supplementary question. He wished to know whether Surrey County Council should routinely ask local Members to contribute to planning consultations. The Area Team Manager responded that all Members receive lists of planning applications, and if members of the public had an issue with an application, they should contact their local Member.
In Mr Parks’ absence, Mr Ken Gulati reiterated that he was only seeking agreement in principle to the proposed 20mph zone.
Mrs Straker asked a supplementary question. She wished to know how a parking restriction between 10am and 11am would help the problem of congestion later in the day. If a one hour per day restriction was the only option, she wished to know if this could be between 2pm and 3pm instead. The Parking Team Manager responded that a longer restriction had originally been advertised but this had received many objections, particularly from parents of children attending Micklefield School. He offered to change the restriction to 2pm – 3pm as requested, and was happy to meet with residents, along with the divisional Member.] |
|
|
FORMAL MEMBER QUESTIONS (AGENDA ITEM ONLY)
To receive any questions from Members under Standing Order 47. Notice should be given in writing to the Community Partnership and Committee Officer before 12 noon 4 working days before the meeting. Minutes: One Member question was received from Ms Barbara Thomson. A response was tabled and is attached to the minutes as Appendix B. This was noted in Ms Thomson’s absence. |
|
|
LOCAL COMMITTEE TASK GROUP REPRESENTATION 2013-14 - VACANCIES [NON-EXECUTIVE FUNCTION]
The Local Committee is asked to appoint Borough Councillors to the vacancies on the Local Sustainable Transport Fund Task Group and the Youth Task Group.
(Report attached) Minutes: No nominations were received for the vacancies on the Local Sustainable Transport Task Group and the Youth Task Group. These task groups will therefore continue with the membership as set out in the report submitted. |
|
|
LOCAL COMMITTEE AND MEMBERS' ALLOCATION FUNDING - UPDATE [FOR INFORMATION ONLY]
Surrey County Council Councillors receive funding to spend on local projects that help to promote social, economic or environmental well-being in the neighbourhoods and communities of Surrey. This funding is known as Members’ Allocation. For the financial year 2013/14 the County Council has allocated £12,876 revenue funding to each County Councillor and £35,000 capital funding to each Local Committee. This report provides an update on the projects that have been funded since May 2013 to date.
(Report and Annexes 1 and 2 attached) Additional documents: Minutes: Resolution:
The Committee NOTED the amounts that have been spent from the Members’ Allocation (revenue) and Local Committee capital budgets, as set out in Annexes 1 and 2 of the report submitted. |
|
Each year Surrey Highways receives requests to change existing or introduce new parking restrictions. These requests are compiled into a district wide review every 12-18 months in Reigate and Banstead.
This report sets out the response to statutory consultation for the locations included in the 2013/14 review. The committee is asked to consider the comments received in response to the statutory consultation and agree how to proceed in each location.
(Report and Annexes 1 and 2 attached) Additional documents: Decision: The Committee AGREED:
(i) The proposals and recommendations in Annex 1 to the report submitted, some amended following statutory consultation.
(ii) That where necessary, the Parking Team Manager, in consultation with the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and local Member, make any necessary adjustments to the proposals following the meeting.
(iii) That the County Council make an Order under the relevant parts of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to impose the waiting and on street parking restrictions in Reigate and Banstead as shown in the Annex to the report submitted (and as subsequently modified by (ii)).
(iv)That the existing text based parking traffic regulation orders are converted to plan based orders.
(v) That the waiting and loading restrictions proposed for the Redhill Balanced Network are implemented ‘as advertised’.
REASONS: Changes to the highway network, the built environment and society mean that parking behaviour changes, and consequently it is necessary for a Highway Authority to carry out regular reviews of waiting and parking restrictions on the highway network.
Following consideration of the comments and objections it is recommended that the waiting restrictions in this report are progressed as they will help to:
· Improve road safety · Increase access for emergency vehicles · Improve access to shops, facilities and businesses · Increase access for refuse vehicles and service vehicles · Ease traffic congestion · Better regulate parking
Minutes: Declarations of Interest: None
Officers attending: David Curl, Parking Strategy and Implementation Team Manager, and Adrian Harris, Engineer, Parking Team
Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: One question (dealt with under Item 5)
Member Discussion – key points:
· The Parking Team Manager explained that there had been a number of late responses to the proposals in Josephine Avenue and Buckland Road, Lower Kingswood, on the grounds that the double yellow lines would make it harder to access the church. The Parking Team Manager accepted these comments but was in agreement with the divisional Member that the proposals should go ahead as advertised because: obstructive parking was an issue on Sundays, not just Monday-Friday; wedding and funeral cars can park on waiting restrictions; loading is permitted on waiting restrictions (except where there are loading restrictions); Blue Badge holders can park for 3 hours on waiting restrictions; there is a church car park within 100 yards and ample parking in Josephine Avenue; this is a safety issue near the junction with the A217. · Concerns were raised regarding the introduction of double yellow lines at Shaw’s Corner, Redhill; the Redhill United Reformed Church has no car park and users of the church, including community groups have to park on street. The Parking Team Manager agreed to look into this. · Members wished to know when a permit scheme would be introduced in Grovehill Road, Redhill. The Parking Team Manager replied that the Redhill Parking Task Group would be looking into this, and the first meeting would be convened shortly. · Support was expressed for the proposals in Garden Close, Banstead and Lymden Gardens, Reigate. · Concerns were expressed that parking restrictions would displace problem parking elsewhere, given that parking was permitted on unrestricted residential roads.
Resolution:
The Committee AGREED:
(i) The proposals and recommendations in Annex 1 to the report submitted, some amended following statutory consultation.
(ii) That where necessary, the Parking Team Manager, in consultation with the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and local Member, make any necessary adjustments to the proposals following the meeting.
(iii) That the County Council make an Order under the relevant parts of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 to impose the waiting and on street parking restrictions in Reigate and Banstead as shown in the Annex to the report submitted (and as subsequently modified by (ii)).
(iv)That the existing text based parking traffic regulation orders are converted to plan based orders.
(v) That the waiting and loading restrictions proposed for the Redhill Balanced Network are implemented ‘as advertised’.
[A revised drawing no. 18012 was tabled, replacing p.112 in the original agenda pack, and is attached to the minutes as Appendix C.]
|
|
|
SURREY FIRE AND RESCUE SERVICE ANNUAL REPORT 2012-13 [FOR INFORMATION ONLY]
This report (appended as Annex 1) outlines the major strands of activity being undertaken within the Reigate and Banstead area by the Surrey Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS) teams based at Reigate and Horley Fire Stations.
(Report and Annex 1 attached) Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of Interest: None
Officers attending: Eddie Roberts, Area Manager East and Stuart de Fraine Ford, Community Impact Officer East, Surrey Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS)
Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None
Member Discussion – key points:
· Discussion took place regarding the difficulty in finding a site for a new fire station in Burgh Heath. The Area Manager reported that SFRS were in discussion with Surrey County Council’s Property Services, and that he hoped to have completed the move by August 2014. He assured Members that contingency plans were in place. · Members wished to know if there were patterns to malicious calls. The Area Manager informed the Committee that malicious calls were recorded on spreadsheets in order that persistent offenders could be targeted. · The Chairman noted that she was pleased to see the number of young people attending Safe Drive Stay Alive and the number of SEN pupils spoken to by the Fire Safety Team. She encouraged all Members to see a performance of Safe Drive Stay Alive. · It was noted that East Surrey Hospital generated many Automatic Fire Alarm (AFA) calls, and Members wished to know how the service was responding to this. The Area Manager replied that since hospitals are considered high risk premises, SFRS has to attend. Ongoing work was taking place with East Surrey Hospital around this. · The Vice-Chairman, speaking in her capacity as Cabinet Associate for Fire and Police Services, thanked SFRS for their work and ensuring that safety messages were reaching the community, particularly vulnerable people. She highlighted the fact that there had been no fatalities through fire in the borough in the past year.
Resolution:
The Local Committee NOTED the report.
[A revised Annex 1 was tabled and is attached to the minutes as Appendix D.]
|
|
|
DEMENTIA FRIENDLY SURREY CHAMPIONS - REIGATE AND BANSTEAD [NON-EXECUTIVE FUNCTION]
The Prime Minister’s Dementia Challenge aims to bring about radical improvements to the lives of people with dementia and their carers. In response to this challenge, Dementia Friendly Surrey was launched to help communities become more inclusive and supportive places for those affected by dementia. By signing up as a Dementia Friendly Surrey Champion, the Local Committee can play a key role in inspiring individuals, groups and organisations to take action in Reigate and Banstead.
(Report and Annex 1 attached) Additional documents: Minutes: Declaration of Interest: None
Officer attending: Liz Tracey, Project Officer – Dementia Friendly Communities, Adult Social Care
Petitions, Public Questions and Statements: None
Member Discussion – key points:
· Members expressed their strong support for the initiative, and highlighted pieces of work that were already contributing to the agenda, such as SFRS and Adult Social Care’s joint work around vulnerable adults, and the Borough Council’s appointment of an Ageing Well Co-ordinator. · Concerns were raised that East Surrey Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) were not involved. The Project Officer clarified that whilst East Surrey CCG had not received Government funding from the Dementia Challenge, they were signed up to the initiative and were promoting it. · Clarification was sought as to whether care homes were part of the initiative. The Project Officer confirmed that they were. · A question was asked regarding the involvement of day services and carers of people with learning disabilities. The Project Officer responded that the needs of people with learning disabilities and dementia were key to the initiative, and work with Surrey and Borders Partnership Trust to fill in the gaps was taking place. Work was also taking place to raise awareness in day services.
Resolution:
The Committee AGREED:
(i) To collectively become a Dementia Friendly Surrey Champion.
(ii) To sign up to the Ageing Well Commitment and select one or more of the pledges set out in Annex 1 to the report submitted at a later date.
(iii) To identify steps to action these pledges in order to nurture a dementia friendly borough.
[A presentation was tabled and is attached to the minutes as Appendix E.]
|
|
|
HIGHWAYS SCHEMES UPDATE REPORT [EXECUTIVE FUNCTION]
At the 4 March 2013 Local Committee, Members agreed a programme of revenue and capital highway works in Reigate and Banstead. Delegated Authority was given to enable the forward programme to be progressed without the need to bring further reports to the Local Committee for decision. This report sets out recent progress.
The estimated cost of implementing the ITS scheme for a pedestrian refuge in Croydon Lane, Banstead is over double the funding allocated by Local Committee for implementation due to the need to divert utility company equipment. This report seeks approval not to progress this at the current time
(Report attached) Decision: The Committee:
NOTED the contents of Annex 1 to the report submitted; and
AGREED that the proposal to provide a pedestrian refuge in Croydon Lane, Banstead is not progressed at the current time.
REASONS: To update the Local Committee on the progress of the highway works programme in Reigate and Banstead and to defer the scheme for Croydon Lane, Banstead. Minutes: Declarations of Interest: None
Officers attending: John Lawlor, South East Area Team Manager and Anita Guy, Senior Engineer, Surrey Highways
Petition, Public Questions, Statements: None
Member Discussion – key points:
· The local Member for Banstead, Woodmansterne and Chipstead expressed a hope that further solutions to the issues in Croydon Lane would be explored. · Members wished to know whether the road maintenance items brought forward, such as Philanthropic Road, Redhill, would take place this year. The Area Team Manager reported that this was on the Operation Horizon list, which would be circulated outside the meeting (Post-meeting note: this has been actioned). · A question was asked regarding the progression of tree and verge works. The Area Team Manager agreed to investigate whether this was being carried out by the Community Gang or the Central Team. · A request was made for updates on footways and the new gulley cleaning contract. The Area Team Manager agreed to seek an update from the Central Team regarding footways, and reported that gulley cleaning would take place in December and March.
Resolution:
The Committee:
(i) NOTED the contents of Annex 1 to the report submitted; and
(ii) AGREED that the proposal to provide a pedestrian refuge in Croydon Lane, Banstead is not progressed at the current time. |
|
|
PROPOSED 20MPH ZONE FOR CHIPSTEAD [EXECUTIVE FUNCTION]
High traffic volumes and speeds on the narrow, winding and unlit roads and lanes of Chipstead – almost all with no pavements – are impeding their use by pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders throughout this semi-rural community. A panel of residents has consulted widely to understand views fully, researched various potential solutions and analysed feedback via village meetings and a questionnaire on their key recommendation. This established overwhelming support for a 20mph zone. Approval in principle is sought from the Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) for such a zone.
(Report and Annexes 1 and 2 attached) Additional documents: Decision: The Committee AGREED that
(i) Investigation by Chipstead Residents’ Association into a 20mph zone for Chipstead takes place, based on the area outlined in Annex 2 to the report submitted.
(ii) A full report and recommendations be brought to a future meeting of the Local Committee following agreement of details with officers and Police.
REASON: To enable further investigation to be undertaken. Minutes: Declarations of Interest: None
Officer attending: Not applicable – report presented by Mr Ken Gulati, local Member for Banstead, Woodmansterne and Chipstead
Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: One statement received.
Member Discussion – key points:
· Concerns were raised that many roads in the borough were being used as “rat runs”, and whilst parts of Chipstead may require a 20mph limit, a blanket limit was unnecessary, particularly given that Chipstead did not have a school and the zone would not be enforceable by the police. It was also noted that Hazelwood Lane already had a restriction on lorries. · Concern was also raised regarding a previous traffic calming scheme instigated by Chipstead Residents’ Association. · Members sought clarification that no direct funding would be required for the proposal. The Highways Area Team Manager confirmed that the scheme was not on the forward programme for SCC funding at the moment. · Some Members supported the proposal on the grounds that a blanket 20mph zone would prevent displacement of traffic, and that the community were fully supportive. It was also noted that 20mph zones were common in other parts of the country. Others felt that whilst it would be useful to have a large scale 20mph experiment in Surrey, it was difficult to approve the scheme in principle without knowing the costs. · An amended recommendation was proposed by the Vice-Chairman, and seconded by Mr Nick Harrison and Dr Zully Grant-Duff. This was put to the vote and carried.
Resolution:
The Committee AGREED that:
(i) Investigation by Chipstead Residents’ Association into a 20mph zone for Chipstead takes place, based on the area outlined in Annex 2 to the report submitted.
(ii) A full report and recommendations be brought to a future meeting of the Local Committee following agreement of details with officers and Police. |
|
|
PROPOSED HIGHWAYS IMPROVEMENTS - LANGSHOTT, HORLEY [EXECUTIVE FUNCTION]
To deliver the bus route, as set out in the Horley Masterplan. Surrey County Council have commissioned independent transport consultants to undertake a study considering access options for the Horley North East Sector development, known as and referred to in this report as ‘the Acres’. The study considers options for both on-site and off-site bus infrastructure and assesses these against a range of criteria including, accessibility, bus operations, highway safety and feasibility.
The purpose of this officer report is to advise the Local Committee of the outcomes of the study and agree the necessary highway works, including associated traffic regulation orders.
(Report and Annexes 1 to 4 attached) Additional documents: Decision: The Committee AGREED that:
(i) Authority is given to support the scheme to reconstruct Langshott and provide passing places and a footway to facilitate the bus service, subject to the identification of available funding, as set out in Option 3c.
(ii) To authorise the advertisement and introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order to reduce the speed limit to 30mph.
(iii) To authorise the advertisement and introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order for the prohibition and restriction of waiting, loading and unloading on Langshott, to avoid vehicles causing an obstruction to the bus route.
(iv)To authorise the advertisement and introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order for the “Bus Only Access” from The Acres onto Langshott.
(v) That the consideration and resolution of any representations received as a result of advertising the above Traffic Regulation Orders be delegated to the South East Surrey Area Team Manager in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Local Committee and local elected Members.
REASONS:
(i) To facilitate the bus route, as approved as part of the Horley Masterplan proposals and planning permission for The Acres.
(ii) To meet the aims of the Horley Masterplan and comply with the Outline Planning Permission for the site and legal requirements of the Section 106 Agreement.
(iii) To provide safe access for all highway users in accordance with Surrey County Council’s Local Transport Plan and national and local policy guidance. Minutes: Declarations of Interest: None
Officer attending: Dave Taylor, Project Engineer, Economy, Transport and Planning
Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None
Member Discussion – key points:
· The Chairman, also local Member for Horley East, thanked the Project Engineer and his team for the thoroughness of their work. She noted that the input of residents had been excellent, and that the Farmhouse pub had been helpful in enabling meetings to be held, often at short notice. · The Vice-Chairman, also local Member for Horley West, Salfords and Sidlow, noted that this issue had been ongoing for many years, and that she had been involved with partners in obtaining funding for the Fastway scheme from central Government, resulting in a scheme which served all parts of the community. She was aware of residents’ concerns, but understood that the road needed to be improved in order for the bus to safely access it.
Resolution:
The Committee AGREED that:
(i) Authority is given to support the scheme to reconstruct Langshott and provide passing places and a footway to facilitate the bus service, subject to the identification of available funding, as set out in Option 3c.
(ii) To authorise the advertisement and introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order to reduce the speed limit to 30mph.
(iii) To authorise the advertisement and introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order for the prohibition and restriction of waiting, loading and unloading on Langshott, to avoid vehicles causing an obstruction to the bus route.
(iv)To authorise the advertisement and introduction of a Traffic Regulation Order for the “Bus Only Access” from The Acres onto Langshott.
(v) That the consideration and resolution of any representations received as a result of advertising the above Traffic Regulation Orders be delegated to the South East Surrey Area Team Manager in consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Local Committee and local elected Members.
|
|
|
REDHILL BALANCED NETWORK - UPDATE [EXECUTIVE FUNCTION]
This paper is to update members on the current status of the Redhill Balanced Network project and ask for approval of proposed flat top road tables at specific crossing points within the town centre highway network.
The dovetailing of the Redhill Balanced Network and Local Sustainable Transport Fund projects has highlighted the need for an additional segregated cycle route on Queensway.
The review of bus stop facilities and requirements for new bus stops has indicated the need for Bus Stop Clearways at bus stops within the town centre.
Some minor changes to the road layout has meant that there will be the need to make some minor amendments to the existing waiting restrictions.
The proposals for Station Road East have been developed further following consultation during the winter of 2012/13. These will now be subject to further consultation during the autumn period 2013.
(Report and Annexes A to C attached) Additional documents: Decision: The Committee AGREED:
To the proposed flat top tables indicated in Annex B1 to the report submitted, and in Annex A plan numbers 101 and 111, and to authorise the advertisement of an appropriate Notice, and to note the treatments to the crossings in Annex B2 to the report submitted.
Not to advertise the possible flat top road tables indicated in Annex B1 to the report submitted, and in Annex A plan numbers 102 and 104 at this time, due to the comments received from the bus operators, and to continue work with the bus operators to try and find an amicable solution.
To the proposed segregated cycle/footway route located in Queensway as indicated in Annex A to the report submitted on plan 111.
To the proposed location of Bus Stop Clearways at bus stops identified within the town centre as indicated in Annex A to the report submitted on plans 101, 102, 106, 108, 109, 110 and 111.
That if objections are received to the advertisement of the legal notices and traffic orders, the Area Team Manager is authorised to try and resolve them in consultation with the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Divisional Member and Project Manager, and decide whether or not they should be acceded to and therefore whether the orders should be made, with or without modification.
To the proposed options for the Station Road East public realm, as indicated in Annex C to the report submitted, and agreed that these options be the subject of a public consultation between 23 September and 3 November (6 weeks) and the feedback from the consultation is reviewed by the Member task group and the Local Committee.
REASONS: The Local Committee was asked to approve the proposals for the installation of flat top road tables at certain crossing points to enable improved benefits for pedestrians and cyclists.
The introduction of the short section of segregated cycle route between Station Road and High Street along the southern footway of Queensway will improve connectivity for cyclists within the town centre.
The dovetailing of both the Redhill Balanced Network and Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF) projects has provided an opportunity to review existing bus stop infrastructure and provide new stops on the planned two-way system on London Road – Queensway – St Matthew’s Road – Cromwell Road. This review has highlighted the need for bus stop clearways at these bus stops
Feedback from the consultation on the Station Road scheme during the winter 2012-13 has enabled development of these proposals and two options have now been provided. These two options will be the subject of public consultation. Minutes: The Vice-Chairman took the chair for this item.
Declarations of Interest: None
Officers attending: Paul Fishwick, Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF) Project Manager and Narendra Mistry, Principal Design Engineer, Environment and Infrastructure
Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None
Member Discussion – key points:
· The local Member for Redhill West and Meadvale reported that Reigate and Banstead Borough Council was contributing £1.1.million to the project. She confirmed that she was happy with the proposals for Station Road East and that discussions regarding the accommodation of minicabs had been positive. · The local Member for Redhill East expressed support for the proposals as they currently stood, but sought assurance that the proposed bollards would not break, and that cycle lanes crossing entrances and junctions would be marked. He also expressed concern that a new pinch point would be created near McDonalds at the crossing points at the bus station. The Project Manager agreed to look at best practice for rise and fall bollards. Signs and lining across junctions would be provided and the raised tables would assist with safety. He also agreed to look at the bus station crossing points. · The Vice-Chairman thanked the task group for their input.
Resolution:
The Committee AGREED:
(i) To the proposed flat top tables indicated in Annex B1 to the report submitted, and in Annex A plan numbers 101 and 111, and to authorise the advertisement of an appropriate Notice, and to note the treatments to the crossings in Annex B2 to the report submitted.
(ii) Not to advertise the possible flat top road tables indicated in Annex B1 to the report submitted, and in Annex A plan numbers 102 and 104 at this time, due to the comments received from the bus operators, and to continue work with the bus operators to try and find an amicable solution.
(iii) To the proposed segregated cycle/footway route located in Queensway as indicated in Annex A to the report submitted on plan 111.
(iv)To the proposed location of Bus Stop Clearways at bus stops identified within the town centre as indicated in Annex A to the report submitted on plans 101, 102, 106, 108, 109, 110 and 111.
(v) That if objections are received to the advertisement of the legal notices and traffic orders, the Area Team Manager is authorised to try and resolve them in consultation with the Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Divisional Member and Project Manager, and decide whether or not they should be acceded to and therefore whether the orders should be made, with or without modification.
(vi)To the proposed options for the Station Road East public realm, as indicated in Annex C to the report submitted, and agreed that these options be the subject of a public consultation between 23 September and 3 November (6 weeks) and the feedback from the consultation is reviewed by the Member task group and the Local Committee. |
|
|
LOCAL SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT FUND - TRAVEL SMART PROGRAMME [FOR INFORMATION ONLY]
In June 2012, Surrey County Council was successful in securing an award of £14.3million in grant funding from the Department of Transport’s (DfT) Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF). This is in addition to the award of £3.9million LSTF Key Component funding secured in July 2011.
Both grants are for the period up to 31 March 2015, and jointly form the Surrey Travel SMART programme. As part of the Surrey Travel SMART programme, a total of £4.8million has been allocated for sustainable travel improvements in Redhill/Reigate.
This report asks Members to note the LSTF Annual Report submitted to the DfT in July 2013 and progress made on the programme to date.
There are no decisions to be made as part of this report.
(Report and Annex 1 attached) Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of Interest: None
Officer attending: Marc Woodall, Travel SMART Engagement Team Manager
Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None
Member Discussion – key points:
· Members wished to know when the Travel SMART shop in the Belfry was due to open. The Engagement Manager reported that the lease had been signed and agreed and a manager was in place. Other partners would be participating too, and it was hoped that the shop would open in mid-October. An update would be provided to the LSTF Task Group at its next meeting on 24 September. · Members asked whether it would be possible to hold a Cycling Festival in Redhill or Merstham in 2014. The Engagement Manager responded that the Cycling Festival was due to become an annual event, and Priory Park had been a fantastic venue. However, it may be possible to hold an additional event in Redhill or Merstham.
Resolution:
The Committee NOTED:
(i) The LSTF Annual Report for 2012/13.
(ii) Progress made to date on the Travel SMART programme.
(iii) The forward plan for decisions as part of the Travel SMART programme. |
|
|
CABINET FORWARD PLAN [AGENDA ITEM ONLY]
Report attached Minutes: Resolution:
The Committee NOTED the report for information.
[The Local Divisional Member for Nork and Tattenhams reported that he had met with volunteers and staff at the Tattenhams Community Partnered Library and that this was working very well.
The Chairman agreed to write to the Cabinet Member for Schools and Learning expressing the Committee’s support for new and expanded schools in the borough.] |
|
|
LOCAL COMMITTEE FORWARD PLAN [AGENDA ITEM ONLY]
Report attached Minutes: Resolution:
The Committee NOTED the report for information. |
|