Agenda, decisions and minutes

Reigate and Banstead Local Committee
Monday, 12 September 2016 2.00 pm

Venue: Reigate Town Hall, Castlefield Road, Reigate, Surrey RH2 0SH

Contact: Susan Briant / Sarah Quinn, Community Partnership and Committee Officers  Reigate Town Hall, Castlefield Road, Reigate, Surrey RH2 0SH

Items
No. Item

85/16

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE (AGENDA ITEM ONLY)

86/16

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING (AGENDA ITEM ONLY) pdf icon PDF 220 KB

    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, or online at www.surreycc.gov.uk/reigateandbanstead or by contacting the Community Partnership and Committee Officer.

    Minutes:

    It was requested that page 6, 6th paragraph be amended from ‘Members felt that Reigate and Banstead received a disproportionate amount’  to ‘Members felt that Reigate and Banstead received ‘disproportionately less’.

     

    The minutes were otherwise accepted as a true record of the meeting held on 6 June 2016.

87/16

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:

    Dr Grant-Duff and Cllr Tarrant declared that they lived in roads that were included in the proposals outlined in Item 13, Annual Parking Review.

88/16

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.

     

89/16

PETITION TO RESURFACE NETHERNE LANE pdf icon PDF 100 KB

    The road surface at various points on Netherne Lane is blighted by numerous pot holes but it is most serious as you travel the last 25 yards or so of Netherne Lane. This is a danger to all road users and especially any cyclists who use this road at night, where there is limited lighting to help make the damaged road surface more visible.

    Minutes:

    A petition containing 45 signatures to resurface the road at the bottom of Netherne Lane, Hooley (near where it meets Dean Lane) was received from Mr Lee Sheldon. Mr Sheldon sent his apologies for not being able to attend the meeting. A response was provided by the Highways Team and included in the document pack. Members had no further comment.

90/16

PETITION TO INSTALL A PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ON VICTORIA ROAD, HORLEY pdf icon PDF 106 KB

    The residents of Magnolia Court are having increasing problems crossing safely on Victoria Road, Horley and request the installation of a pedestrian crossing near the medical centre, library or Lidls.

    Minutes:

    A petition containing 33 signatures to install a pedestrian crossing on Victoria Road, Horley near the medical centre, library or Lidls was received from Mr Bryan Middleton. Mr Middleton said he was presenting the petition on behalf of the residents of Magnolia Court. He said that the average age of the petitioners was 81 years and due to the speed of the traffic they were having difficulty crossing Victoria Road to access the medical centre, library and supermarket. He noted that East Grinstead and Reigate have a 20 mph limit in the town centre to assist pedestrians but his preference was to have a pedestrian crossing.

     

    The Area Highway Manager thanked Mr Middleton for presenting the petition and  said that the proposed new pedestrian crossing on Victoria Road had been added to the programme of highway works for Reigate and Banstead but it was still at an early stage.  It was noted that the proposed pedestrian crossing would be positioned near to the medical centre. The proposal was supported by a number of Members.

91/16

PETITION FOR LIMITED PARKING RESTRICTIONS AT BALCOMBE GARDENS, HORLEY pdf icon PDF 103 KB

    A petition for a review and the potential introduction of limited parking restrictions at Balcombe Gardens, Horley between the hours of 10:00 – 12:00 Monday to Friday inclusive.

    Minutes:

    A petition containing 66 signatures entitled ‘We the following residents of Balcombe Gardens, Horley support the request for a review and the potential introduction of limited parking restrictions in our road between the hours of 10:00 – 12:00, Monday – Friday’ was presented by Ms Tracey and Mrs Earle. They stated that there had been an increase in non-resident parking in Balcombe Gardens and commuters and holiday makers were using the road to park their vehicles. Cars had been left for 1 or 2 weeks and occasionally longer. On occasions trade vehicles were not able to deliver parcels and had to return goods to store without being delivered. Similarly rubbish had not been cleared as refuse lorries were not able to gain access.  Parking on the verges had altered the character of the road. Photographs of parked vehicles were tabled at the meeting (see Annex 1 to the minutes).

     

    A number of Members supported the petition and it was noted that parking limitations had been proposed and included in Item 13, Annual Parking Review and that the public consultation with residents would commence in November.

     

92/16

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:

    None received.

93/16

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 received from Ms Thomson. See Annex 2 to the minutes.

     

94/16

LOCAL COMMITTEE DECISION TRACKER (FOR INFORMATION) pdf icon PDF 119 KB

    To note progress against decisions taken at previous meetings.

    Minutes:

    The Decision Tracker was noted.

     

    [A request was made for an update on the Variable Message Signs, particularly in Redhill, as due to the limited parking during the redevelopment the signs need to be in place by November. It was agreed that this be discussed outside the meeting.

     

    A request was also made that the matter of HGV movements be placed on the Decision Tracker in order that any progress could be monitored].

95/16

GREATER REDHILL SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT PACKAGE (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION - FOR DECISION) pdf icon PDF 127 KB

    This report is to brief the Local Committee Members on the Greater Redhill Sustainable Transport Package (STP). Phase 1 of scheme delivery commenced October 2015, with the full project due to be completed March 2018. The report provides a summary update of what has been delivered to date. The programme of works for the remainder of the project is in the final stages of development and will require local committee approval to proceed. The project is subject to tight timescales for the scheme delivery.

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    The Committee agreed to:

     

    (i)  note the phase 1 scheme delivery completed so far

     

    (ii)  note the programme of works in development for scheme delivery during 2016/17

          and 2017/18.

     

    (iii) delegate authority to the Area Highways Manager in consultation with the

         Chairman, Vice Chairman, the Greater Redhill STP Task Group and Transport

         Strategy Project Manager to identify and prioritise the schemes to take forward to

         delivery, including seeking permissions for the advertisement of legal notices and

         traffic orders as required.

     

    REASONS:

    To ensure that the Local Committee is kept fully informed of scheme progress, Members are asked to note the scheme delivery completed to date. The phase 1 delivery programme for 2015/16 was approved at the September 2015 Local Committee.

     

    The C2C LEP funding allocated to this project is subject to a legal agreement between Surrey County Council as the delivery body, and West Sussex County Council as the Accountable Body for the C2C LEP. Project funding has been spent in accordance with this agreement.

     

    Progress of the design work to develop the programme of improvements for scheme delivery during 201617 and 2017/18 was approved at the September 2015 Local Committee. The Officer Project Board has taken this forward. The programme of works for the remainder of the project is in the final stages of development and was discussed in detail at the Member Task Group on 29 June. An update is provided for the full committee within this report. An additional Member Task Group is scheduled for 8 September to review the current scheme proposals.

     

    Due to tight timescales for delivery of the remaining programme it was agreed at the Member Task Group that approval of this programme, including seeking permissions for the advertisement of legal notices and traffic orders as required, should be delegated to the Area Highways Manager in consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Local Committee, and the Transport Strategy Project Manager. The Chairman and Vice Chairman are both members of the Member Task Group, and therefore it is proposed to seek approvals to proceed through the Task Group at a dedicated meeting planned for the start of October when the final proposed programme will be available. Subject to this approval, a further report will be brought to the December Local Committee to provide an update on the programme being taken forward to delivery.

     

    Regular project update reports have been provided to the Local Committee within the Local Area Highways reporting.

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officers attending: Neil McClure, Project Manager, Transport Policy

     

    Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None

     

    Member Discussion – key points:

     

    The Vice-Chairman welcomed Neil McClure who presented the report.  Neil outlined the work completed to date and referred Members to the March and July Newsletters included in the document pack (pages 33 – 37 inclusive). Neil stated that in order to meet the LEP timescales there was an urgent need to press forward to detailed design and delivery of the prioritised schemes. He reported that the proposed Phase 2 programme had been approved by the Greater Redhill Sustainable Transport Task Group on 8 September.  The Task Group had agreed to take forward the cycle/pedestrian improvements detailed in sections 5,6,7,and 8, and the cycle parking at Earlswood Station listed as scheme section 16. Officers have been asked to ensure that works on the A23 tie in with local access routes to the NCR21. Neil said a full report will be presented to the December Local Committee.

     

    Members expressed concern that the introduction of cycle routes was displacing parking spaces and it was suggested that somewhere else be found for cars to park before cycle routes were introduced.

     

     

    The Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) AGREED to:

     

    (i)  note the phase 1 scheme delivery completed so far

     

    (ii)  note the programme of works in development for scheme delivery during 2016/17

          and 2017/18.

     

    (iii) delegate authority to the Area Highways Manager in consultation with the

         Chairman, Vice Chairman, the Greater Redhill STP Task Group and Transport

         Strategy Project Manager to identify and prioritise the schemes to take forward to

         delivery, including seeking permissions for the advertisement of legal notices and

         traffic orders as required.

     

96/16

EPSOM AND BANSTEAD SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT PACKAGE SCHEME (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION - FOR INFORMATION) pdf icon PDF 125 KB

    This paper is to brief the Local Committee Members on the Epsom Banstead Sustainable Transport Package (STP). The scheme is currently being developed into a business case for submission to the Coast to Capital (C2C) Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) in a bid for funding from the Local Growth Award. The bid submission date is expected at the end of September 2016, although a firm date is still to be confirmed by the LEP.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officers attending: Neil McClure, Project Manager, Transport Policy

     

    Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None

     

    Member Discussion – key points:

     

     

    Neil briefed Members on progress to date. The public consultation was carried out between 27 June and 14 August. Five hundred and four questionnaires were completed and email responses were also received from a number of organisations including Residents Associations, Highways England and Natural England.  An analysis of the consultation was included in the report. In general there was positive overall support for the proposed schemes. The proposed new crossing on the A217 was supported by a petition which was presented to the Local Committee (R&B) on 7 March 2016. The public had identified Real Time Information as a key measure that would encourage them to start using a bus or use a bus more often. (Members noted that the real time passenger information (RTPI) at Redhill station was now functioning correctly. Free wifi on board buses was a less popular measure, although still considered attractive by the public for encouraging greater bus usage. 

     

    Neil stated that the business case funding bid was due to be submitted this autumn but the exact date had not yet been confirmed by the LEP. It was noted that it was a scalable scheme and final costs would not be known until designs had been finalised. On current timescales, construction was expected to commence in the first quarter 2017 and be completed 2018/19.

     

    Members thanked Neil and his team for their support. 

     

    The Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) NOTED the:

     

    (i)  project progress to date;

    (ii) results of the high level analysis of the public engagement on the proposed

         Schemes (Annex 1 to the report).

     

     

97/16

HIGHWAY SCHEMES UPDATE (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION - FOR INFORMATION) pdf icon PDF 107 KB

    At the 14 December 2015 Local Committee, Members agreed a programme of revenue and capital highway works in Reigate and Banstead.  An amended programme of works was agreed on 7 March 2016 to take account of the reduced revenue budget.  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 report also updates Members on the progress of the Wider Network Benefits (East) scheme and the number of enquiries received from customers.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officers attending: Zena Curry, Area Highway Manager

     

    Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None

     

    Member Discussion – key points:

     

     

    The Vice-Chairman welcomed Zena Curry who presented the report. Zena advised Members that following discussion with the Chairman there was an amendment to page 95, Victoria Road, Horley – Pedestrian Crossing  to delete ‘Consort Way’ and insert ‘Kings Road (just north of Kings Road junction).

     

    Zena confirmed that the installation of average speed cameras on the A217 north of the M25 will be completed within the financial year. Members asked if the use of average speed cameras was being considered elsewhere. Zena said that the project manager concerned was not present at the meeting but she believed other roads in the borough may be considered. However not all roads were suitable as they could not take the technology and other measures to control speed might be more appropriate.

     

    Members asked when Albert Road and Lumley Road, Horley would be restored to two-way working throughout their length. It was noted that parking was an issue on these roads. It was suggested that this might be included in the parking review.

     

     

    The Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) NOTED:

     

    (i) the contents of the report.

98/16

DRAINAGE AND STRUCTURES PROGRAMME (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION - FOR INFORMATION) pdf icon PDF 99 KB

    At cabinet in June 2016, the 15 year Highway Asset Strategy for assets including Roads, Pavements, Structures and Drainage was approved. This 15 year strategy will be split into three 5 year programmes of work. This report sets out how the 5 year programmes for Structures and Drainage are being developed and invites the Local Committee to help shape the programmes.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officers attending: Zena Curry, Area Highway Manager

     

    Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None

     

    Member Discussion – key points:

     

     

    Zena Curry stated that Members were being invited to participate in the structures and drainage programme and:

    (i)  identify structures which they feel have heritage or local community importance

         and should be prioritised for capital maintenance programmes; and

    (ii) review the recorded impacts identified on the Wetspots database and provide

         updated information if the current issue(s) is not properly represented.

     

    Zena said the wetspot list is available on the Surrey County Council website.  The registered structures are also on the map. Members are invited to contact Daniel Robinson about structures and Owen Lee about drainage.

     

     

    The Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) NOTED the report:

     

     

     

    Mrs Ross-Tomlin arrived 2.45pm and took the chair.

     

99/16

LOCAL COMMITTEE FUNDING OF COMMUNITY SAFETY PROJECTS (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION - FOR DECISION) pdf icon PDF 168 KB

    The Local Committee has a delegated budget of £3,000 for community safety projects. This report recommends the introduction of a simple process enabling the local Community Safety Partnership and other organisations to outline their planned spend for projects that meet the criteria outlined in this report.

     

    Decision:

    The Committee agreed that:

     

    (i) the delegated Community Safety budget of £3,000 per Local Committee

         for 2016/17 is to be retained by the Community Partnership Team, on

         behalf of the Local Committee, and that the Community Safety Partnership

         is invited to submit proposals that meet the criteria and principles for

         funding, as defined at paragraph 2.6 of the report, with 2.6(b) amended to

         restrict expenditure to projects within Reigate and Banstead.

     

    (ii) authority is delegated to the Community Partnership Manager, in

         consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Local

         Committee, to authorise the expenditure of the Community Safety budget

         in accordance with the criteria and principles stated at paragraph 2.6 of

         this report;

     

    (iii) the Committee receives a report detailing the projects that were

          successful in being awarded the local community safety funding and the

          outcomes and impact they have achieved.

     

    REASONS:

    A recent analysis of how the local committees’ community safety funds were spent in 2015-16 revealed a mixed picture. While there were some notable examples of good practice, much of the funding was spent on activities that could have otherwise been delivered either through existing partnership work or by closer synergy with Surrey’s established, strategic community safety projects. This report makes recommendations that are intended to secure greater oversight of the committee’s expenditure and better value for money for projects that help to achieve the County’s community safety priorities.

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officers attending: Sarah Quinn, Community Partnership and Committee Officer

                                    (Reigate and Banstead)

     

    Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None

     

    Member Discussion – key points:

     

     

    The Chairman welcomed Sarah Quinn who presented the report on behalf of Gordon Falconer, Community Safety Manager.

     

    It was noted that the delegated budget for community safety had traditionally been transferred to the local Community Safety Partnership (CSP) to assist efforts to tackle crime and antisocial behaviour.  The proposal before the committee was to change the procedure so that the Community Partnership Team retain the delegated funding on behalf of the Local Committee. The CSP would then be invited to present projects to the committee and bid for funding. The new procedure would give the committee more control over the funding.

     

    It was noted that all boroughs / districts in Surrey have the same amount of funding for community safety.  Members suggested that the funding should be related to the size of the borough / district.

     

    It was proposed and seconded that paragraph 2.6 (b) be amended to restrict expenditure to projects within the Reigate and Banstead geographical area.

     

     

    The Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) AGREED that:

     

    (i) the delegated Community Safety budget of £3,000 per Local Committee

         for 2016/17 is to be retained by the Community Partnership Team, on

         behalf of the Local Committee, and that the Community Safety Partnership

         is invited to submit proposals that meet the criteria and principles for

         funding, as defined at paragraph 2.6 of the report, with 2.6(b) amended to

         restrict expenditure to projects within Reigate and Banstead.

     

    (ii) authority is delegated to the Community Partnership Manager, in

         consultation with the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Local

         Committee, to authorise the expenditure of the Community Safety budget

         in accordance with the criteria and principles stated at paragraph 2.6 of

         this report;

     

    (iii) the Committee receives a report detailing the projects that were

          successful in being awarded the local community safety funding and the

          outcomes and impact they have achieved.

     

100/16

ANNUAL PARKING REVIEW (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION - FOR DECISION) pdf icon PDF 103 KB

    Each year Surrey Highways receives requests to change existing or introduce new parking restrictions. These requests are compiled and reviewed in a borough wide process. To progress the 2016 review the Local Committee is asked to approve statutory consultation for changes to on-street parking restrictions at the locations listed in the annexes to the report.

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    The Committee agreed:

     

    (i)  the proposals in Annexes 1 and 2 (as amended to include drawings 68 and 69,

         and to include the removal of a parking bay from in front of a vehicle

         crossover outside 111A The Crescent, Horley, and its replacement with a

         single yellow line, and to include Avenue Gardens, Horley in the Balcombe

         Gardens scheme);

     

    (ii)  that if necessary, adjustments can be made to the proposals agreed at the meeting 

          by the Parking Strategy and Implementation Team Manager in consultation with the

          Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Divisional Member prior to statutory consultation;

     

    (iii) the intention of the County Council to make Traffic Regulation Orders 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 Annexes (and

          as subsequently modified by ii) is advertised and that if no objections are

          maintained, the order is made;

     

    (iv) that if there are unresolved objections, they will be dealt with in accordance with the

          County Council’s scheme of delegation by the Parking Strategy and Implementation

          Team Manager, in consultation with the Chairman, Vice Chairman of this committee

          and the Divisional Member;

     

    (v) that if necessary the Parking Strategy and Implementation Team Manager will report

         the objection back to the Local Committee for resolution;

     

    (vi) to the new process for implementation of new school keep clear markings (SKCs),

          and to agree to revoke the traffic regulation orders for existing SKCs across Reigate

          and Banstead, in light of changes in government legislation.

     

     

    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.

     

    It is recommended that the waiting restrictions in this report (as amended) are progressed as they will help to:

     

          improve road safety

          increase access for emergency vehicles

          help residents park nearer their homes

          improve access to shops, facilities and businesses

          increase access for refuse vehicles, buses and service vehicles

          ease traffic congestion

          better regulate parking

     

    Changes in government legislation mean that a traffic regulation order (TRO) is no longer required to make school keep clear markings enforceable. We are therefore suggesting that the existing traffic orders for these markings be revoked, and that a new process to deal with the implementation of any new markings be set up.

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: Dr Grant-Duff and Cllr Tarrant declared that they lived in roads that

                                              were included in the proposals outlined in Item 13, Annual Parking

                                              Review.

     

    Officers attending: Rikki Hill, Parking Project Team Leader

     

    Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: See Petition 4c (Limited parking restrictions at

                                                                          Balcombe Gardens, Horley)

     

    Member Discussion – key points:

     

     

    The Chairman welcomed Rikki Hill who presented the report. Rikki listed a number of amendments to the report and annexes including:

     

    Drawing 36: Russells Crescent, Horley (pg 134) – change location description from between Burton Close and Massetts Road to along the whole road.

     

    Drawing 40: Croydon Road, Reigate (pg 134) – change the times of operation in the description of controls from (0800 – 1800, Mon – Sat) to 10am – 4pm, Monday – Friday.

     

    Drawing 41 (Blackborough Road, Blackborough Close) (pg 134) - should have also included Deerings Road, Reigate Road, which is shown on the drawing but was omitted from the explanation.

     

    Drawing 45 Raglan Road (pg 135) – was spelt incorrectly as ‘Raglen’.

     

    Drawing 51 Brambletye Park Road / Prines Road (pg 135) should read Brambletye Park Road / Princes Road.

     

    Drawing 38: Balcombe Gardens, Horley (pg 173) – the single yellow line shown in Silverlea Gardens should be throughout the length of Balcombe Gardens and not Silverlea Gardens.

     

     

    A revised list was tabled at the meeting (see Annex 3 to the minutes).

     

     

    Problems with vehicles mounting pavements was discussed, particularly in Radnor Court. Members agreed to discuss with officers outside the meeting.

     

    Members discussed and agreed the removal of a parking bay from in front of a vehicle

    crossover outside 111A The Crescent, Horley, and its replacement with a single yellow line.

     

    It was noted that a petition concerning parking in the Eastgate area had been submitted to Reigate and Banstead Borough Council.  

     

    Members discussed Brighton Road, Banstead and cars parking in the acceleration and deceleration lanes in the sight lines at the junction. The possibility of extending the double yellow lines northwards was discussed.

     

    Members discussed Drawing 62 (pg 197) Fir Tree Road, Nork and Tattenhams and the impact of parking restrictions on local shops. Rikki agreed to have a look at the matter.

     

    Members agreed to include Avenue Gardens, Horley in the Balcombe Gardens scheme and not to impose parking restrictions in Silverlea Gardens for the moment, unless there was an impact from the restrictions in the other roads.  The proposed restrictions from 10am – 12 noon on both sides of Balcombe Gardens was discussed and it was thought that this might cause a potential problem for some residents. It was suggested that this might be avoided if parking restrictions were imposed from 10am – 12 noon on one side of Balcombe Gardens and from 12 noon – 2pm on the other side.

     

     

    The Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) AGREED:

     

    (i)  the proposals in Annexes 1 and 2 (as amended to include drawings 68 and 69,

         and to include the removal of a  ...  view the full minutes text for item 100/16

Annex 1 - Balcombe Road, Horley - Petition pdf icon PDF 19 MB

Annex 2 - Member Question pdf icon PDF 70 KB

Annex 3 - Parking Review - revised annexes pdf icon PDF 162 KB

Additional documents: