Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 464 KBVenue: Reigate Town Hall, Castlefield Road, Reigate, Surrey RH2 0SH
Contact: Sarah Smith, Partnership Committee Officer Reigate Town Hall, Castlefield Road, Reigate, Surrey RH2 0SH
| No. | Item | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
To receive any apologies for absence. Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Ken Gulati, Cllr Derek Allcard and Cllr Michael Blacker. |
|||||
|
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
To approve the minutes of the meeting on 21 June 2017 as a correct record.
Minutes: It was agreed that the minutes of the meeting from 21 June 2017 were a true record. |
|||||
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
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 Members 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 Minutes: No declarations of interest were received. |
|||||
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.
One petition has been received from : George Curry on behalf of the Walton & Tadworth Traders (300 signatures)
Petition details: There are numerous parking bays in Walton and Tadworth outside the shops which do not have any time restriction. The result of this is that there is a problem with persistent all day parking between 9am and 5pm, without any car movement, stopping the shops from benefitting from passing trade and deterring local customers.
The vehicles which are parked all day are usually the same vehicles, either commuters using the train at Tadworth or employees of a particular business who despite being spoken to by the shops and their employers refuse to park elsewhere. The bays requested are typically empty in the evenings after 6pm Monday to Friday suggesting that it is not local residents causing this issue.
It is proposed that to solve this issue a small number (in comparison to the current number of nonrestricted bays) of parking bays are given a 2hr time limit with no return between 9 am and 5pm Monday to Friday as seen elsewhere in Walton & Tadworth.
Additional documents: Minutes: No declarations of interest.
George Curry presented his petition (see Supplementary agenda papers)
1. Cllr Turner commented that the introduction of a designated disabled parking space, that was unlikely to be in constant use, would deprive the village of a general space, but was happy to be guided by officers on the matter. 2. The Chairman confirmed local committee support for the proposals ahead of the parking review later in the year.
|
|||||
|
FORMAL PUBLIC QUESTIONS
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 Partnership Committee Officer by 12 noon 4 working days before the meeting. Minutes: No declarations of interest.
Officers present:
Zena Curry, Area Highways Manager Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer
1. George Curry had submitted a formal question and received a formal response ahead of the meeting (see Supplementary agenda papers)
2. The Chairman confirmed he had seen the problem for himself and that it would be added to the list of schemes to be considered for funding.
|
|||||
|
FORMAL MEMBER QUESTIONS
To receive any questions from Members under Standing Order 47. Notice should be given in writing to the Partnership Committee Officer before 12 noon 4 working days before the meeting. Minutes: No declarations of interest
Officers present:
Zena Curry, Area Highways Manager Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer
1. Ken Gulati had submitted a formal question and received a response (see Supplementary agenda papers).
2. The Member was not present to ask a supplementary. |
|||||
|
RECOMMENDATION TRACKER
The tracker monitors the progress of the decisions and recommendations that the Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) has agreed. Minutes: No declarations of interest
Officers present: Zena Curry, Area Highways Manager (AHM) Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer
1. Page 12 (item 7) The divisional member (Redhill West & Meadvale) requested that this item be re-classified on the tracker. Pendleton Road is still being used as a cut through by lorries from several companies, but by Britannia in particular and the road surface is disintegrating as a result. However improving the junction as part of the Greater Redhill STP is the only way to address this issue. The Area Highways Manager will engage with the incoming officer responsible for freight movements to look at signage but the junction as a whole needs to be improved to address the problem. 2. Page 12 (item 12) It was noted that there was an error in the update where it should have read Buckland ‘Lane’ instead of ‘Road’. 3. Page 15 (item 10) Verbal update from AHM that the average speed cameras should be installed during first or second week of October. 4. Page 11 (item 9) Query raised as to whether this item should be classified as ‘Action Closed’. To be followed up after the meeting. 5. Page 18 (item 13) Cabinet Member for Highways (present at the meeting) provided a verbal update. Work on the crossing is scheduled to start early October and will last 12 weeks. There is an embargo on work during December so the work will be completed sometime after Christmas. 6. Members discussed the need to refresh the lining on the roundabout at M25 Junction 8. AHM explained that this was the responsibility of the county council but it would require a closure of the slip roads. Officers are working with Highways England to coordinate this work. 7. Members raised the issue of the ‘puddle’ at the bottom of Green Lane. The AHM explained that it was a surface water area and therefore liable to flooding. The divisional member (Merstham & Banstead South) disagreed and had a possible solution to propose. The AHM agreed to discuss the matter further outside of the meeting. 8. It was agreed that some further work was required to ensure that the tracker accurately reflected the progress on the actions that had been recorded.
The Local Committee (Reigate & Banstead) noted the contents of the tracker.
|
|||||
|
CABINET MEMBER (HIGHWAYS) UPDATE (AGENDA ITEM)
An update from the Cabinet Member for Highways, Mr Colin Kemp. Additional documents: Minutes: No declarations of interest.
1. Colin Kemp, Cabinet Member for Highways set out his intention to improve the quality and transparency of the information that is provided to members and residents. 2. The Cabinet Member acknowledged that although the local committee’s highways budget had been drastically cut, there was still a role for local/joint committees going forward. 3. This year £90 million will be spent this year across the Surrey road network. A map (attached) was displayed that showed the location of projects in Reigate & Banstead either delivered or scheduled for delivery this financial year. (N.B. the numbers on the map are the Surrey Highways asset ID number. These numbers correspond with the ID on the published Horizon 2 lists on the SCC website) A briefing note (attached) summarises the spend across the borough; but the Cabinet Member knows this is not enough which is why there is a need to prioritise where and how on the network this money is spent. 4. Going forward the Cabinet Member would like proposals to be presented to the Local Committee earlier so that members are able to contribute to the process 5. The Local Committee also needs to look at other funding that it has access to (eg Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) developer funding (s106) and parking surplus). Parking outside local commercial centres is one area we can explore. The main aim is to create churn of vehicles and allow residents who wish to visit these businesses to park, this in turn would help the businesses survive. The Federation of Small Businesses has acknowledged that its members could benefit, although there will be different challenges depending on the area. 6. Members will need to feed into the process and the final decision will come back to the Local Committee for agreement. 7. There will be some financial benefits to this and figures indicate a possible income across Surrey of £2.5million per annum. It is important to note that this money will be divided 20% to RBBC, 20% to Surrey Highways and 60% to the Local Committee, which can be used by the Committee to respond to residents’ issues locally. 8. There will be challenges and some opposition to the proposals but it is important to start having the conversations. 9. Going forward he will be happy to receive emails directly from members but borough councillors should copy in their county councillor as a matter of form. 10. With reference to information on the cutting back of dangerous trees (page 5 of briefing note) members wanted to know how many had been replaced and the reason for the height of the tree stumps that are left. The AHM explained that many of the trees are cut down at the end of their life or in an emergency and unfortunately there was no budget to plant replacements. The tree stumps are left at a height so as to be clearly visible to those with a visual impairment. 11. The divisional member (Nork & Tattenhams ... view the full minutes text for item 149/17 |
|||||
|
HIGHWAYS UPDATE [EXECUTIVE FUNCTION FOR INFORMATION]
This report summarises progress of the Local Committee’s programme of Highways works for the current financial year 2017/18. It also provides a summary of progress on the A23 Resilience Scheme, the Wider Network Benefits Scheme and the Epsom and Banstead Sustainable Transport Package (STP).
Additional documents: Minutes: No declarations of interest received.
Officers present: Zena Curry, Area Highways Manager (AHM) Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer Doug Hill, Strategic Network Resilience Manager (SNRM)
Members raised a number of queries:
1. A23 Resilience scheme (Annex 2) Members requested more detail on the scheme. The SNRM explained that they were still in the process of scoping the project which the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) would need to sign off, after which the Committee would be provided with regular updates. 2. The divisional member (Reigate) asked for information on the retaining wall on Reigate Hill, that was listed in the online Horizon report. The AHM explained that engineers were carrying out an assessment of the structure behind the safety barrier. It was not clear whether this was an actual wall or bank, but the AHM will report back to the divisional member outside of the meeting. 3. Page 30 – A23 Brighton Road/Salbrook Road/Lodge Lane, Salfords. The divisional member (Horley West, Salfords and Sidlow) had not been aware that the CIL bid had been unsuccessful and it was agreed that communication on this issue needed to be improved. (Committee Officer to forward RBBC Executive Report for information). 4. Page 30- A240 Reigate Road/A2022 Fir Tree Road(Drift Bridge Junction). The divisional member (Nork and Tattenhams) suggested reversing the sequence ie vehicles from Fir Tree Road first, might as a temporary measure, improve the traffic flow. The AHM agreed to pass on the suggestion to the traffic signals team.
The Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) agreed to note the contents of the report.
|
|||||
|
GREATER REDHILL SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT PACKAGE [EXECUTIVE FUNCTION FOR DECISION]
Work on the Greater Redhill Sustainable Transport Package is continuing. This report provides an update to Members on the progress of each of these schemes.
Within the programme of quality bus corridor improvements being taken forward, a number of bus stop clearways will be introduced at existing bus stops. Members of the committee are asked to consider these for approval. Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Reigate & Banstead) agreed to :
(i) To note the progress and delivery of schemes within the project.
And resolved to:
(ii) To agree that bus stop clearways are introduced at existing bus stops along quality bus corridors where bus stop improvements are being undertaken (Redhill-Reigate-Whitebushes (bus routes 430/435), Redhill – Reigate (bus route 420/460), A23 corridor (Chequers Roundabout to Redhill (bus routes 100, 400, 420/460, 424, 430/435) as specified in Annexes B and C.
Minutes: No declarations of interest received
Officers present:
Neil McClure, Transport Strategy Project Manager Alison Houghton, Senior Transport Officer
1. The divisional member (Reigate) queried the dimensions of the bus clearways and asked how those affected would be informed. 2. The Senior Transport Officer confirmed that those affected would be informed by letter with 28 days to respond.
The Local Committee (Reigate & Banstead) agreed to :
(i) To note the progress and delivery of schemes within the project.
And resolved to:
(ii) To agree that bus stop clearways are introduced at existing bus stops along quality bus corridors where bus stop improvements are being undertaken (Redhill-Reigate-Whitebushes (bus routes 430/435), Redhill – Reigate (bus route 420/460), A23 corridor (Chequers Roundabout to Redhill (bus routes 100, 400, 420/460, 424, 430/435) as specified in Annexes B and C.
|
|||||
The A217 route between Reigate and Horley has been identified by the Road Safety Foundation as being within the top 50 worst A-road routes for the number of fatal and serious injuries per vehicle kilometre travelled. The Department for Transport has created a £175 million “Safer Roads Fund” for local authorities to bid for to improve the quality of infrastructure specifically on these top 50 worst A-road routes. This report describes proposals for a range of highway improvements on the A217 between Reigate and Horley that could be included within the bid submission to the Department for Transport.
Additional documents: Decision:
Minutes: No declarations of interest received.
Officers present:
Duncan Knox, Road Safety & Active Travel Team Manager
1. The divisional member (Earlswood & Reigate South) highlighted that discussions still needed to be had with regard to the inclusion of a possible design for the Woodhatch Junction. The Road Safety Manager acknowledged that there were no easy solutions but would be happy to discuss options further. 2. The divisional member (Redhill East) queried the absence of any reference to cyclists. He had received an email from a resident, calling for improvements to cycling and pedestrian paths along the route to be included in the bid. 3. The Road Safety Manager explained that in researching for the bid he had referred to the Reigate & Banstead Cycling Plan, that had been agreed by the Local Committee at its meeting on 27 February 2017. As it stands the plan does not include cycling facilities along the A217 route under discussion, but it could be looked at again in the future. He stressed that the criteria set by the Department of Transport was around ‘road safety’ and while there may be potential for a future scheme, it did not fit the specific terms to qualify for this funding stream. 4. The divisional member (Reigate) queried whether further measures could be added to the plans as the works detailed only amounted to around £800k, which was less than the £1.2million being bid for. She also expressed concern over the proposed installation of uncontrolled crossing points in Bell Street (paragraph 3.32). In particular this location is used by school children and the proposal might appear to be encouraging pedestrians to cross where it was not fully safe to do so. 5. The Road Safety Manager explained that the DfT criteria allows for bids for a 9.1km stretch without match funding. The cost of some works has already increased, but it is possible that there will be some budget available (subject to the road safety criteria being met). Pedestrians already cross Bell Street in the suggested location, rather than use the nearby signalised facilities and the new measures will make it safer for those doing so. 6. It was agreed that consultation would be needed although what form this would take has not yet been decided. Once the money had been awarded the proposals would be shared and refined as required. 7. The Chairman stressed the importance of agreement on the proposals so as not to miss the deadline for submission. 8. The divisional member (Horley West, Salfords & Sidlow) referred to the request (paragraph 3.8) to reduce the speed limit on the 50mph stretch of Mill Lane to 40mph, so that it is consistent with the sections immediately before and after it. The sight lines for those drivers exiting properties onto the road were poor. 9. She also expressed concern that the increase in traffic due to the new housing estate had not been taken into account. She highlighted that the new roundabout at the entrance to the ... view the full minutes text for item 152/17 |
|||||
|
FLOODING UPDATE [EXECUTIVE FUNCTION FOR INFORMATION]
To provide an update on the flood resilience work being undertaken in Reigate and Banstead Borough by Surrey County Council (SCC) and its partners.
Minutes: No declarations of interest received
Officer present: Doug Hill, Strategic Network Resilience Manager (SNRM)
1. Members very much welcomed the report . In particular they had not been aware of the amount of resurfacing work that had been carried out in connection with resilience schemes. (Natalie Bramhall left the meeting). 2. A23 resilience project is being funded by the LEP and the match funding required is being provided by the Horizon programme. (Cllr White left the meeting)
3. The divisional member (Reigate) queried the £45,000 being spent on mitigating flood risk in the Reigate town centre. The SNRM explained that this money had come from DEFRA to look at different options and once these had been identified, officers would be able to bid for more funding. He will come back to her outside of the meeting. (Cllr Schofield and Graham Knight leave the meeting) 4. The divisional member (Merstham & Banstead South) queried whether the drainage works at the M25 Junction 8 roundabout had been completed before it was resurfaced and the SNRM agreed to speak to him outside of the meeting.
The Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) agreed to: (i) Note the work achieved to date by SCC and its partners in promoting flood resilience in the Borough. |