Agenda, decisions and minutes

Reigate and Banstead Local Committee
Monday, 2 December 2019 2.00 pm

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

Contact: Jess Edmundson, Partnership Committee Officer  Reigate Town Hall, Castlefield Road, Reigate, Surrey RH2 0SH

Items
No. Item

OPEN FORUM SESSION

No members of the public attended to ask a question during the open forum session.

CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS

The Chairman gave the following announcements:

 

·         Pre-election period – We are currently in the pre-election period and I am to remind all members that whilst the committee’s business may continue, I would ask everyone to ensure they focus on the business at hand, and to please steer clear of entering into a political discussion.

·         New Task Group and Local Partnership Boards (LPB’s) - Members will recall we talked about the need for positive and collaborative action on sustainable travel, cycling and air quality, and we had proposed setting up a task group through the local committee.

However, as members will know from the Leader, Tim Oliver, discussions are being held with officers at Reigate and Banstead Borough Council to pilot a new partnership board in the new year.

Given that air quality, cycling and sustainable transport are priorities for both the borough council and for the county council, as well as partners in Health, it therefore seems to be an opportunity for this cross-cutting priority to feed into the new partnership board as a first area of focus, starting in the new year. This will enable us to take a joined up approach across all relevant bodies, to secure the necessary officer time and energies, and to develop a plan of action. I fully expect the local committee to be able to feed into this piece of work going forwards, and will be liaising with officers to secure a discussion for us all on the new board and how we can support this new partnership model early in the new year.

·         Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) - At the informal meeting in October we talked about some of the bids for CIL funding that SCC had applied to RBBC for. We haven’t yet heard the outcome of these bids but as soon as I have formal notice of any decision I will circulate this to the committee.

·         Members Highways Funding – I am pleased to report that all monies allocated to members for 2019-20 to spend on highways bar £35 has been committed or spent.

·         Members Community Allocation (MCA) – There are members that still have some MCA to spend in this year. A reminder that the deadline for this is 31 January 2020. If people wish to commit some money to the Junior Citizens Award it’s still possible to do so. Please let me know.

·         M25 J8 Improvements Work – Since I last updated you there has been no further update on these works and they are still scheduled to begin in January 2020. If I hear anything else I will let the committee know.

 

27/19

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

28/19

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING pdf icon PDF 91 KB

29/19

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:

    Ms Thomson declared an interest in item 7. As the divisional member who had shown a lot of support publically for the application she believed she could not evidence she had come to the meeting with an open mind and therefore would abstain from the discussion and vote.

     

    There were no other declarations of interest.

30/19

PETITIONS

    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.

     

    Minutes:

    There were two petitions received before the deadline.

31/19

PETITION TO: PROVIDE FOR A CROSSING THAT PRIORITISES PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLES OVER TRAFFIC AT THE JUNCTION OF WHEATFIELD WAY AND CYCLE ROUTE 21 pdf icon PDF 75 KB

    The full wording of the petition and officer response will be provided within the supplementary agenda.

    Decision:

    The Local Committee agreed:

          i.        To note the officer’s comment

         ii.        That a proposed scheme for a formal pedestrian crossing where National Cycle Network Route 21 crosses Wheatfield Way be added to the Integrated Transport Scheme (ITS) List for consideration for future funding.

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    The above decision was made to enable the scheme to be included on the ITS to be considered for implementation when funding becomes available.

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

    Officers Attending: Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer (STE), SCC


    Petitions, Public Questions and Statements:
    The petition and officer response was published within the supplementary agenda.

     

    The lead petitioner, Ms Diana Udul was unable to attend the meeting and nominated Mr Martin Saunders to speak on her behalf. Mr Saunders addressed the committee with his concerns detailing that the current informal crossing was confusing due the raised table. It was unclear, particularly for children who should stop – the vehicles in the road or the pedestrians and cyclists trying to cross Wheatfield Way. A formal crossing would help and shouldn’t be too difficult or expensive to achieve.

     

    Key points from the discussion:

     

    ·         The divisional member gave his full support to the residents and the petition; agreeing that it caused much confusion and adding that the bendy nature of the road exacerbated the problem. He asked what the exact cost of a formalised crossing would be.

    ·         The STE confirmed it wasn’t possible to give an exact figure at this moment for a formalised crossing but a zebra crossing on average cost around £70,000.

    ·         Other local members were supportive of the petition as it appeared to be the obvious place on the road to include a crossing.

    ·         It was suggested better signage could be included to make the footpath more obvious and apparent to vehicles using the road. However it was noted that there were limitations to what signage could be introduced.

    ·         The committee recognised there could be smaller pieces of work that could be completed to help alleviate some of the problems associated with the footpath crossing the road  and asked officers to take a look at these.

     

    Resolution:

     

    The Local Committee agreed:

          i.        To note the officer’s comment

         ii.        That a proposed scheme for a formal pedestrian crossing where National Cycle Network Route 21 crosses Wheatfield Way be added to the Integrated Transport Scheme (ITS) List for consideration for future funding.

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    The above decision was made to enable the scheme to be included on the ITS to be considered for implementation when funding becomes available.

32/19

PETITION TO: IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AT ENTRANCES TO ST ANNE'S CATHOLIC PRIMARY SCHOOL, BANSTEAD pdf icon PDF 79 KB

    The full wording of the petition and officer response will be provided within the supplementary agenda.

     

    Decision:

     

    The Local Committee agreed to:

          i.        Allow the county councils Safer Travel Team to investigate concerns raised by the petition using the Road Safety Outside Schools Policy

         ii.        The outcome of the safety assessment being reported to the school and local divisional member as well as the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the local committee, containing the results of the road safety education assessment and a description of any potential highway improvements and estimated costs.

     

    Reason for decisions:

     

    The above decisions were made to enable the SCC Safer Travel Team to conduct a Road Safety Outside Schools Assessment and report back their findings and recommendations for improvements that could be implemented, if appropriate.

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

    Officers Attending: Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer (STE), SCC


    Petitions, Public Questions and Statements:
    The petition and officer response was published within the supplementary agenda.

     

    The lead petitioner Ms Claire Mehrai attended the meeting and addressed the committee with details of the petition. She made the point that improving safety along the route to St Anne’s Catholic Primary School would also be of benefit to children travelling to other schools in the vicinity. She added there was some signage in place to notify vehicles of the short 20mph zone outside the school; this however was currently covered in foliage so couldn’t be easily seen. The problem of cars parking right outside the school made it difficult with children often having to cross unsafely between cars, where visibility was poor.

     

    Key points from the discussion:

     

    ·         The divisional member expressed support for the petition in principle, noting the area was particularly busy at school drop off and pick up time when the roads were also busy with commuter traffic.

    ·         Other members suggested that a pedestrian controlled crossing could be a solution as well as parking measures. It was confirmed that the issue with introducing parking measures was that they were hard to enforce particularly as the issue only occurred for a short period during each school day.

     

    Resolution:

     

    The Local Committee agreed to:

          i.        Allow the county councils Safer Travel Team to investigate concerns raised by the petition using the Road Safety Outside Schools Policy

         ii.        The outcome of the safety assessment being reported to the school and local divisional member as well as the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the local committee, containing the results of the road safety education assessment and a description of any potential highway improvements and estimated costs.

     

    Reason for decisions:

     

    The above decisions were made to enable the SCC Safer Travel Team to conduct a Road Safety Outside Schools Assessment and report back their findings and recommendations for improvements that could be implemented, if appropriate.

33/19

FORMAL PUBLIC QUESTIONS pdf icon PDF 69 KB

    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:

    Declarations of Interest: None

    Officers Attending: Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer (STE), SCC


    Petitions, Public Questions and Statements:
    The questions and officer responses were published within the supplementary agenda.

     

    The questioner, Katie Fulbrook attended but did not ask any supplementary questions.

     

    Key points from the discussion:

     

    ·         The divisional member asked what the timescale for getting the traffic lights fixed was. She noted she had previously reported this on numerous occasions and it had not yet been fixed and was causing delays at the junction.

    ·         Other members of the committee were in agreement that the traffic lights needed to be treated as a matter of urgency and not as a routine job.

    ·         It was suggested that the Chairman write directly to the Cabinet Member for Highways to address the concerns of the committee and request urgent action be taken as it was causing considerable delay at a busy junction and affecting emergency service vehicles accessing the East Surrey Hospital.

    ·         It was suggested the questions asked by the resident were in relation to how the Three Arch Junction would operate after the improvements were made and not how it currently operated which had already been established was insufficient.

    ·         The Chairman suggested inviting the officers and project team involved with the Three Arch Road improvements to the next Local Committee Informal meeting and then to a future formal meeting to provide an update on where the project was at.

     

34/19

FORMAL MEMBER QUESTIONS

35/19

ALLEGED PUBLIC FOOTPATH BETWEEN WOODHATCH ROAD AND ATHERFIELD ROAD, REIGATE [NON-EXECUTIVE FUNCTION - FOR DECISION] pdf icon PDF 124 KB

    An application was received for a Map Modification Order (MMO) to add a public footpath between Woodhatch Road and Atherfield Road in Reigate.

     

    It is considered that the evidence shows that a public footpath can reasonably be alleged to subsist over the route. As such a legal order to modify the definitive map and statement should be made.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: Ms Barbara Thomson declared an interest. As divisional member she had publically supported the applicant’s request and therefore would abstain from the vote.

    Officers Attending: Daniel Williams, Countryside Access Officer, SCC


    Petitions, Public Questions and Statements:
    None

     

    There were no speakers in support of the application.

     

    Mr John English, Broadhaven Estates attended to speak in objection to the application and had three minutes to do so.

     

    He made the following points:

     

    ·         Broadhaven Estates owned part of the land that the path in question crossed.

    ·         It was believed that people had presumed because Broadhaven Estates hadn’t physically stopped people using the path it was a suggestion they were supportive of its use as a public right of way.

    ·         When Broadhaven Estates bought the land in 2013 they made their intention known to the planning authority that they planned to move the footpath from across their land to the edge.

     

    After Mr English had spoken the Chairman noted that he had been made aware by the Countryside Access Officer that some of the points made by Mr English were new ones that had no previously been submitted during the consultation and could therefore not be considered by the committee when making their decision.

     

    Mrs Pauline Young, the applicant attended the meeting and had three minutes to respond to the comments made by Mr English.

     

    She made the following points:

    ·         Much of what had just been said by Mr English was new information she had not previously heard before.

    ·         She had been using the footpath since the mid 1950’s and argued this was sufficient to establish it as a right of way.

    ·         She noted that there was no objection to the new footpath proposed by Broadhaven Estates but it was her understanding that the right of way needed to exist in the first place before it could be considered to be moved.

    ·         The main reason for submitting the application was to ensure access to and from the estate remained as it was used daily by many people including school children attending Reigate School.

     

    The Countryside Access Officer then introduced the report stating there had been no challenge to the usage until 2017 and the 20 year period of undisputed usage ran backwards from then to 1997.

     

    Key points from the discussion:

     

    ·         The divisional member spoke on behalf of the borough councillors who were unable to attend to indicate their support as the path was well used by many people.

    ·         Some members expressed sympathy towards Broadhaven Estates as at the time of making the planning application in early 2017 there was no right of way established or application until mid-late 2017.   

    ·         Members were advised that the introduction of a new path, the surface of the route in question and signage were irrelevant to the determination of the route being a right of way. As even without the path being surfaced and signed it could still exist as a right of way.

     

    Resolution:

     

    The local committee voted by a show of hands  ...  view the full minutes text for item 35/19

36/19

HIGHWAYS SCHEMES UPDATE [EXECUTIVE FUNCTION - FOR INFORMATION] pdf icon PDF 117 KB

    To inform the Local Committee on the progress of the 2019/20 Integrated Transport and highways maintenance programmes in Reigate and Banstead, as well as other projects that are not funded through the Local Committee such as the Major Scheme work, including the centrally funded major maintenance works, the Greater Redhill STP and the A23 Resilience Project.

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

    Officers Attending: Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer (STE), SCC


    Petitions, Public Questions and Statements:
    none

     

    Key points from the discussion:

     

    ·         A query was raised about the Horizons programme; questioning why only certain areas appeared to have footways that were scheduled for work. The STE confirmed that the Horizon programme was coordinated by a different team and the assessment process considered the usage as well as the condition.

    ·         It appeared to some members that Slipshatch Road could be an issue with the maintenance of the road surface and verge associated with erosion caused by water runoff. It was confirmed it was not a maintenance issue and the design team would be looking at it.

    ·         The CIL Panel at Reigate & Banstead Borough Council had met last week to discuss bids put forward for neighbourhood CIL. Informally it was confirmed that none of the projects listed in the report were to be considered at this time for funding.

    ·         With regards to the Chetwode Road improvements it was noted that Raven Housing had agreed some small amendments to the proposals. 

     

    Resolution:

     

    The local committee noted the contents of the report.

     

37/19

HIGHWAYS SCHEMES FORWARD PROGRAMME 2020-21 AND 2021-22 [EXECUTIVE FUNCTION - FOR DECISION] pdf icon PDF 84 KB

    This report seeks approval of a programme of highway works for Reigate and Banstead funded from the Local Committee’s delegated capital and revenue budgets.

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    The Local Committee agreed:

     

    General

        i.       To note that the Local Committee’s devolved highways budget for capital works in 2019/20, subject to approval by full Council on 10 December 2019, is £211,111

       ii.       That the devolved capital budget for highway works be used to progress both capital improvement schemes and capital maintenance schemes.

      iii.       To note that should there be any changes to the programme of highway works as set out in this report, a report will be taken to a future meeting of Reigate and Banstead Local Committee to inform members of the changes.

    Capital Improvement Schemes (ITS)

     

      iv.       That the capital improvement schemes allocation for Reigate and Banstead be used to progress the Integrated Transport Schemes programme set out in Annex 1;

       v.       To authorise that the Area Highway Manager, in consultation with the Local Committee Chairman and Vice-Chairman, be able to vire money between the schemes agreed in Annex 1, if required;

      vi.       That the Local Committee Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Area Team Manager, together with the local divisional Member are able to progress any scheme from the Integrated Transport Schemes programme, including consultation and statutory advertisement that may be required under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, for completion of those schemes. Where it is agreed that a scheme will not be progressed, this will be reported back to the next formal meeting of the Local Committee for approval.

    Capital Maintenance Schemes (LSR)

     

     vii.       That the capital maintenance schemes allocation for Reigate and Banstead be divided equitably between County Councillors to carry out capital maintenance works in their divisions, and that the schemes to be progressed be agreed by divisional members in consultation with the Area Maintenance Engineer.

    Revenue Maintenance

    viii.       To note that members will continue to receive a Member Local Highways Fund allocation of £7,500 per county member to address highway issues in their division; and

      ix.       That the Member Local Highways Fund be managed by the Area Maintenance Engineer on behalf of and in consultation with members.

     

    Reason for decisions:

     

    The above decisions were made to agree a forward programme of highways works in Reigate and Banstead for 2020/21 – 2021/22, funded from the Local Committee’s devolved budget.

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

    Officers Attending: Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer (STE), SCC


    Petitions, Public Questions and Statements:
    none

     

    Resolution:

     

    The Local Committee agreed:

     

    General

        i.       To note that the Local Committee’s devolved highways budget for capital works in 2019/20, subject to approval by full Council on 10 December 2019, is £211,111

       ii.       That the devolved capital budget for highway works be used to progress both capital improvement schemes and capital maintenance schemes.

      iii.       To note that should there be any changes to the programme of highway works as set out in this report, a report will be taken to a future meeting of Reigate and Banstead Local Committee to inform members of the changes.

    Capital Improvement Schemes (ITS)

     

      iv.       That the capital improvement schemes allocation for Reigate and Banstead be used to progress the Integrated Transport Schemes programme set out in Annex 1;

       v.       To authorise that the Area Highway Manager, in consultation with the Local Committee Chairman and Vice-Chairman, be able to vire money between the schemes agreed in Annex 1, if required;

      vi.       That the Local Committee Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Area Team Manager, together with the local divisional Member are able to progress any scheme from the Integrated Transport Schemes programme, including consultation and statutory advertisement that may be required under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, for completion of those schemes. Where it is agreed that a scheme will not be progressed, this will be reported back to the next formal meeting of the Local Committee for approval.

    Capital Maintenance Schemes (LSR)

     

     vii.       That the capital maintenance schemes allocation for Reigate and Banstead be divided equitably between County Councillors to carry out capital maintenance works in their divisions, and that the schemes to be progressed be agreed by divisional members in consultation with the Area Maintenance Engineer.

    Revenue Maintenance

    viii.       To note that members will continue to receive a Member Local Highways Fund allocation of £7,500 per county member to address highway issues in their division; and

      ix.       That the Member Local Highways Fund be managed by the Area Maintenance Engineer on behalf of and in consultation with members.

     

    Reason for decisions:

     

    The above decisions were made to agree a forward programme of highways works in Reigate and Banstead for 2020/21 – 2021/22, funded from the Local Committee’s devolved budget.

38/19

RECOMMENDATIONS AND DECISIONS TRACKER [FOR INFORMATION] pdf icon PDF 251 KB

    The tracker monitors the progress of the decisions and recommendations that the Local Committee has agreed.

    The Local Committee is asked to note the progress made and agree to remove from the tracker any items marked ‘complete’.

     

    Minutes:

    The local committee noted the decision tracker.

39/19

FORWARD PLAN [FOR INFORMATION] pdf icon PDF 52 KB

    The Local Committee (Reigate and Banstead) will note the contents of the forward plan.

    Minutes:

    The local committee noted the forward plan and asked for an update on the Libraries Transformation Consultation to be received at the next informal meeting in January 2020.