Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 642 KBVenue: Council Chamber, Elmbridge Civic Centre, High Street, Esher, KT10 9SD. View directions
Contact: Cheryl Poole, Community Partnership & Committee Officer Elmbridge Civic Centre, High Street, Esher, KT10 9SD
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
To receive any apologies for absence and notices of substitutions from Borough members under Standing Order 39. Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Tony Samuels and Cllr Stuart Hawkins. |
|
|
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
To approve the Minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record. Additional documents: Minutes: The minutes were agreed as an accurate record. |
|
|
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests from Members in respect of any item to be considered at the meeting.
Notes: · In line with the Relevant Authorities (Disclosable Pecuniary Interests) Regulations 2012, declarations may relate to the interest of the member, or the member’s spouse or civil partner, or a person with whom the member is living as husband or wife, or a person with whom the member is living as if they were civil partners and the member is aware they have the interest.
· Members need only disclose interests not currently listed on the Register of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests.
· Members must notify the Monitoring Officer of any interests disclosed at the meeting so they may be added to the Register.
· Members are reminded that they must not participate in any item where they have a disclosable pecuniary interest.
Minutes: No declarations of interest were received. |
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
To receive any Chairman’s announcements. Minutes: The Chairman asked for the presentation showing some of the projects funded by Members’ Allocations to be shown on the screen. |
|
To receive any petitions in accordance with Standing Order 68. Notice should be given in writing or by e-mail 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.
· A petition from Mr Tony Nockles requesting, in relation to the Jolly Boatman/Hampton Court Station site, ‘Surrey County Council to immediately commission a revised Road Safety Audit (Stage 1) using published site drawings available in 2008 and in 2012’.
·
A petition from Sue Kittlesen stating ‘travelling from Byfleet Road to the Painshill junction with the A3 and the other way
towards West Byfleet along Parvis Road has become a nightmare on a regular
basis due to road works. We ask Surrey County Council to restrict
all non emergency work to between 10pm and 5am on this very busy
route’. · A petition from Sarah Spence requesting ‘SCC to implement traffic calming measures on Ewell Rd’.
· A petition from residents of Prospect Rd, Long Ditton requesting ‘that all six trees that have been removed by Surrey County Council be replaced and replanted as soon as possible’.
Additional documents: Minutes: Four petitions were received and the details are attached as Annex A.
1. A petition containing 91 signatures was received from Tony Nockles requesting: ‘Surrey County Council to immediately commission a revised Road Safety Audit (Stage 1) using published drawings available in 2008 and in 2012’.
Tony Nockles spoke for 3 minutes in support of the petition. He showed a plan which identified the land owned by Surrey County Council explaining that it contained two public roads which are used as footpaths by pedestrians and cyclists. He added that 1000s of people cross these roads each year.
He explained the purpose of the petition was to ensure that the safety audit previously agreed by the Local Committee in February 2014 will address both present and future risks to pedestrians and cyclists crossing Hampton Court Station’s forecourt, SCC owned frontage and Cigarette Island Lane. Tony Nockles said that after the February 2014 meeting the SCC officer agreed with the Councillor Stuart Selleck that a revised road safety report would be produced and the resulting Road Safety Comments were based on assumptions and focussed on the entrance to Cigarette Island Lane, ignoring the construction phase of the development, the bus stops and the station forecourt. He asked that SCC, as both the highways authority and the landowner, ensured that the revised safety audit was carried out without delay and that it should take into account the 2008 site drawing and the information in the 2012 Method of Construction Statement.
Stuart Selleck, the divisional Member, expressed his support for Tony Nockles. He added that Tony Nockles and some Councillors had met with South West Trains who had expressed concern for the safety of pedestrians on the forecourt of the station. In addition he knew that the one of the bus services of Transport for London (TfL) was no longer scheduled to stop at the station as they deemed the forecourt unsafe. He requested that SCC officers talk to the other agencies involved with the site and look at the safety audit. In support Cllr Steve Bax urged SCC to look into this issue.
3. A petition containing a total of 454 signatures was received from Sarah Spence requesting ‘SCC to implement traffic calming measures on Ewell Rd.’ Sarah spoke in support of the petition giving a number of examples of ‘near misses’, adding that 100s of other people had had similar experiences, explaining that this dangerous junction was the route used by many residents to access the local schools, nursery and recreation ground. She said that approximately 20% of the Long Ditton population had signed the petition and she had been overwhelmed by the response. She requested either a controlled crossing or speed restrictions as it is the most popular place to cross but on coming vehicles cannot be seen.
Peter Hickman, the divisional Member, said he had asked SCC officers to investigate as to whether the location could be included in the, already scheduled, Long Ditton schools safety ... view the full minutes text for item 5/15 |
|
This report updates Members on the findings following a petition, by Mrs Mary Dennis to the December 2014 meeting of the Local Committee, concerning pedestrian crossing safety, on the A307 Portsmouth Road, Long Ditton, in the vicinity of Ditton Reach. Decision: The Local Committee resolved to:
(i) agree to include a feasibility study scheme on ITS schedule of works, which is to be programmed by this committee and the Divisional Member, in due course.
Reason for decision: a feasibility study will determine the most appropriate location and solution to be introduced, along the section of road, and enable a more holistic balance with other highway users. Minutes: Frank Apicella, the SCC Highways Engineer, introduced the report explaining that due to the location, particularly the bus stops close by; the best option would be to carry out a feasibility study to find the most appropriate solution.
Peter Hickman added it was a dangerous road, which was difficult to cross and the issue was also complicated by the fact that Kingston Council are looking at introducing a Mini Holland scheme, but that some action does need to be taken.
The officer assured the Committee that a feasibility study would take into account all road users including the elderly and the vulnerable.
The Local Committee resolved to:
(i) agree to include a feasibility study scheme on ITS schedule of works, which is to be programmed by this committee and the Divisional Member, in due course.
Reason for decision: a feasibility study will determine the most appropriate location and solution to be introduced, along the section of road, and enable a more holistic balance with other highway users. |
|
|
PETITION RESPONSE UPDATE: ESHER ROAD SAFETY MEASURES REQUEST (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
A subsequent report following the agreement at the meeting on 8th December 2014 to defer the decision on this issue until Members had the opportunity to be better informed on the proposed solution. Decision: The Local Committee resolved to agree:
(i) to wait the construction of the new bridge over the River Mole which will be designed to accommodate a wider carriageway and pedestrian footways on either side of the carriageway, subject to successful land purchase negotiations, thus negating the need for pedestrians to cross the road.
Reason for decision: The new bridge will be designed to provide a new footway on the west side, hence removing the need for pedestrians to cross the road. A feasibility study to look at short term measures, before the bridge can be built, would not be a good use of highways budgets. Minutes: Frank Apicella introduced the report by saying that this decision had been deferred from the meeting on 8th December 2014. Any short term solution would be difficult, expensive and the timescales would be lengthy so it was sensible to wait for the new bridge to be built, which will resolve the issues.
Stuart Selleck, the divisional Member, agreed that any short term solution would not be cost effective. Cllr Steve Bax also agreed it was the best solution, but expressed concern for the disruption when the bridge is built and also if there was any delay.
The officers explained the disruption was inevitable when the bridge is replaced, even though a lot of the construction will take place adjacent to the site. As regards the timetable, it is difficult to confirm until the budget is guaranteed.
The Local Committee resolved to agree:
(i) to wait the construction of the new bridge over the River Mole which will be designed to accommodate a wider carriageway and pedestrian footways on either side of the carriageway, subject to successful land purchase negotiations, thus negating the need for pedestrians to cross the road.
Reason for decision: The new bridge will be designed to provide a new footway on the west side, hence removing the need for pedestrians to cross the road. A feasibility study to look at short term measures, before the bridge can be built, would not be a good use of highways budgets. |
|
|
PUBLIC QUESTION TIME
To answer any questions from residents or businesses within the Elmbridge 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 four working days before the meeting. Minutes: One public question was received from Ken Huddart of Claygate Parish Council.
What reassurances can the Local Committee give that after considerable input from Claygate residents to a recent parking survey and to SCC's own current consultation on specific local proposals, identifying on street commuter parking as a major issue, that Claygate residents will not have to wait years for a review that leads to action to address this matter?
The response is attached as Annex C.
Ken Huddart asked in a supplementary question when the four solutions already recognised in Claygate would be completed. The Parking Team Manager explained Claygate is in the 2nd year of the new Parking Strategy cycle. |
|
|
MEMBER QUESTION TIME
To receive any written questions from Members under Standing Order 47. Minutes: There were no Member questions received. |
|
Agenda Item only
A short presentation to explain the management of the process for applications to the CIL local spending boards. Minutes: Judith Jenkins (Elmbridge Borough Council Infrastructure Delivery Co-ordinator) gave a powerpoint presentation to explain to the Local Committee how the Community Infrastructure Levy local spending boards operate. The presentation is attached as Annex D. The amount that is in the pot for each settlement area is dependent on how much development has taken place in the area. If the area did not receive any bids last year then the funding will have been carried forward so a larger pot will have built up.
Members’ comments included how well the fund had been used last year, how the publicity this year had been good and how important it was for the Councillors to be involved. |
|
|
SOUTH EAST PERMIT SCHEME (FOR INFORMATION)
This report updates the Local Committee on the first 12 months of the operation of the South East Permit Scheme, which controls road works on the Surrey County Council highway network. Additional documents: Minutes: Kevin Orledge, the SCC Streetworks Team Manager, introduced the report informing the Local Committee that the South East Permit Scheme had been operating for 12 months. Companies who want to carry out work on the highway now must pay a fee for a permit. The income that these have produced is as predicted and the team now consists of 32 full time staff. This added resource has led to an increase of 60% in the number of inspections of road works taking place. At the moment SCC set their own conditions on the permits, but the Department for Transport (DfT) is looking to standardise the conditions set across all operating authorities. SCC is working with the DfT to look at the implications of the standardisation.
Members’ comments included:
· The new scheme is providing a more co-ordinated approach to road works · Compliments regarding communication about recent road works in Oxshott · Questions about the fees charged and signs not being removed
The officer responded that the team generate income through other means including inspections, overrun charges and re-inspections. He also requested that any signs left behind by contractors be reported.
The Local Committee resolved to
(i) note the contents of the report. |
|
|
ELMBRIDGE PARKING STRATEGY (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
The Local Committee is asked to consider a new approach to reviewing parking, which will be more proactive and strategic. Decision: The Local Committee resolved to agree:
(i) to adopt a new more strategic approach to reviewing parking provision in Elmbridge.
(ii) to use the surplus from the on street parking account to fund the reviews.
Reason for decision: In the past reviews have tended to be reactive in nature and concentrated on where parking was not desirable and so should be controlled or restricted. A more strategic approach would allow us to also consider where parking is needed and how those parking needs may be met. Minutes: Rikki Hill, the SCC Parking Team Manager, introduced the report, explaining how the previous parking reviews had taken a reactive approach, but the new Strategy will take a broader more comprehensive view.
Members’ comments included:
· Positivity with the proposal · How the public’s mindset also needs to be changed as we must protect our local high streets and the public are only willing to walk a limited distance to shops · The need to encourage businesses to look at new ways of getting their employees to work · We must also treat residents with care when looking at the parking restrictions. Some are concerned by the idea of possibly removing yellow lines.
Rikki Hill followed up by adding that the aim is to focus on what restrictions are appropriate, not at removing or installing restrictions. If the lines are for safety reasons then they would not be removed. Consultants will be used, but it will be a closely controlled project and will include looking at parking patterns. After the planned 3 year period then the areas will be reconsidered.
The Local Committee resolved to agree:
(i) to adopt a new more strategic approach to reviewing parking provision in Elmbridge.
(ii) to use the surplus from the on street parking account to fund the reviews.
Reason for decision: In the past reviews have tended to be reactive in nature and concentrated on where parking was not desirable and so should be controlled or restricted. A more strategic approach would allow us to also consider where parking is needed and how those parking needs may be met. |
|
|
ELMBRIDGE CYCLING PLAN (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
This report proposes an approach for the development of a Cycling Plan for Elmbridge, which will support the Elmbridge Local Transport Strategy. Decision: The Local Committee resolved to:
(i) approve the methodology for developing the Elmbridge Cycling Plan
(ii) agree to develop the Cycling Plan jointly between the County Council and the Borough Council
(iii) agree to set up a task group to develop a full Plan
(iv) agree the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Cycling Group (annex A)
(v) nominate and agree the County Council and the Borough Council members of the Task Group (paragraph 3.1) Margaret Hicks, Rachael I Lake, Peter Hickman, Cllr Andrew Davis, Cllr Jan Turner, Cllr Ian Donaldson
Reason for decision: An Elmbridge Cycling Plan will support the Elmbridge Local Transport Strategy. A long-term, consistent approach to provision, that supports other programmes, will help its effectiveness. Minutes: Dave Sharpington, the SCC Cycling Programme Manager, introduced the report explaining this was a suggested approach for the development of a Local Cycling Plan for Elmbridge.
It was proposed that a Task Group be set up to develop the plan in full.
The Local Committee resolved to:
(i) approve the methodology for developing the Elmbridge Cycling Plan
(ii) agree to develop the Cycling Plan jointly between the County Council and the Borough Council
(iii) agree to set up a task group to develop a full Plan
(iv) agree the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the Cycling Group (annex A)
(v) nominate and agree the County Council and the Borough Council members of the Task Group (paragraph 3.1) Margaret Hicks, Rachael I Lake, Peter Hickman, Cllr Andrew Davis, Cllr Jan Turner, Cllr Ian Donaldson
Reason for decision: An Elmbridge Cycling Plan will support the Elmbridge Local Transport Strategy. A long-term, consistent approach to provision, that supports other programmes, will help its effectiveness. |
|
|
HIGHWAYS UPDATE (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
This report details progress with the delivery of the Local Committee’s programme of highways works for 2014-15 and the preparations for the delivery of the programme for 2015-16. Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee resolved to:
(i) agree that Members identify drainage projects in their division in which to invest the £50,500 capital drainage allocation
(ii) agree to allocate £40,000 from the Local Committee Highways Allocation for 2015-16 to StreetSmart, as in previous financial years 2013/14 and 2014/15
(iii) agree option D for the allocation of the 2015-16 Local Committee Highways budgets
(iv) agree to extend the divisional programme
in table 5 from 2015-16 to 2015-17 (v) authorise the Area Team Manager in consultation with the Chairman, Vice Chairman, and relevant Divisional Member(s) to undertake all necessary procedures to deliver the agreed programmes.
Reason for decision: to take into account the recently announced changes to the Local Committees highways budgets. Minutes: Nick Healey, the Area Highways Manager, introduced the report and the tabled addendum, attached as Annex E, and updated the Local Committee that Elmbridge had received £250,000 from the Project 400 flooding and winter damage repair programme.
Members asked a few questions in relation to the highway schemes funded this financial year. Cllr Peter Harman queried an issue in Cavendish Rd, about which Nick Healey promised to provide a response outside the meeting.
In relation to the tabled addendum to this item Nick Healey explained that following the recent Full Council meeting, changes had been made to the Local Committee highways budget for 2015-16. Firstly 25% of the capital maintenance budget must be used to assist with ‘drainage’ issues and secondly there was a reduction of £105,550 in the highways revenue budget. There was a discussion about the type of drainage work which could be classified as capital. It was agreed that Local Committee Members would notify the Highways service of drainage projects in their divisions by 13th March 2015. Nick Healey assured Members that once the drainage priorities were received he would try to split the £50,500 ‘drainage’ budget as equitably as possible between the 9 divisions.
Moving on to the revenue budget, the Committee then agreed that they wanted to allocate £40,000 of the Local Committee Highways Allocation for 2015-16 to StreetSmart, which eliminated Options B & C from the list of 6 options proposed as possible ways of allocating the Local Committee highways budgets for 2015-6.
Members were not happy with the reduction in the budgets.
Members discussed the other options and Nick Healey provided further detail on how the ‘Pooled Revenue’ had been used in previous years. Members agreed to eliminate Option A then voted on the remaining options. 9 Members voted for Option D, and 3 each for Options E and F. The Chairman also agreed to write to the Full Council to express the Local Committee’s concern with the reduction in the budgets.
The Local Committee resolved to:
(i) agree that Members identify drainage projects in their division in which to invest the £50,500 capital drainage allocation
(ii) agree to allocate £40,000 from the Local Committee Highways Allocation for 2015-16 to StreetSmart, as in previous financial years 2013/14 and 2014/15
(iii) agree option D for the allocation of the 2015-16 Local Committee Highways budgets
(iv) agree to extend the
divisional programme in table 5 from 2015-16 to 2015-17 (v) authorise the Area Team Manager in consultation with the Chairman, Vice Chairman, and relevant Divisional Member(s) to undertake all necessary procedures to deliver the agreed programmes.
Reason for decision: to take into account the recently announced changes to the Local Committees highways budgets. |
|
This report proposes new bids to be submitted to Elmbridge Borough Council’s CIL Strategic Spending Board for the next funding round. Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee resolved to:
(i) approve the submission of one bid for transport scheme detailed in Table 1 and Annex 2 below
(ii) approve the submission of five bids for education schemes detailed in Table 1
(iii) engage with the Area Team Manager and the School Commissioning Officer in the development of the approved bids, to ensure that Divisional and Ward Members are fully apprised of the proposed schemes (paragraph 4.1 refers)
(iv) authorise the Head of School Commissioning in consultation with the Chairman, Vice Chairman and relevant Divisional Member(s) and Ward Member(s) to agree a final list of CIL applications for education schemes for the April 2015 deadline.
Reason for decision: Before bids are submitted to Elmbridge Borough Council they should be approved by the Local Committee. Minutes: This report, and the tabled additional recommendation attached as Annex F, with the proposed bids to the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Strategic Board was presented by Nick Healey (Area Team Manager NE), Melanie Harris (School Commissioning Officer) and David Ligertwood (Transport Projects Team Manager).
Members posed questions relating to:
· The nursery provision at Hurst Park · The relative cost of the Real Time Passenger Information(RTPI) and how it operates with multiple bus companies
David Ligertwood explained that the recent Local Transport Review showed support for the RTPI and that as SCC is the provider of the bus stop infrastructure then we are the only agency who can provide the system. He confirmed that all bus service providers will be able to use the technology.
The Local Committee resolved to:
(i) approve the submission of one bid for transport scheme detailed in Table 1 and Annex 2 below
(ii) approve the submission of five bids for education schemes detailed in Table 1
(iii) engage with the Area Team Manager and the School Commissioning Officer in the development of the approved bids, to ensure that Divisional and Ward Members are fully apprised of the proposed schemes (paragraph 4.1 refers)
(iv) authorise the Head of School Commissioning in consultation with the Chairman, Vice Chairman and relevant Divisional Member(s) and Ward Member(s) to agree a final list of CIL applications for education schemes for the April 2015 deadline.
Reason for decision: Before bids are submitted to Elmbridge Borough Council they should be approved by the Local Committee.
Cllrs Peter Harman and Dorothy Mitchell left the meeting. |
|
|
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AWARD OF LOCAL PREVENTION WORK FUNDING (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
The Local Committee is asked to agree to award the Local Prevention funding as recommended in the report. Decision: The Local Committee resolved to:
(i) approve the Youth Task Group recommendation to award a contract for a 36 month period for One to One Work from 01 September 2015 to Surrey Care Trust for the value of £65,000 per annum (subject to future changes in SYP budgets). Within the contract there is the opportunity to extend the service for further two years, subject to budget changes, provider performance and any changes in the needs of the young people.
(ii) approve the Youth Task Group recommendation to award a grant for a 36 month period for Neighbourhood Work from 01September 2015 to the following providers:
(i) The Lifetrain Trust for 50% of the grant value
(ii) Eikon for 50% of the grant value
Within this grant agreement there is the opportunity to extend the service for further two years, subject to budget changes, provider performance and any changes in the needs of the young people.
Reason for decision: The recommendations will support the Council’s priority to ensure that all young people in Surrey are employable. Minutes: Jeremy Crouch, SCC Contract Performance Officer – Youth Work, introduced the report.
The Local Committee resolved to:
(i) approve the Youth Task Group recommendation to award a contract for a 36 month period for One to One Work from 01 September 2015 to Surrey Care Trust for the value of £65,000 per annum (subject to future changes in SYP budgets). Within the contract there is the opportunity to extend the service for further two years, subject to budget changes, provider performance and any changes in the needs of the young people.
(ii) approve the Youth Task Group recommendation to award a grant for a 36 month period for Neighbourhood Work from 01September 2015 to the following providers:
(i) The Lifetrain Trust for 50% of the grant value
(ii) Eikon for 50% of the grant value
Within this grant agreement there is the opportunity to extend the service for further two years, subject to budget changes, provider performance and any changes in the needs of the young people.
Reason for decision: The recommendations will support the Council’s priority to ensure that all young people in Surrey are employable. |
|
|
LOCAL COMMITTEE BUDGETS (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION - FOR INFORMATION)
This report provides an update on the projects which have been funded by the Local Committee and Members’ Allocation funding since April 2014. Additional documents: Minutes: The Local Committee resolved to note:
(i) The amounts that have been spent from the Members’ allocation and Local Committees capital budgets, as set out in Annex 1 of this report. |