Agenda, decisions and minutes

Tandridge Local Committee
Friday, 23 September 2016 10.15 am

Venue: Council Chamber, County Hall, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey KT1 2DN. View directions

Contact: Vicki Eade, Community Partnership and Committee Officer  Tandridge District Council Offices, Station Road East, Oxted, Surrey, RH8 0BT

Items
No. Item

71/16

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

72/16

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING pdf icon PDF 211 KB

73/16

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:

    None received.

74/16

PETITIONS pdf icon PDF 102 KB

    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.

     

    Petitions received:

     

    1)     Road safety at Eastbourne Road/Ray Lane junction, Blindley Heath, by Mrs Rachel Turk

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    One petition, containing 399 signatures, was received from Mrs Rachel Turk. The petition, response from the Local Committee, and the comments made by the signatories, were all tabled at the meeting.

     

    Mrs Turk set out the reasons for her petition. She called for improvements to the junction of Ray Lane with the A22 at Blindley Heath, following a fatal accident there on 17 August 2016.

     

    Mrs Turk expressed concerns that the junction was dangerous, and stated that there had been multiple accidents at the site, including one where two people suffered serious neck injuries.  Mrs Turk said that the junction is poorly signed, one of the signs is dirty and therefore fails to show up clearly, and the phasing of the traffic lights needs reviewing. Mrs Turk suggested introducing yellow lines at the junction, as well as more signage to warn drivers of the junction and encourage them to drive safely.  Mrs Turk read out a selection of comments made by people who had signed the petition, which corroborated her concerns.

    Zena Curry, Area Highway Manager, acknowledged the concerns of local residents, as expressed in the petition, but stated that there were no records of an accident involving serious neck injury at this location. She advised that she was unable to comment on the circumstances of the accident until the legal process had concluded.

    Chris Cannon, Road Safety and Traffic Management Officer with Surrey Police, stated that while there have been accidents recorded to the north, south and east of the junction, no accidents have been recorded at the lights themselves. Therefore Surrey Police currently have no concerns about the safety of the traffic lights at the junction. A speed survey was conducted to the north of the junction in 2013, which showed average speeds were within the limit.

     

    Mrs Helena Windsor, divisional member for Godstone, reminded the committee that residents in Blindley Heath had requested a 30mph speed limit at the Local Committee meeting on 24 June 2016, and asked when the speed survey would be undertaken. She questioned the phasing of the lights and whether this had been changed since the incident, as people had been seen working on it. She concurred that the phasing of the lights felt unsafe, and highlighted that this was a concern echoed within many of the comments made through the petition.

     

    The Area Highway Manager confirmed that the speed survey would be undertaken before, or closely after, October half term, so that there are typical traffic conditions. Highways Officers have visited the site, and this is probably what was observed by residents locally.

     

    Mr Michael Sydney, divisional member for Lingfield, asked why Highways couldn’t provide the committee with timescales for when the investigation would be completed. He stated that it was clear from the comments on the petition what residents think of the junction, and wanted reassurance that the results of the investigation would be brought back to the Local Committee. The Road Safety and Traffic Management Officer confirmed that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 74/16

75/16

FORMAL PUBLIC QUESTIONS pdf icon PDF 111 KB

    To answer any questions from residents or businesses within the Tandridge District 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.

     

    Questions and responses will be provided at the meeting.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    6 formal public questions were received. Questions and responses were tabled at the meeting.

     

    The Chairman permitted District Councillor Mr Pat Cannon to ask a question informally at the meeting.

     

    1)    Parish Councillor Stephen Blunden – pedestrian safety on Wolf’s Hill

     

    The Chairman referred Mr Blunden to the response, and to the drawing of the proposed scheme that was tabled at the meeting. The Chairman acknowledged that the road was narrow and on a bend.

     

    Mr Blunden was pleased to see that the council had proposed a scheme. He stated that as a daily user of the road, he has serious concerns about pedestrian safety, and while the proposed scheme is a welcome development, he would like to see additional measures to slow the traffic down, and asked why a 20mph limit could not be put in place. Anita Guy, Principal Highway Maintenance Engineer stated that in order to comply with Surrey’s speed limit policy, average speeds would need to be 24mph or less for a signed only 20mph speed limit to be effective. Therefore traffic calming measures would need to be installed to ensure drivers complied with a 20mph speed limit. However, the narrow road and lack of street lighting mean it is not possible to put in traffic calming measures. 

     

    Parish and District Councillor Mrs Liz Parker stated that there is a light, but it is covered with foliage, and that with a new development of 172 homes in Hurst Green, improvements to this road are necessary. Mrs Parker had concerns that the proposed hatching could make the road narrower, and potentially add to the risks.

     

    The Chairman acknowledged the complexities around making improvements for pedestrians on this road, but agreed that it does need looking at. He proposed to discuss with the district and parish councils once the results of the road safety audit are known. The scheme will be put onto the ITS list, for review with the Parish Council.

     

    2)    Mr Mike Clark – congestion on Croydon Road Caterham

     

    The Chairman referred Mr Clark to the written response.

     

    Mr Clark asked whether there would be any funding for a review of the road design next year. He stated that, in his view, the road is unsafe. The parking issues and the road design itself results in the road becoming effectively a single lane, and that as a result it is unacceptable as a main road into Caterham. He argued that what was needed was more than a look at parking.

     

    Mrs Marks acknowledged Mr Clark’s concerns. For residents along this road, having somewhere to park is a key concern. Drivers need to drive carefully and safely.  Given that the road is the main route into Caterham, Mrs Marks agreed that the road does need looking at.

     

    The Area Highway Manager stated that no complaints had been received from bus operators about congestion in the area, and invited Mr Clark to offer his support through the Parish Council, who would welcome his suggestions,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75/16

76/16

MEMBERS QUESTIONS pdf icon PDF 55 KB

    To receive any written questions from Members under Standing Order 47.  Notice should be given in writing to the Community Partnership and Committee Officer of formal questions by 12.00 noon four working days before the meeting.

     

    Questions and responses will be provided at the meeting.

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Questions 1 and 2 and the responses were tabled at the meeting. Questions 3 and 4 were asked informally at the meeting.

     

    1)    Mr Nick Skellett - Pavement outside Moor House School

     

    The Chairman proposed a meeting with the school and district council to discuss. District Councillor Mr Pat Cannon endorsed this.

     

    2)    Mr Nick Skellett – Use of Oxted pavements

     

    The Chairman accepted the response.

     

    3)    Mr Nick SkellettWoodhurst Lane

     

    The Chairman asked that Woodhurst Lane be assessed when the committee prioritises schemes for 2017-18.

     

    4)    Mrs Helena Windsor – Blocked footpath

     

    Mrs Windsor reported that footpath FP269 was blocked but that progress was now being made, and she has been told it is the next one on the list to be resolved.

77/16

DECISION TRACKER (FOR INFORMATION) pdf icon PDF 251 KB

    This document provides an update on the decisions made at previous meetings of the Tandridge Local Committee starting from June 2015.

     

    (Report attached)

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officer attending: Vicki Eade, Community Partnership and Committee Officer

     

    Petitions, Public Question, Statements: None

     

    The Chairman referred members to the tracker.

78/16

MEMBERS ALLOCATIONS SUMMARY (FOR INFORMATION) pdf icon PDF 187 KB

    Surrey County Council Councillors receive funding to spend on local projects that help to promote social, economic or environmental well-being in the neighbourhoods and communities of Surrey. This funding is known as Members’ Allocation.

     

    For the financial year 2016/17 the County Council has allocated £10,296 revenue funding to each County Councillor. This report provides an update on the projects that have been received since April 2016 to date.

     

    (Report and annex attached)

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officer attending: Sandra Brown, Community Partnership Team Leader – East

     

    Petitions, Public Question, Statements: None

     

    Member Discussion – Key Points:

     

    The Chairman referred members to the report.

     

    Members were pleased to note the ‘Singing for the Brain’ sessions were soon to start, and were keen to attend the group’s Christmas session.

     

    Resolution:

     

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) agreed to note:

    (i) The Members’ Allocation applications received and amounts spent, where indicated, as set out in Annex 1 of the report.

79/16

COMMUNITY SAFETY FUNDING (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION) 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.

     

    (Report attached).

    Decision:

     

     The Local Committee (Tandridge) RESOLVED to agree 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 this report.

     

    (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 for decision:

     

    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

     

    Officer attending: Vicki Eade, Community Partnership and Committee Officer

     

    Petitions, Public Question, Statements: None

     

    The officer introduced the report. The proposals aimed to ensure better value for money and greater transparency.

     

    Member Discussion – Key Points:

     

    The Committee agreed to the proposals.

     

    Resolution:

     

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) RESOLVED to agree 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 this report.

     

    (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 for decision:

     

    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.

     

80/16

PRESENTATION FROM GOVIA THAMESLINK (FOR INFORMATION) pdf icon PDF 1 MB

    Presentation from Govia Thameslink about issues on the railways of interest to local residents, such as car parking, capacity and long-term plans for stations.

     

    (No report)

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officers attending: Phil Hutchinson, Head of Strategic Planning, Jane Cobb, 2018 Timetable Consultation Project Manager, Govia Thameslink

     

    Petitions, Public Question, Statements: None

     

    The officers presented the consultation just launched on the 2018 timetable.

     

    The Head of Strategic Planning apologised to those present for the ongoing disruption affecting services locally and stated that the company is working hard to restore service levels. He told the committee about the ‘step change’ in infrastructure, capacity and connections that will come following the completion of the London Bridge project. It will be the biggest change to railway timetables in a generation. The consultation closes on 8 December 2016, and he asked for the committee’s support in publicising the consultation locally.  Following the consultation, a full timetable will be produced for Spring 2017.

     

    There are changes proposed for the Tandridge area – these can be viewed online and in the consultation documents that the Head of Timetabling agreed to send to the committee. There will be positive changes for train users locally, where connections to London and the north will improve, as will capacity, through the introduction of longer trains, and increased frequency. For example, Caterham will see faster journeys into London, as the train will combine at Purley and continue as a fast train to London Bridge. The frequency is also proposed to increase to 4 per hour during the evenings.

     

    Member Discussion – Key Points:

     

    The Chairman agreed to help publicise the consultation, by sharing with District and Parish Councils. He asked that the committee be sent the consultation documents, so that they are clear what they are being asked to comment upon, and will seek to provide a response from the Local Committee. He invited the Govia representatives to attend the next informal meeting of the committee to discuss the proposals in more detail.

     

    Members raised concerns about the impact of the changes on the number of cars parked on local roads, which is already a key frustration for her residents, and called for more parking to be provided. Mr Hutchinson said there were no plans for increasing car parking within this consultation. He agreed to take the concerns back to the Local Development Manager for Govia Thameslink, who had been unable to attend the meeting. 

     

    In response to a question from Mr Sydney, Mr Hutchinson said there were no plans for double decker trains in the near future.

     

    In response to a question from Mrs Windsor, Mr Hutchinson said there were no proposed changes to the frequency of trains on the Tonbridge line, but a new evening service running directly to London was being proposed. 

     

    The Area Highway Manager asked that Govia link with Surrey Highways and Transport, who look at bus links with railway timetables. The Head of Timetabling confirmed they were planning to meet with local bus operators as part of the consultation.

     

    The officers said there is a Local Development Fund for integration of services locally, and the committee were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80/16

81/16

MILITARY COVENANT UPDATE (FOR INFORMATION) pdf icon PDF 140 KB

    Surrey County Council (SCC) signed the Armed Forces Community Covenant with the military on 13 March 2012, with Tandridge District Council (TDC) signing on 24 April 2014. Following the signings, a countywide Surrey Civilian Military Partnership Board (SCMPB) was established to implement actions under the Covenant across Surrey.

     

    This report provides an update of activities undertaken.

     

    (Report and annexes 1-4 attached).

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officer attending: Canon Peter Bruinvels, Civilian – Military Liaison Adviser to Surrey County Council,

     

    Petitions, Public Question, Statements: None

     

    Canon Peter Bruinvels outlined the achievements of both the County Council and Tandridge District Council in offering support to the military community.

     

    The Surrey Civilian-Military Partnership Board (SCMPB) is now chaired by Mrs Marks. Every department within the county council now has an armed forces officer champion, and Surrey has secured the second highest amount of funding in the UK amounting to £500,000 through Covenant Grants in England. District Councillor Pat Cannon, is the first serving Council Chairman to also be the Armed Forces Champion. The SCMPB job description for armed forces champions as developed by Surrey is now being used UK wide by the MoD as an exemplar.

     

    Surrey’s contact centre staff have received training so they now ask residents calling whether they have served in the armed forces, so that they can be referred to service charity ‘ssafa’ if appropriate. Work is underway with Kent and surrounding authorities now to share best practice and coordinate information.

     

    Surrey County Council has been awarded the Employers Recognition Scheme ‘Gold Award’, which recognises them as a military friendly employer. Among a very limited number of high profile blue chip companies (22), Surrey was one of only two county councils to secure this award.

     

    The next steps will be to encourage businesses to adopt the community covenant, and encourage them to take on reservists. The Civilian-Military Liaison Officer referred the committee to a directory of information, advice and guidance put together for military families to help them access public services.

     

    Member discussion – key points:

     

    Members offered their thanks to the Civilian-Military Liaison Officer, for his enthusiasm and determination in working so hard to represent the military.

     

    District Councillor Mr Pat Cannon endorsed this,  and expressed his gratitude to Mrs Marks for her help as Chairman of the SCMPB. 

     

    The Chairman announced that he was in discussions with the district council to secure the return of district councillors to the Local Committee, and was keen to look at a joint committee going forwards. Mr Cannon stated that he would be writing to the Leader of the district council to endorse this, as he sees the value of the Local Committee. 

82/16

SPEED LIMIT - GODSTONE ROAD BLETCHINGLEY (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION) pdf icon PDF 107 KB

    The speed limit on the A25 Godstone Road in Bletchingley was reduced from 50mph to 30mph in 2012.  Concerns have been expressed by Surrey Police that a section of the 30mph speed limit is not effective.  Therefore, a speed limit assessment has been carried out following the process set out in Surrey’s policy “Setting Local Speed Limits”.   As a result of this assessment it is proposed that the existing 30mph speed limit in a section of Godstone Road and also in the un-named service roads fronting Chevington Villas and Sunnybank Villas, be increased to 40mph.  This report seeks approval for the changes to the speed limit in accordance with Surrey’s policy.

     

    (Report and Annexes 1 and 2 attached)

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) RESOLVED to defer this item until the 9 December 2016 meeting

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    To allow for consultation with Parish and District Councils

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officers attending: Zena Curry, Area Highway Manager

     

    Petitions, Public Question, Statements: None

     

    To accommodate the residents who had come to the meeting for this item, the Chairman amended the agenda to take this item after Item 7.

     

    Member Discussion – Key Points:

     

    The Chairman reported that he had spoken with Chris Cannon, Road Safety and Traffic Management Officer with Surrey Police ahead of the meeting, and that due to a lack of prior consultation with the Parish and District Councils, he was minded to defer the item until the committee’s December meeting.

     

    Divisional Members Mrs Windsor said residents had not had time to comment on the proposals.

     

    A number of local residents spoke in favour of deferring the decision. Residents of Sunnybanks Villas addressed the committee, and asked for the decision to be postponed. Resident Mrs Janine Marks said that the Parish Council needed to be consulted, and that the existing 30mph limit was needed, particularly in light of new housing developments and proposed car park which should be taken into consideration. Another resident called for greater enforcement of the existing 30mph speed limit, and was frustrated that residents had not been permitted to conduct any Speedwatch activity in this area. Resident Mr Blackwell spoke of his experience seeing people speeding in this area.

     

    The Area Highway Manager agreed to the consultation proposed, prior to consultation as part of the traffic order process, but stated that the report would still come back in December with the same recommendation for decision. Surrey Police’s Road Safety and Traffic Management Officer agreed to meet with the residents.

     

    Mrs Windsor proposed to defer the decision. Mrs Marks seconded the proposal. 

     

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) RESOLVED to defer this item until the 9 December 2016 meeting

     

    Reason for decision:

     

    To allow for consultation with Parish and District Councils

83/16

HIGHWAYS SCHEMES 2016-17 UPDATE (SERVICE MONITORING AND ISSUES OF LOCAL CONCERN) pdf icon PDF 106 KB

    At the 11th December 2015 Local Committee, Members agreed a programme of revenue and capital highway works in Tandridge.  An amended programme of works was agreed on 23rd 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.

     

    (Report and Annex attached)

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Declarations of Interest: None

     

    Officers attending: Zena Curry, Area Highway Manager

     

    Petitions, Public Question, Statements: None

     

    The Chairman Mr Nick Skellett left the meeting at this point at 12:30pm. Mr Sydney, Vice-Chairman of the Local Committee, took over as Chairman for this item.

     

    Member Discussion – Key Points

     

    Mrs Windsor asked about Green Lane, Outwood, which had been on the original list for resurfacing but nothing has happened. The Principal Highway Maintenance Engineer, agreed to look into this and respond to Mrs Windsor.

     

    Mrs Marks asked about High Lane, Warlingham, where the farmer is concerned for safety. The Principal Highway Maintenance Engineer responded that Highways are about to issue a traffic order that does not allow motor vehicle access, which will enable lockable bollards to be put up. Officers agreed to send Mrs Marks a copy of the letter that is being sent to residents there to advise them.

     

    Mr Sydney asked about progress on dropped kerbs for Dormans Road, Dormansland. Officers confirmed that this will be done this financial year if sufficient funds are available, or during 2017-18.

     

    Mrs Marks confirmed with the Area Highway Manager that she had asked for the following issues in Caterham to be looked into: i) speeding on Burntwood Lane, ii) inconsiderate parking at the Mercedez-Benz garage on Croydon Road by the roundabout, iii) parking at Waitrose, (iv) the exit from Morrisons supermarket onto Harestone Valley Road, v) dates for completion of the yellow lines on Croydon Road, and vi) a speed survey for Stafford Road. The Area Highway Manager acknowledged receipt of these issues, and agreed to look into them and report back to Mrs Marks.

     

    Mr Sydney asked why Reigate and Banstead parking enforcement officers had not been undertaking enforcement activity in Dormansland and Lingfield as agreed with the Parking Strategy and Implementation Manager. The Area Highway Manager agreed to look into this and respond to Mr Sydney.

     

    The Area Highway Manager invited members to submit their comments on structures and drainage in a report that would be circulated to them shortly. She confirmed that the Winter Service report did not come to this Local Committee this year, as it would be taken to Cabinet.