Agenda, decisions and minutes

Tandridge Local Committee
Friday, 9 December 2016 10.15 am

Venue: Tandridge District Council Offices, Station Road East, Oxted, Surrey, RH8 0BT

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

Items
No. Item

84/16

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

    To receive any apologies.

    Minutes:

    Apologies were received from Mr David Hodge and Mr John Orrick.

    Mr Orrick subsequently arrived during Item 14.

     

    As the Chairman was aware that some committee members needed to leave the meeting early, he changed the order of the published agenda to take items 10 and 11 first after item 3.

85/16

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING pdf icon PDF 231 KB

86/16

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 Member is aware, that relates to the Member’s spouse or civil partner (or any person with whom the Member is living as a spouse or civil partner)
    • 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:

    Mr Chris Botten declared an interest in Item 4 – petition received from Burstow Primary School – as he will be the Chair of Governors from January 2017.

     

    Mr Michael Sydney declared a personal, but not prejudicial, interest in Item 11 – application to divert footpath 415- due to his position on the High Weald Joint Advisory Committee.

87/16

PETITIONS pdf icon PDF 146 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.

     

    One petition has been received:

     

    1) Safer school run for Burstow Primary School (Mrs Catherine Coulson)

     

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    This item was heard following items 10 and 11. Mr Pat Cannon left the meeting during this item.

     

    1 petition was received. A copy of the petition and response, as well as the supporting comments made by signatories, and a letter of support from the Acting Headteacher is annexed to the minutes.

     

    1 – Safer school run for Burstow Primary School.

     

    Mrs Catherine Coulson, a parent at the school, initiated this petition. As she was unable to attend the meeting, Claire Hodgson, Acting Headteacher at Burstow Primary School, presented the petition on her behalf.

     

    Mrs Hodgson’s presentation included the following points:

    ·         The school is by a busy crossroads, with shops on both sides of the road.

    ·         HGVs often come through, and many deliver to the local shops. As a result, many people park on the yellow lines near the corner of the road.

    ·         The current situation is dangerous, and is a daily problem at drop-off and pick-up times.

    ·         The accident that happened in July is typical of the road.

    ·         The school are keen to work with the county council to explore the issues more closely, and look at possible solutions.

     

    Burstow Parish Councillor, Mrs Liz Cutter, also addressed the committee. She agreed that the parking needs to be looked at, but was pleased that the county council was not planning to increase the railings. She asked that the county council look into the issues raised.

     

    The Area Highway Manager acknowledged the concerns, and referred the committee to the observations made by council officers on a visit to the school. Some suggestions have been put forward to improve the situation, as detailed in the response, and Highways want to work with the school and parents going forwards. The officer explained that at this point they cannot promise a larger scheme, but they will work on the suggestions in the petition response, and in the longer term, it could be possible to review the junction.

     

    Members acknowledged the problems outside the school. The divisional member explained he had held a useful meeting with the school, with some positive ideas to discuss further with the Education Department within the county council.

     

    Members were keen to see more enforcement of parking on double yellow lines. 

     

    The committee agreed the response provided.

88/16

FORMAL PUBLIC QUESTIONS pdf icon PDF 73 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.

    Minutes:

    1 public question had been received, from Mr Simon Morrow, District Councillor for Warlingham East, Chelsham and Farleigh, and Warlingham Parish Council Chairman. A copy of the question and the response is annexed to the minutes.

     

    Mr Morrow asked about the county council’s plans for the field on Chelsham Road, Warlingham. The site is within the greenbelt. He hoped that next year would see some positive news about this site.

     

    The Chairman referred Mr Morrow to the response.

89/16

MEMBERS QUESTIONS pdf icon PDF 81 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.

    Minutes:

    1 member question had been received, from county councillor Mr Nick Skellett. A copy of the question and response is annexed to the minutes. Mr Skellett asked about the traffic and parking problems being caused by the closure of Woodhurst Lane and Southlands Lane.

     

    Mr Skellett was pleased to note in the response that the closure of Woodhurst Lane had been lifted.

     

    Mrs Sally Marks asked a question informally. Mrs Marks invited the Caterham Rotary to consider supporting an application for Members Allocations funding to put towards a Christmas party for the residents at Hillcroft Court Caterham. Residents had been forced to leave their homes due to the June 2016 floods. Mr Chris Botten confirmed that Caterham Parish Council has already committed £200. Mr Rod Stead, who sits on the Rotary Club, agreed to discuss this with the Rotary.

90/16

DECISION TRACKER (FOR INFORMATION) pdf icon PDF 298 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:

    Members asked for an update on work to redirect HGVs away from villages, and requested that the SCC Traffic Planning Engineer attends a future informal meeting. The Chairman agreed to circulate an update to the newly co-opted district members. The Area Highway Manager agreed to circulate any updated information to the committee.

     

    Mr Michael Cooper, who is also Chairman of the Caterham Town working group that is working on the Caterham Masterplan would be pleased to work with the county council on the issues on Croydon Road, Caterham.

     

    Mr Chris Botten noted the update regarding Le Personne residential home, and suggested that if the feasibility study indicated a high cost, then introducing a 20mph speed limit may be more desirable. The Area Highway Manager noted this request, and Mr Rod Stead’s request that the Chair of Trustees at the home are consulted. Members were disappointed that this issue had not yet been resolved.

     

    Members were surprised to see the Whyteleafe gullies had not previously been classified as high priority.

91/16

MEMBERS ALLOCATIONS SUMMARY (FOR INFORMATION) pdf icon PDF 208 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:

    The Chairman reminded county council members that the February deadline for funding was approaching, and to speak to the Local Support Assistant about possible projects.

92/16

HIGHWAYS UPDATE 2016-17 (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION) pdf icon PDF 118 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:

    Decision:

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) resolved to agree to:

     

    i) Note the contents of the report;

     

    ii) Authorise the Area Team Manager in consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman to finalise the list of local priority schemes for inclusion in the Horizon 2 Roads Major Maintenance Programme (HRMM) by 31st January 2017, following consideration of the selection of schemes under the influence of the Local Committee at the informal Local Committee meeting on 25 November 2016

     

    Reasons for decisions:

     

    To update the Local Committee on the progress of the highway works programme in Tandridge.

     

    Minutes:

    Officers attending: Zena Curry, Area Highway Manager, Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer

     

    The Chairman referred members to a paper on Horizon 2 he circulated at the meeting. He stated that the number of roads needing attention was high, and therefore to allocate the 20% available to the committee, he had asked the Area Highway Manager to put forward recommendations for the Chairman and Vice-Chairman to agree.

     

    The Area Highway Manager confirmed that there were 74 schemes prioritised on the list. Due to the urgent problems on Titsey Hill, this scheme would be included. This would take up about 1km of the circa 2km that the committee had discretion to agree.

     

    Resolution:

     

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) resolved to agree to:

     

    i) Note the contents of the report;

     

    ii) Authorise the Area Team Manager in consultation with the Chairman and Vice Chairman to finalise the list of local priority schemes for inclusion in the Horizon 2 Roads Major Maintenance Programme (HRMM) by 31st January 2017, following consideration of the selection of schemes under the influence of the Local Committee at the informal Local Committee meeting on 25 November 2016

     

    Reasons for decisions:

     

    To update the Local Committee on the progress of the highway works programme in Tandridge.

     

93/16

HIGHWAYS FORWARD PROGRAMME 2017/18 - 2018/19 (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION) pdf icon PDF 145 KB

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

     

    (Report and annex attached).

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) resolved to agree to:

     

    General

     

    (i) Note that the Local Committee’s devolved highways budget for capital works has been reduced as set out in the Medium Term Financial Plan, to £272,294 in 2017/18 and to £226,912 in 2018/19, and that it has been assumed that the revenue budget for 2017/18 remains the same as for 2016/17, at £195,303;

     

    (ii) Note that a further report will be presented to the March 2016 meeting of the Tandridge Local Committee to agree a revised programme should the devolved budget vary from these amounts;

     

    Capital Improvement Schemes (ITS)

     

    (iii) Agree that the capital improvement schemes allocation for Tandridge be used to progress the Integrated Transport Schemes programme set out in Annex 1;

     

    (iv) 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;

     

    (v) Agree that the Local Committee Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Area Team Manager, together with the relevant 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.

     

    (vi) The Area Team Manager, in consultation with the Local Committee Chairman and Vice-Chairman, be able to vire money between the capital improvement schemes (ITS) and capital maintenance (LSR) budgets, and vice-versa, if required;

     

    Capital Maintenance Schemes (LSR)

     

    (vii) Agree that the capital maintenance schemes allocation for Tandridge be divided equitably between County Councillors to carry out Local Structural Repair, and that the schemes to be progressed be agreed by the Area Maintenance Engineer in consultation with the Local Committee Chairman, Vice-Chairman and local divisional Members;

     

    Revenue Maintenance

     

    (viii) Authorise the Area Maintenance Engineer, in consultation with the Local Committee Chairman, Vice-Chairman and relevant local divisional Member, to use £195,303 of the revenue maintenance budget for 2017/18 as detailed in Table 2 of this report;

     

    (ix) The Area Maintenance Engineer, in consultation with the Local Committee Chairman and Vice-Chairman, be able to vire the revenue maintenance budget between the identified work headings in Table 2;

     

    (x) Agree that £5,000 per County Councillor be allocated from the revenue maintenance budget for Highways Localism Initiative works, and that if bids for this funding have not been received by the end of May 2016, the monies revert to the relevant Member to use to fund Community Enhancement works;

     

    (xi) Agree that Members should contact the Area Maintenance Engineer to discuss their specific requirements with regard to any Community Enhancement allocation and arrange for the work activities to be managed by the Area Maintenance Engineer on their behalf;

     

    (xii) Agree that the revenue maintenance gang be managed on Members’ behalf by the Area Maintenance Engineer.

     

    Reasons for decisions:

     

    To  ...  view the full decision text for item 93/16

    Minutes:

    As the Chairman was aware of some committee members needing to leave the meeting early due to other engagements, this item was taken after Item 3.

     

    Officers attending: Zena Curry, Area Highway Manager, Anne-Marie Hannam, Senior Traffic Engineer

     

    The Area Highway Manager introduced the report, and explained the forward programme is based on the assumed budget, but the actual budget will not be finalised until March. A further report will be brought to the Local Committee in March once the final budgets are known. The Area Highway Manager referred members to table one in the report, which sets out the assumed levels of funding for the committee highway budgets, and to annex 1, which sets out the proposed schemes. There is the opportunity for virement during the year if required. The Chairman explained that there is flexibility within the programme, and the Chairman and Vice-Chairman will always consider suggestions from members.

     

    Member discussion – key points:

     

    ·         A22 – Whyteleafe - Members asked for clarification on the ‘anomaly’ listed in annex 1. Officers explained that the traffic order behind the positioning of the signs needed to be amended.

    ·         Members were concerned that the sum for drainage and ditches was inadequate. The officer explained that there are other budgets for capital funding of this held centrally, which are not included within this report. There will be the opportunity for the committee to respond flexibly to local needs with in-year virements of funds.

    ·         Members welcomed the investment at Halliloo Valley Road / Woldingham Road / Bug Hill, and asked that strong negotiations are started with the landowner, so that the works are not delayed.

    ·         Members suggested Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) funding, where secured, could help to enhance funding for the forward programme.

     

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) resolved to agree to:

     

    General

     

    (i) Note that the Local Committee’s devolved highways budget for capital works has been reduced as set out in the Medium Term Financial Plan, to £272,294 in 2017/18 and to £226,912 in 2018/19, and that it has been assumed that the revenue budget for 2017/18 remains the same as for 2016/17, at £195,303;

     

    (ii) Note that a further report will be presented to the March 2016 meeting of the Tandridge Local Committee to agree a revised programme should the devolved budget vary from these amounts;

     

    Capital Improvement Schemes (ITS)

     

    (iii) Agree that the capital improvement schemes allocation for Tandridge be used to progress the Integrated Transport Schemes programme set out in Annex 1;

     

    (iv) 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;

     

    (v) Agree that the Local Committee Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Area Team Manager, together with the relevant 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  ...  view the full minutes text for item 93/16

94/16

APPLICATION TO DIVERT PUBLIC FOOTPATH 415 DORMANSLAND (OTHER COUNTY COUNCIL FUNCTIONS) pdf icon PDF 195 KB

    This report seeks a decision on whether to make a legal order to divert Public Footpath No. 415, Dormansland. Two objections have been received.

     

    The officer’s recommendation is that an order should be made.

     

    (Report and 4 annexes attached).

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) resolved, by 9 votes against, 0 votes in favour and 1 abstention,  to REFUSE that:

     

    A Diversion Order is made under section 119 of the Highways Act 1980, to divert Public Footpath No. 415, Dormansland onto the line shown A D E F on Drg. No. 3/1/129/H13.

     

    Reasons for decision:

     

    The committee were not satisfied that the criteria for making a diversion order had been met; with particular concern about the route itself, the ecological implications, ease of navigating the proposed route and potential for vandalism.

    Minutes:

    Officer attending: Debbie Prismall, Senior Countryside Access Officer, Legal Definition

     

    As the Chairman was aware that some members of the committee needed to leave early he amended the order of the agenda, so this item was taken after items 3 and 10.

     

    Public Speakers:

     

    Mr Eric Richardson, representative of Swites Wood Ltd, had registered to speak in objection to the application. Mr Richardson made the following points:

    ·         The current path goes nowhere.

    ·         It is little used and obsolete.

    ·         The county council’s ecologist objects to the proposed diversion, and yet the officer recommendation seeks to override this objection.

     

    Mrs Maureen Young, Chairman of Dormansland Parish Council, had registered to speak in objection to the application. Mrs Young made the following points:

    ·         Concern for the disturbance to wildlife

    ·         Worried that the proposal will increase anti-social behaviour

    ·         Concerned that deer will not be able to jump both fences and may be injured/killed.

     

    Mr Tony Pearson, Local Footpath Secretary, had registered to speak in favour of the application, on behalf of the Ramblers, and arrived during the member discussion. Mr Pearson made the following points:

    ·         The Ramblers were consulted on this proposal in 2015 and indicated their support.

    ·         However since then the Ramblers only support the proposal with reluctance. The Ramblers fully support taking walkers off the roads, however they consider there could be a better solution than the one being proposed.

     

    Member discussion – key points:

     

    ·         The local ward member, Mrs Lesley Steeds, asked for the application to be refused. She was not satisfied the proposal met the criteria for a diversion, and was concerned about the ecological impacts of the proposed footpath. She stated they would disadvantage those walking with dogs, and that the overhanging branches, and high stile, made it difficult to negotiate. She was concerned the proposed diversion could lead to an increase in antisocial behaviour from vandals, or motorbikes.

    ·         The divisional member, Mr Michael Sydney, agreed with Mrs Steeds. He commented it was a seemingly expensive request, and he would expect the High Weald AONB Joint Advisory Committee would agree with him.

    ·         Members commented that the footpath seems very little used, and were surprised there was no information on this within the report. 

    ·         Concerns were expressed about the steep drop at the entrance, and the presence of culverts and overhanging trees. The exit of the current footpath onto the busy road make this path appear seldom used.

    ·         Members asked the officer to confirm that if the application is refused, the current footpath remains. The Countryside Access Officer confirmed this.

     

    The Countryside Access Officer referred members to the written statement made by the Ramblers, as set out in the report.

     

    The Senior Countryside Access Officer explained that other options have been explored, but this proposal takes walkers off a busy road where there have been past incidences of accidents. The stile would be replaced with a kissing gate to improve access. The land could be stepped to ease the steep bank. There are no counters recording the use of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 94/16

95/16

APPLICATION TO DIVERT FOOTPATH 381 LINGFIELD (OTHER COUNTY COUNCIL FUNCTIONS) pdf icon PDF 193 KB

    An application has been received from Network Rail to divert Public Footpath No. 381, Lingfield onto the existing Lingfield station footbridge on safety grounds under section 119a of the Highways Act 1980. A number of objections have been received. This report seeks a decision on whether to make a legal orderto divert the footpath.

     

    The officer’s view is that the application should be refused.

     

    (Report and 3 annexes attached).

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) resolved to agree that:

     

    (i) The application from Network Rail dated 3 November 2016 to divert Public Footpath No. 381, Lingfield onto the existing station footbridge, shown A C E F G B on Drg. No. 3/1/29/H60a is refused.

     

    (ii) Network Rail is asked to explore other options for a diversion onto an alternative route accessible for those with mobility difficulties and pushchairs, including a new footbridge with lifts or improving the level crossing.

     

    (iii) The Chairman writes to Network Rail expressing the committee’s dissatisfaction with their failure to secure a satisfactory solution for residents.

     

    Reasons for decision:

     

    The application seeks to divert the at-level crossing onto an existing stepped footbridge. The footbridge is not accessible for those with mobility difficulties and

    those with young children in pushchairs and also involves a 360 metre detour if

    travelling in a west to east direction or vice versa.

    Minutes:

    Officer attending: Debbie Prismall, Senior Countryside Access Officer, Legal Definition

     

    Public speakers:

     

    Parish Councillor Mrs Liz Lockwood had registered to speak on behalf of Lingfield Parish Council in objection to the application. Mrs Lockwood made the following points:

    ·         The current footpath provides direct, level, and road-free access for walkers.

    ·         Anyone with a buggy, mobility difficulty, or heavy luggage is disadvantaged through this proposal. A lift is needed to enable these residents to access both sides of the platform and the continuing footpath.

    ·         Lingfield has a high proportion of local residents who have mobility difficulties.

    ·         This proposal is a backwards step.

     

    Mr Tony Pearson, Local Footpath Secretary, had registered to speak in objection to the application, on behalf of the Ramblers. Mr Pearson made the following points:

    ·         The footpath was closed on a temporary basis, and residents were led to expect the development of a bridge with lift access. This is what residents want to see.

    ·         The existing route provides a useful link for walkers. The proposed diversion is a large detour.

    ·         The committee should reject this application and ask Network Rail to come up with a better solution.

     

    Member discussion – key points:

     

    ·         Members confirmed with officers that refusing the diversion application would not cause the existing footpath to be reopened.

    ·         Members commented that this temporary closure has now been going on for a long time. It was felt that there must be a way of making the level crossing safer, perhaps using lights or other warning system. Members noted that Network Rail were working towards a national programme of level crossing closures.

    ·         Members expressed concern about the lack of disabled access being proposed, and concluded that the officer recommendation to refuse the application was correct, as this was an inadequate solution for Lingfield residents.

     

    Members voted on both of the officer recommendations:

     

    Votes in favour of recommendation (i): 9

    Votes against recommendation (i): 0

    Abstentions: 0.

     

    Votes in favour of recommendation (ii): 9

    Votes against recommendation (ii): 0

    Abstentions: 0.

     

    The Chairman proposed an additional recommendation to write to Network Rail to express the committee’s dissatisfaction with their failure to propose an acceptable solution. Mrs Marks seconded this proposal.

     

    Resolution:

     

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) resolved to agree that:

     

    (i) The application from Network Rail dated 3 November 2016 to divert Public Footpath No. 381, Lingfield onto the existing station footbridge, shown A C E F G B on Drg. No. 3/1/29/H60a is refused.

     

    (ii) Network Rail is asked to explore other options for a diversion onto an alternative route accessible for those with mobility difficulties and pushchairs, including a new footbridge with lifts or improving the level crossing.

     

    (iii) The Chairman writes to Network Rail expressing the committee’s dissatisfaction with their failure to secure a satisfactory solution for residents.

     

    Reasons for decision:

     

    The application seeks to divert the at-level crossing onto an existing stepped footbridge. The footbridge is not accessible for those with mobility  ...  view the full minutes text for item 95/16

96/16

COMMUNITY SKILLS INITIATIVE (SERVICE MONITORING AND ISSUES OF LOCAL CONCERN) pdf icon PDF 101 KB

    This Community Skills initiative, developed in partnership with Kier Highways, seeks to address 3 key issues within Local Authority service areas:

     

    1. Address skills shortages within the Highways Service through the targeted selection and training of local people who would not normally be able to access this employment;
    2. Provide vulnerable people with a supported route to employment that improves their economic wellbeing and reduces their reliance on statutory services;
    3. Provide enhanced service and social value within existing highways contracts and in so doing support the local authority’s overall performance under the Social Value Act.

    (Report and annex attached).

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Officer attending: Keir Schiltz, Team Manager, Commissioning and Prevention, Children, Schools and Families

     

    The officer introduced the report. The initiative aims to bring vulnerable people into the workforce, and this collaboration with Kier Highways is intending to support these vulnerable people, as well as addressing areas of skills shortages in the highways sector. Candidates will receive intensive support and training, with access to the Kier Highways apprenticeship scheme following successful completion of this pre-apprenticeship course.

     

    Member discussion – key points:

     

    The Chairman confirmed that the proposal coming to the committee would be secured specifically for Tandridge residents, and that the works they undertook would be within the district. He confirmed that he had seen the results of the scheme and been impressed. Local Committees are being asked to support this initiative, in order for it to progress next year, assuming that suitable candidates will be identified, and an operational base agreed.

     

    Mrs Marks asked the Team Manager to make contact with the Community Foundation for Surrey, who may be able to assist with transport costs for the candidates.

     

    The Team Manager confirmed that the candidates will be identified through the youth service and wider Early Help service. Case workers will be asked to identify candidates, and this could include those in looked after care, homeless, or in the criminal justice system.

     

    Resolution:

     

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) resolved to agree to:

     

    (i) Endorse the development of the S-Skills initiative in Tandridge;

     

    (ii) Invite members to consider allocating a proportionate contribution towards the expected total cost of £3750 to sponsor 1-3 Tandridge participants on this initiative, from their Localism Initiative/Community Enhancement Fund.

     

    Reasons for decisions:

     

    Vulnerable young people and adults within our communities often require different routes to employment. It is particularly important to find sectors where their inherent and latent skills can be developed and valued by the employer and where the employer has the necessary incentives to supply the extra support necessary.

     

    The highways sector is one such area where their ageing workforce, who are primarily resident outside of the county, needs to be replaced and therefore there is a real desire to diversify the approach to recruitment and training.

     

    Surrey County Council is committed to maximising the Social Value gained from every pound it spends through its contracted and directly delivered services.

     

    The Local Committee’s Youth Task Group, (comprising county and district councillors and officers) have discussed the proposals and indicated their support for the initiative.

97/16

CATERHAM FLOODING - SECTION 19 REPORT (SERVICE MONITORING AND ISSUES OF LOCAL CONCERN) pdf icon PDF 117 KB

    This report is to provide an update of activities and plans following the flooding in Caterham on the Hill and Coulsdon on the 7 June 2016. Although a number of flood resilience activities have taken place since the event, further work will be required to provide the most effective methods of mitigating the impact of future flood incidents.

     

    This report details the findings of the section 19 flood investigation in relation to the flood event that took place in Caterham on the Hill and Coulsdon on 7 June 2016 and lists the ongoing actions being taken by the Risk Management Authorities in this area.

     

    Members are asked to note the findings of the investigation and the suite of ongoing work by relevant authorities.

     

    (Report and annex attached)

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Officer attending: Tor Peebles, Flood Risk Management Strategy and Partnerships Team Leader

     

    Mr John Orrick arrived during this item.

     

    The Team Leader introduced the report. He confirmed that there had been a positive first meeting of the Caterham Flood Action Group in early December. All gullies in the area are due to be cleared during January and February. Every single gully in Caterham on the Hill has been visually inspected. The Flood Action Group are being invited to identify blocked gullies they have seen. The officer noted the positive community spirit and commitment within the Caterham on the Hill community. The officer confirmed that the county council is working with the other Risk Management Authorities (RMAs) to look at opportunities for mitigating the impact of flooding. Funding has been secured for feasibility studies, and the county council will be seeking further contributions from the other RMAs.

     

    The Area Highway Manager acknowledged past issues with the quality of gully cleansing. The contract has been reviewed and more quality control measures put in to address this. This includes spot checks, and new auditing methods and procedures. There are issues with parked cars blocking access to gullies. The Area Highway Manager confirmed that the council can now suspend parking and enforce this to allow for gully cleansing. However because this is expensive to do, it will only be implemented in roads with a history of problems.

     

    Member discussion – key points:

     

    ·         Members commended the Team Leader for the considerable amount of work that had been undertaken by county council officers and partner agencies.

    ·         Members asked what would happen if there was a repeat of the June rainfall tomorrow- would the consequences be the same? The Team Leader confirmed that the Money Pit is not large enough to take that volume of water. Maintenance has been carried out on the drainage, however the flood risk itself has not changed.

    ·         Park Road in Caterham is one road which could benefit from action to ensure gully clearing is not hampered by parked cars.

    ·         The Atkins report provides crucial information on how water flows through the district and signposts towards possible solutions.

    ·         Mr Botten thanked the Team Leader for attending the Caterham Parish Council public meeting, and commended all the officers who attended. Mr Botten requested that use is made of the Parish Council’s knowledge and resources. They could contribute towards the cost of parking suspension, and could use the Parish Warden to help identify blocked gullies. The focus should be to widen the focus on broader resilience to a range of emergency situations, such as power cuts.  The Team Leader agreed to take these points forward in discussion with the Parish Council.

    ·         Members discussed how Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) contributions from developers can help support the work to mitigate flooding risk and impact.  Mr Martin Fisher confirmed that flooding work was a priority for the district council’s use of CIL.

    ·         Members asked for clarification on where overall responsibility for drainage sits. The Team Leader confirmed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 97/16

98/16

ON-STREET PARKING ENFORCEMENT UPDATE (SERVICE MONITORING AND ISSUES OF LOCAL CONCERN) pdf icon PDF 199 KB

    Local Committees are responsible for agreeing on-street parking restrictions as part of the parking review process.  Committees have a scrutiny role in the enforcement operation and a share of any surplus income generated.

     

    This report sets out the background for these arrangements and provides an update on the enforcement operation in Tandridge.

     

    (Report and 2 annexes attached).

    Additional documents:

    Minutes:

    Officers attending: David Curl, Parking Strategy and Implementation Team Manager, Jacquie Joseph, Parking Services Manager Reigate and Banstead Borough Council, Gavin Handford, Head of Corporate Policy, Performance and Parking, Reigate and Banstead Borough Council.

     

    Mrs Sally Marks and Mr Martin Fisher left the meeting during this item.

     

    The Team Manager introduced the report. This is an annual update and summary of the accounts.

     

    The Head of Corporate Policy, Performance and Parking welcomed the committee’s feedback on where to increase enforcement activity, and acknowledged the desire to see more enforcement. Temporary workers were being recruited as a trial to see if this would generate sufficient income to cover their costs. At least one of these new officers will be dedicated purely to Tandridge. Reigate and Banstead Borough Council were also looking at their use of vehicles and staff working hours. He invited members to let him know of any roads they felt particularly needed more enforcement.

     

    The Parking Services Manager confirmed that she is meeting with the Police to explore better joint enforcement.

     

    Member discussion – key points:

     

    ·         Members asked that the county council works together with Tandridge District Council on their off-street parking review, to secure the best result for residents and local businesses.

    ·         Members requested the following additions to the list for more enforcement:

    o   Croydon Road Caterham opposite the former Adult Education site.

    o   Station Avenue, Caterham where cars are often seen parking on double yellow lines.

    o   Redehall Road and Wheelers Lane  Smallfield and Burstow School

    ·         Members asked whether the Caterham Business Improvement District (BiD) could provide funding for greater enforcement. Increasing churn in small town centres is a key concern for businesses. Mr Michael Cooper asked that officers engage with the BiD on this. The Head of Corporate Policy, Performance and Parking agreed to send a member of his parking team to a BiD meeting.

    ·         Members asked that broken pay and display machines are brightly covered so that people can quickly see this.

    ·         Members asked that the officers report back to the committee in March with an update on the impact of the changes.

     

    Resolution:

     

    The Local Committee (Tandridge) resolved to agreed to:

     

    (i) Note the contents of the report.

     

    Reasons for decisions:

     

    Waiting and parking restrictions that are suitably/adequately enforced will help

    to:

           Improve road safety

           Increase access for emergency vehicles

           Improve access to shops, facilities and businesses

           Increase access for refuse vehicles and service vehicles

           Ease traffic congestion

           Better regulate parking

     

    The Local Committee can contribute towards these objectives in partnership

    with the enforcement team.