Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 598 KBVenue: Council Chamber, Guildford Borough Council, Millmead House, Millmead, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 4BB
Contact: David Hall Surrey County Council, Old Millmead House, Millmead, Guildford, GU2 4BB
Media
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS
To receive any apologies for absence and notices of substitutions from Borough members under Standing Order 39. Additional documents: Minutes: Apologies received from Marsha Moseley, Nigel Manning, Tony Rooth and David Wright. |
|
|
MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING
To approve the Minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record. Additional documents: Minutes: The Minutes of the meeting held on 20 September 2017 were agreed as a true and accurate record of the meeting and were duly signed by the Chairman. |
|
|
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.
Additional documents: Minutes: There were no declarations of pecuniary interest. |
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
To receive any Chairman’s announcements. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no Chairman’s announcements. |
|
|
PETITIONS & LETTERS OF REPRESENTATION
To receive any petitions in accordance with Standing Order 65 or letters of representation in accordance with the Local Protocol. An officer response will be provided to each petition / letter of representation.
One petition has been received requesting further speeding restrictions on Wodeland Avenue, Wherwell Road and Annandale Road. Mr Tim John will present the petition. Additional documents: Minutes: Mr Tim John presented a petition with 101 signatures to get approval from the Task Group at Surrey Highways for additional sets of speed cushions (bumps) along Wodeland Avenue and new ones in Wherwell Road and Annandale Road to improve road safety for residents and pedestrians.
Mr John pointed out that speeding is a very real and constant issue on the three roads and whilst there are currently two speed cushions in place in Wodeland Avenue there is a long stretch between them allowing cars to gather significant speed.
An incident took place in August where a car crashed into a front garden wall causing significant damage.
The Highways Manager reported that two years ago the Committee approved a 20 MPH speed limit plus two speed cushions. Average speed records showed it to be a low speed road, but he would recommend to the Transportation Task Group that an additional set of cushions be installed.
Cllr Goodwin thanked the petitioner for his presentation and suggested that an additional two humps might be more appropriate and he might be able to use some of his Member’s Allocation to provide additional funding. |
|
|
WRITTEN PUBLIC QUESTIONS
To receive any questions from Surrey County Council electors within the area in accordance with Standing Order 66. Additional documents: Minutes: There were four written questions from members of the public received by the specified deadline.
Question 1 from John Oliver I fully understand that the Newlands Corner site in itself does not fall within the remit of the Guildford Local Committee. However, Drove Road, which bisects the site, is a public highway/bridleway and, therefore, does fall within the Committee’s remit. Surrey County Council has stated its intention to restructure the car park without defining what this means. Could you please let me know: What discussions, either face to face or through correspondence, have taken place with the SCC Countryside Group, its Director or Assistant Director or the SCC Cabinet Member for Environment and Planning about the restructure, what those discussions entailed and what outcomes and decisions, if any, were reached as a result of them; If the restructure was to involve the resurfacing of the car park area, would the Highways Department pay for the resurfacing of that part of the whole area which is Drove Road What steps will be taken to ensure that car parking spaces do not encroach onto Drove Road?” The following written response was provided to Mr Oliver: Public Bridleway 147 Albury runs through the car parking area at Newlands Corner and as you rightly point out, is shown on many Ordnance Survey maps as 'Drove Road'. It is therefore open to walkers, cyclists and equestrians. There are no plans to alter the route either physically, such as resurfacing as part of the car park or legally, with a change to the alignment or status.
The Countryside Access Team have been consulted in this matter and bridleway use will not be adversely affected by the parking arrangements.
Question 2 from Dylan White On the invitation of Cllr Graham Ellwood I spoke at this meeting on 8th Dec 15. At that I outlined the problems ALDI were causing the residents of north east Guildford and also proposed some solutions. Cllr. Ellwood thought these solutions were all worth pursuing so as we’re a year further on and the busiest month is upon us, I’d like to find out what progress has been made. These solutions are based on ALDI’s current permitted conditions which they themselves admit they break on a daily basis so should their appeal be successful and they are allowed even more HGV deliveries the situation for us residents is only going to get worse so these solutions will become even more urgent. To recap, my solutions to the car park being too small and there not being a separate delivery entrance are as follows: Clearly shoppers need to be got in and out of the store as fast as possible. So all 8 tills need to be constantly manned and helpers need to be on each till to assist with bag packing. I’ve seen times when only 3 tills are manned with large queues at each. Plenty of staff need to be on hand to assist people in finding what they want so they ... view the full minutes text for item 183/16 |
|
|
MEMBER QUESTION TIME
To receive any written questions from Members under Standing Order 47. Additional documents: Minutes: There were no written questions from Members. |
|
|
PARKING BUSINESS PLAN 2017 (FOR INFORMATION)
This item will be presented by Kevin McKee, Parking Service Manager, Guildford Borough Council and sets out the Parking Business Plan for 2017. It covers off-street car parking, on-street parking and park and ride. There are no specific recommendations for Committee but it presents an opportunity to comment on the work of the parking service.
Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) noted the business plan.
Minutes: This item was presented by Kevin McKee, Parking Services Manager, Guildford Borough Council and set out the Parking Business Plan for 2017. It covered off-street parking, on-street parking and park and ride. There were no specific recommendations for the Committee, but it provided an opportunity to comment on the work of the parking service.
The Local Committee (Guildford) noted the business plan.
|
|
This report will be presented by Kevin McKee, Parking Services Manager, Guildford Borough Council and seeks approval to recommendations for changing the way in which parking reviews are conducted and proposes the scope of the next review. Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) that reviews are combined and deal with issues both in the CPZ and non-CPZs areas, (ii) that reviews are limited in scope to deal with around 50 items / locations, and prioritisation is given to safety issues, (iii) that permit schemes or changes to them are considered if residents can demonstrate a groundswell of opinion clearly in support of such amendments, (iv) that disabled bay, vehicle crossover and less controversial issues are fast-tracked, and formally advertised as early in the review process as possible, (v) to formally advertise Surrey County Council’s intention to make an order to give effect to the proposals for Annandale Road, Duncan Drive, the Millmead Terrace area, The Oval and Vicarage Gate, shown in ANNEXE 5. If any representations are received they be reported to a future meeting of the Committee for consideration, or if no representations are received, the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) will be made. (vi) to develop and formally advertise Surrey County Council’s intention to make an order to give effect to the proposals for, Alresford Road, Maori Road, St Omer Road, Sycamore Road, Upperton Road, Warren Road and Woodbridge Road, listed in Paragraph 2.15, If any representations are received they be reported to a future meeting of the Committee for consideration, or if no representations are received, the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) will be made. (vii) That officers discuss further with local borough and county councillors the possibility of making changes in respect to the 40 or so ‘Local’ issues shown in ANNEXE 4, and develop proposals in a number of these locations, to be reported back to the Committee in March 2017, with a view to seeking authority to formally advertise them. Minutes: This item was presented by Kevin McKee, Parking Services Manager, Guildford Borough Council and sought approval to recommendations for changing the way in which parking reviews are conducted and proposes the scope of the next review. The intention was to move towards smaller, but quicker reviews.
It was noted that the recommendations mirrored the conclusions reached by Surrey County Council officers.
It was noted that to introduce a parking restriction, Surrey County Council needed to follow the process set out in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 (as amended) to create a Traffic Regulation Order. This required the formal advertising of a proposal and for any comments or objections received to be considered before the restriction is introduced. If a comment or objection is received that requires the proposal to be changed significantly, the proposal is likely to need to be advertised again. For more complex or controversial proposals informal consultation would take place before formally advertising the proposal, or have information to show that the proposal is likely to be supported.
It was also noted that to focus its resources more efficiently, the County Council also decided that, prior to considering parking schemes, or significant changes to existing ones, residents and businesses would have to demonstrate significant support for such changes before they were considered as part of a review. Previously, issues raised by a relatively small number of people had been pursued and large amounts of time had been spent consulting, only to find that there was not general support. This revised approach also meant that reviews were responding to the wishes of communities and also likely to reduce the need to undertake informal consultation for some of the major amendments, instead allowing officers to proceed straight to formal advertisement.
Members supported the proposal for fast-tracking non-controversial proposals in conjunction with a simplified process, although it was noted that the need to retain flexibility was required.
The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed:
(i) that reviews are combined and deal with issues both in the CPZ and non-CPZs areas, (ii) that reviews are limited in scope to deal with around 50 items/locations, and prioritisation is given to safety issues, (iii) that permit schemes or changes to them are considered if residents can demonstrate a groundswell of opinion clearly in support of such amendments, (iv) that disabled bay, vehicle crossover and less controversial issues are fast-tracked, and formally advertised as early in the review process as possible, (v) to formally advertise Surrey County Council’s intention to make an order to give effect to the proposals for Annandale Road, Duncan Drive, the Millmead Terrace area, The Oval and Vicarage Gate, shown in ANNEXE 5. If any representations are received they be reported to a future meeting of the Committee for consideration, or if no representations are received, the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) will be made. (vi) to develop and formally advertise Surrey County Council’s intention to make an order to give effect to the proposals for, Alresford Road, Maori Road, St ... view the full minutes text for item 186/16 |
|
|
HIGHWAYS UPDATE (EXECUTIVE DECISION FUNCTION)
This item will be presented by John Hilder, Area Highways Manager (South West) and provides an update on the 2016/17 programmes of highway improvement and maintenance works and operations funded by this committee. Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed to:
(i) Note progress of the 2016/17 programme of highway works and operations detailed at Annex 1.
(ii) Agree that revenue budget is capitalised as necessary to deliver the agreed programme of works.
Minutes: This item was introduced by John Hilder, the Area Highways Manager (SW) and provided an update on the 2016/17 programmes of highway improvement and maintenance works and operations funded by this committee.
It was noted that four ITS schemes will roll forward to 2017/18 and should be completed early in the next financial year.
The Local Committee (Guildford) agreed to:
(i) Note progress of the 2016/17 programme of highway works and operations detailed at Annex 1.
(ii) Agree that revenue budget is capitalised as necessary to deliver the agreed programme of works.
|
|
|
HIGHWAYS BUDGETS FOR 2017/18 (EXECUTIVE DECISION FUNCTION)
This report will be presented by John Hilder, Area Highway Manager (South West). In November the Guildford Transportation Task Group met to consider budget priorities for 2017/18, with recommendations coming to this committee meeting. Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) Agreed to:
(i) The capital and revenue allocations recommended by the Task Group and described in this report to a total value of £460,000. This reflects a reduction of £140,000 compared with the value of the current year budget in anticipation of reductions in the highways budget devolved to this committee in the coming financial year. (ii) Note that the task group will convene if necessary once the Local Committee budget is known in the Spring of 2017. (iii) Subject to approval of recommendations (i) and (ii) authorise the AHM to consider and determine any objections submitted following the statutory advertisement of the traffic orders and notices associated with the programme of schemes, in consultation with the Chairman and/or Vice-Chairman of the Local Committee and relevant local councillors. (iv) Delegate authority to the AHM in consultation with the Chairman and Vice- Chairman and locally affected Members to amend budgets throughout the year if required to ensure the budget is allocated in a timely manner. (v) The Community Enhancement Fund being devolved to each County Councillor based on an equal allocation of £5,000 per division
Minutes: This item was introduced by John Hilder, the Area Highways Engineer (SW). It was noted that the budget for 2017/18 would be set at a full meeting of the County Council in March or April 2017. As the council faces increasing budget pressures, particularly on revenue streems, a significant reduction in the highway allocation to local committees was anticipated for 2017/18 compared with the £699,000 for the current year.
The Transportation Task Group met on 8 November to consider requests for new highways schemes and make recommendations for the highways programme for 2017/18. The group considered it prudent to plan for a reduction in both capital and revenue budgets for 2017/18 and recommended making allocations to a sum of £460,000 with £310,000 of this potentially available for new ITS schemes. If budget reductions proved to be less than anticipated the task group would reconvene and make further recommendations to the March meeting of the Local Committee.
It was noted that Highways had some limited funding available for drainage work in April. The Local Committee (Guildford) Agreed to:
(i) The capital and revenue allocations recommended by the Task Group and described in this report to a total value of £460,000. This reflects a reduction of £140,000 compared with the value of the current year budget in anticipation of reductions in the highways budget devolved to this committee in the coming financial year. (ii) Note that the task group will convene if necessary once the Local Committee budget is known in the Spring of 2017. (iii) Subject to approval of recommendations (i) and (ii) authorise the AHM to consider and determine any objections submitted following the statutory advertisement of the traffic orders and notices associated with the programme of schemes, in consultation with the Chairman and/or Vice-Chairman of the Local Committee and relevant local councillors. (iv) Delegate authority to the AHM in consultation with the Chairman and Vice- Chairman and locally affected Members to amend budgets throughout the year if required to ensure the budget is allocated in a timely manner. (v) The Community Enhancement Fund being devolved to each County Councillor based on an equal allocation of £5,000 per division
|
|
|
20% HORIZON 2 ROADS MAJOR MAINTENANCE PROGRAMME
This item will be presented by John Hilder, Area Highways Manager (South West).
At the beginning of November all Surrey County Council members were issued with the provisional list of carriageway major maintenance schemes within their district or borough which are included in Horizon 2 (commences 1 April 2017 for a period of five years)
This list comprised schemes prioritised by Surrey’s Asset Planning team based on a rigorous assessment process based of condition, road hierarchy and risk, described at Annex A. This list represents 80% of the overall Horizon 2 programme
The committee is asked to determine the balancing 20% of the overall programme by selecting schemes from the residual list of prioritised schemes at Annex A. This needs to be done by 31 January 2017.
Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) Agreed to: I. Consider the selection of schemes under the influence of the Local Committee for inclusion in the Horizon 2 (2017-2021) Roads Major Maintenance Programme.
II. Convene the Guildford Transportation Task Group in early January to make recommendations.
III. The Asset Planning team recommendation that each local committee delegates the final decision on selection to the Area Highway Manager in consultation with the Local Committee Chairman and Vice Chairman. Selected schemes must be submitted to Asset Planning by 31 January 2017.
Minutes: This item was introduced by John Hilder, the Area Highways Engineer (SW). It was noted that at the beginning of November all Surrey County Council members were provided with the provisional list of carriageway major maintenance schemes within their borough which would be included in the Horizon 2 programme. The list comprised schemes prioritised by Surrey’s Asset Planning team based on an assessment based on condition, road hierarchy and risk. This list represented 80% of the overall Horizon 2 programme. The remaining 20% would need to be prioritised by the local committee by 31 January 2017. Members expressed concerns over some of the roads which had been included or not included in the priority list and it was agreed that any comments should be sent to David Hall, the Community Partnership and Committee Officer before the end of December. The Local Committee (Guildford) Agreed to: i. Committee for inclusion in the Horizon 2 (2017-2021) Roads Major Maintenance Programme.
|
|
|
CLUSTER FUNDING 2016/17 (EXECUTIVE DECISION FUNCTION)
This item will be introduced by David Hall, Community Partnership and Committee Officer (Guildford). The Committee are asked to note and confirm the recommendations made by the four Guildford Cluster Groups. Additional documents: Decision: The Local Committee (Guildford) Agreed to:
(i) Note and confirm the projects at Annexe 1 supported by the Cluster Fund in 2016/17. (ii) Review the Cluster initiative prior to the next municipal year. (iii) The continuation of the Cluster Fund for 2016-17 being administered by the Surrey County Council. (iv) Any variations to be delegated to the Community Partnership Team Leader in consultation with the Chairman and appropriate Divisional Member.
Minutes: It was noted that the four cluster groups had met and confirmed the projects that they wished to support during the 2016/17 financial year
The Local Committee (Guildford) Agreed to:
(i) Note and confirm the projects at Annexe 1 supported by the Cluster Fund in 2016/17. (ii) Review the Cluster initiative prior to the next municipal year. (iii) The continuation of the Cluster Fund for 2016-17 being administered by the Surrey County Council. (iv) Any variations to be delegated to the Community Partnership Team Leader in consultation with the Chairman and appropriate Divisional Member.
|
|
|
DECISION TRACKER (FOR INFORMATION)
To provide an update on previous Local Committee Decisions. Additional documents: Minutes: Members noted progress on the decision tracker. |