Agenda, decisions and minutes
PDF 751 KBVenue: Council Chamber, Guildford Borough Council, Millmead House, Millmead, Guildford GU2 4BB
Contact: Joanna Long Partnership Committee Officer
Link: View the webcast
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
The questions and responses given during the open forum are annexed to the minutes.
|
|
|
APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCES
To receive any apologies for absence from members under Standing Order 39. Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillor Julie Iles. |
|
|
MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING
To approve the Minutes of the previous meeting as a correct record. Minutes: The minutes of the previous meeting of 19 September 2018 were signed as a true record. |
|
|
DECISION TRACKER [FOR INFORMATION]
This report updates the committee on the progress of decisions that have been made at previous meetings. Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Officers present: Jo Long, Partnership and Committee Officer and Frank Apicella, Area Highways Manager.
Members noted the progress of decisions made at previous meetings. The Area Highways Manager updated the committee that on page 15 of the Decision Tracker, 13 June 2018, Item 12 the advertisement of the traffic orders for Lysons Avenue had been completed and the Sheepfold Road order was in the process of being done. |
|
|
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: There were no declarations of interest of made. |
|
|
CHAIRMAN'S ANNOUNCEMENTS
To receive any Chairman’s announcements. Minutes: The Chairman congratulated Councillor Julie Iles and Councillor Matt Furniss on becoming new members of the Surrey County Council Cabinet.
The Chairman also updated the committee that the two new Joint Committee working groups had held their first meetings. The Infrastructure Delivery and Transportation Working Group had met on 7 November and the Parking and Air Quality Working Group had met on 30 October 2018. |
|
To receive any petitions in accordance with Standing Order 65. An officer response will be provided to each petition.
To receive an officer response to the Denzil Road petition presented at the 19 September 2018 Joint Committee. Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Officers present: Frank Apicella, Area Highways Manager
Petition presented by Mr Jamieson at the 19 September 2018 Joint Committee.
Member discussion - key points:
The Chairman drew Members attention to the response to the Denzil Road petition on the agenda and the invited Mr Jamieson to comment however he wasn’t present at the meeting.
Resolved:
The Joint Committee noted the officer’s comments. |
|
To receive any petitions in accordance with Standing Order 65. An officer response will be provided to each petition.
Two petitions have been received:
The first petition is from Mr Kibble requesting the installation of ‘Double Yellow Lines’, around the junction of Spoil Lane and Manor Road, into Spoil Lane and The Gardens, Tongham
The second petition is from Mr Mark Payne ‘Deathly Junction’, requesting that the junction between the A3 and Beechcroft Drive be removed and a safe alternative access be provided Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Officers present: Frank Apicella, Area Highways Manager
Petition presented by Mr Mark Payne called ‘Deathly Junction’, requesting that the junction between the A3 and Beechcroft Drive be removed and a safe alternative access be provided, (see supplementary agenda for petition details and officer response).
Mr Payne stated that Beechcroft Drive has a small blind access into heavy traffic on the A3 and the residents safety is at risk when turning out of this dangerous junction. Highways England refuse to say it is dangerous, as most accidents don’t count in the figures as people aren’t hurt however there are still a lot of accidents causing holds ups etc. Public money has been wasted by Highways England, SCC and GBC on surveys and signage and clearing up after accidents in trying to deal with this issue and there has been a failure to deal with this problem. Highways England say there are funding and legal issues with providing a safe alternative access. Why can’t a road over Surrey University land be delivered? Why can’t this access be reinstated in the Guildford BC Local Plan?
Member discussion - key points:
Councillor Furniss informed the meeting that GBC and SCC had been working hard to come to an agreement with the University to address the access issue and did have a solution. However, Highways England kept moving the funding goal posts including 150 years maintenance for an adoption of a road and made the situation untenable. Councillor Furniss offered to arrange a meeting with Highways England and the residents to discuss this further.
Mr Payne stated that he would like to meet with Highways England as Councillor Furniss had suggested.
Resolved:
The Joint Committee noted the officer’s comments.
Declarations of interest: None
Officers present: Andy Harkin, Parking Manager, GBC
Petition presented by Mr Kibble requesting the installation of ‘Double Yellow Lines’, around the junction of Spoil Lane and Manor Road, into Spoil Lane and The Gardens, Tongham. (see supplementary agenda for petition details and officer response).
Mr Kibble stated ‘The road into, and out of Spoil Lane continues to be badly congested throughout the day due to cars being parked in this area causing a hazard to other road users along Manor Road and Spoil Lane. During the mornings and afternoons there are a large number of pedestrians crossing these junctions, mainly school children heading to and from Ash Manor School. The petition proposal has been deferred until March 2019, why can’t yellow lines be painted on the road?’
Member discussion - key points:
The Chairman and the Parking Manager explained that there was a great deal of work, cost and consultation that had to be done before a decision to paint yellow lines could be implemented and that there were hundreds of similar requests across the borough to be considered as well.
Resolved:
The Joint Committee noted the officer’s comments.
|
|
To receive any questions from Surrey County Council electors within the area in accordance with Standing Order 66.
Two public questions have been received. The first public question is from Joanna McGowan:
How are GBC and SCC planning to ensure that mobility and accessibility issues are first and foremost when planning new and redevelopments in Guildford town centre?
The second public question is from Doug Scott:
My question is with regard to the failure of Utility Companies to re-instate the Setts, following digging up the Guildford High Street.
What is being done to ensure that the non-standard Setts outside Clarks Shoe shop, are replaced by Setts of the matching size, colour and texture, as specified?
What is being done to ensure that the Tarmac is removed from outside NEOM Organics and the Setts replaced?
The Setts are valuable and extremely difficult to replace. What is being done to ensure that, in future, Setts are reused and the High Street repaired to the Surrey Highways standard, as required by the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991?
Additional documents: Minutes: Declarations of interest: None
Officers present: Frank Apicella, Area Highways Manager
The first question asked was from Doug Scott about the failure of Utility Companies to re-instate the Setts, following digging up the Guildford High Street. (see supplementary agenda for petition details and officer response).
Doug Scott stated that he was very heartened with the response that highways had come back with informing him that Thames Water were working with SCC to repair the damage to the setts. He commented that it is an ongoing problem with utility companies.
Member discussion - key points:
The Area Highways Manager informed the Committee that over the years some of the setts had gone missing however when he project managed the sett replacement scheme he had managed to find a source to replace them with very similar setts. He explained that Thames Water have agreed that they will put the tarmac back and then pay SCC to put the setts back as utility companies don’t have the skills to make the replacement. The Highways Manager commented that he would like to continue this dialogue with the utilities companies.
Resolved:
The Joint Committee noted the officer’s comments.
Declarations of interest: None
Officers present: Frank Apicella, Area Highways Manager
The second question asked was from Joanne McGowan about how GBC and SCC are planning to ensure that mobility and accessibility issues are first and foremost when planning new and redevelopments in Guildford town centre? (see supplementary agenda for petition details and officer response).
Joanne McGowan informed the Members that she hadn’t received the response to her question directly and that this was the first time she had seen the response from officers. She stated that the response to her question was legalese and was not a human response. Mrs McGowan informed the meeting that for people with a lack of mobility or a disability getting around Guildford town centre was very difficult. She wanted to know what was going to be done to engage with people who have accessibility issues to make sure their voices are heard when planning and redevelopment of the town is undertaken and to consider the impact this could have on them. Mrs McGowan asked for a more human response to her public question that considered people’s needs.
Mrs McGowan requested that the response to written public questions be e-mailed to members of the public in advance who are attending the meeting to hear the discussion on their question.
Member discussion - key points:
Cllr Angela Goodwin stated that responses to public questions should be in plain English and that she’d like to arrange a meeting with the relevant officers to discuss Joanne McGowan’s concerns. The Members were informed that the response to the public questions had been published with the supplementary agenda and would usually go out to individuals directly who had submitted public questions. The Chairman invited Mrs McGowan to come back to next Committee to receive a better more human response.
Resolved:
The Joint Committee noted the officer’s ... view the full minutes text for item 23/18 |
|
|
MEMBER QUESTIONS
To receive any written questions from Members under Standing Order 47.
Minutes: No member questions had been received. |
|
The report seeks approval of the Outline Business Case to implement measures to improve air quality on the A331 (Blackwater Valley Relief Road) and comply with the accompanying Ministerial Direction and the preferred option of a 50mph speed limit from 70mph on a section of the A331 shown in Appendix 2 of the report.
The Blackwater Valley partnership of Guildford Borough Council, Surrey Heath Borough Council, Rushmoor Borough Council, Surrey County Council and Hampshire County Council have jointly prepared the Outline Business Case as they all have an interest in the A331.
Annex 1 of the report will follow with the supplementary agenda. Additional documents: Decision: The Guildford Joint Committee agreed that:
(i) The Committee endorses the Outline Business Case to date as shown in Appendix 1 and the preferred option of a 50mph speed limit from 70mph on a section of the A331 shown in Appendix 2.
(ii) Delegate authority to The Director of Community Services, Guildford Borough Council in consultation with the Lead Councillor for Licensing, Environmental Health and Protection and Community Safety (Guildford Borough Council) and the Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport (Surrey County Council) to make any minor amendments and submit the Outline Business Case to the Joint Air Quality Unit by the 31 December 2018.
(iii)Delegate authority to The Director of Community Services, Guildford Borough Council in consultation with the Lead Councillor for Licensing, Environmental Health and Protection and Community Safety (Guildford Borough Council) and the Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport (Surrey County Council) to make any minor amendments to and submit the Full Business Case to the Joint Air Quality Unit.
Reasons:
The UK National Plan for tackling roadside nitrogen dioxide concentrations (2017) named Guildford Borough Council along with Rushmoor Borough Council and Surrey Heath Borough Council as needing to undertake a Feasibility Study to explore measures to achieve compliance with the EU limit values for nitrogen dioxide along part of the A331 (Blackwater Valley Road) in the shortest possible time. The requirement for the Feasibility Study was specified in a Ministerial Direction.
The recommendations help ensure that Guildford Borough Council complies with the Ministerial Direction. Firstly, by complying with guidance issued by the Joint Air Quality Unit that states the Feasibility Study should be approved by the Local Authority and secondly by delegations to ensure the Feasibility Study is submitted by the specified deadlines.
Minutes: Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None
Officers present: Justine Fuller, Regulatory Services Manager, GBC and William Bryans Transport Studies Team Manager, SCC
Member discussion - key points:
Councillor Ellwood thanked officers for all their hard work; he commented that five councils working together was quite an achievement.
Members asked how the proposed speed limit was going to be enforced. The Regulatory Services Manager informed members that Hampshire Police had recently said they no longer have the resources to install and enforce the proposed speed limit via average speed cameras. The speed limits will be enforced as part of the Police’s general activities, but there will not be any additional proactive enforcement. Road users will be made aware of the reason for the speed reduction with signage. The final decision on the proposed measures rests with the Secretary of State.
Members agreed that if a similar report came back to the Committee it would be helpful to have costs for the other options in a simple table and the ongoing cost and benefit of them.
Members asked if DEFRA would pick up the police enforcement costs. However, officers explained that it is not just a matter of meeting the Police’s costs. The main issue is that Hampshire Police will have a lack of resource in their offices dealing with safety camera enforcement. Furthermore, DEFRA do not have the authority to instruct the Police to undertake activities.
Members queried whether the southern end of the A331 would be compliant with the EU limit values for nitrogen dioxide. Officers responded that this section is forecast to become compliant during 2020, and there will be a monitoring programme so they will be looking at this section and submitting reports on this to DEFRA.
The recommendations were agreed by majority.
Resolved:
The Guildford Joint Committee agreed that:
(i) The Committee endorses the Outline Business Case to date as shown in Appendix 1 and the preferred option of a 50mph speed limit from 70mph on a section of the A331 shown in Appendix 2.
(ii) Delegate authority to The Director of Community Services, Guildford Borough Council in consultation with the Lead Councillor for Licensing, Environmental Health and Protection and Community Safety (Guildford Borough Council) and the Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport (Surrey County Council) to make any minor amendments and submit the Outline Business Case to the Joint Air Quality Unit by the 31 December 2018.
(iii)Delegate authority to The Director of Community Services, Guildford Borough Council in consultation with the Lead Councillor for Licensing, Environmental Health and Protection and Community Safety (Guildford Borough Council) and the Cabinet Member for Environment and Transport (Surrey County Council) to make any minor amendments to and submit the Full Business Case to the Joint Air Quality Unit.
Reasons:
The UK National Plan for tackling roadside nitrogen dioxide concentrations (2017) named Guildford Borough Council along with Rushmoor Borough Council and Surrey Heath Borough Council as needing to undertake a Feasibility Study to explore measures to achieve compliance with ... view the full minutes text for item 25/18 |
|
|
ON-STREET PARKING BUSINESS PLAN 2019-2020 (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION FOR DECISION)
This report presents the Parking Annual Report 2017-18 for Guildford and makes a number of recommendations to the Joint Committee in respect of on-street parking and the use of the surplus generated from this service. Additional documents: Decision: The Guildford Joint Committee agreed to:
(i) Note the contents of Annexe 1, the Parking Annual Report for 2017-18 and the current and planned work associated with on street parking in section 1.
(ii) Agree to increase the charge that applies to the 30-minute maximum stay Pay and Display only, and 30-minute maximum stay Pay and Display dual-use bays by 20 pence per half-hour, from 80 pence per half-hour to £1 per half-hour
(iii) Agree that the staffing provision at three of the Park & Ride sites (Artington, Merrow and Onslow) be changed from a static operating model to a mobile provision focusing on locking, unlocking and cleaning
Reasons:
(i) To maintain the differential between convenient on street parking and off street parking to support the “drive to not through” strategy and
(ii) To reduce the operating costs of the park and ride service.
Minutes: Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: Petition requesting the installation of ‘Double Yellow Lines’, around the junction of Spoil Lane, Tongham, considered under Item 22 Petitions.
Officers present: Andy Harkin, Parking Manager, GBC and Chris Wheeler, Waste and Fleet Services Manager GBC
Member discussion - key points:
Members noted that there had been a drop in ticket numbers, the Parking Manager explained that on-street parking had reduced; some people had been displaced and were now using off-street parking.
The Parking Manager stated he was going to send the triaged assessment list of CPZ issues (an update of Annexe 2 of the Sept JC On-Street Parking report) which had been considered by the Parking and Air Quality Working Group, and the scored list of Non-CPZ issues (an update of Annexe 3 of the Sept 2018 JC report) to borough and county members shortly for consideration prior to the next Working Group and the March Committee.
Resolved:
The Guildford Joint Committee agreed to:
(i) Note the contents of Annexe 1, the Parking Annual Report for 2017-18 and the current and planned work associated with on street parking in section 1.
(ii) Agree to increase the charge that applies to the 30-minute maximum stay Pay and Display only, and 30-minute maximum stay Pay and Display dual-use bays by 20 pence per half-hour, from 80 pence per half-hour to £1 per half-hour
(iii) Agree that the staffing provision at three of the Park & Ride sites (Artington, Merrow and Onslow) be changed from a static operating model to a mobile provision focusing on locking, unlocking and cleaning
Reasons:
(i) To maintain the differential between convenient on street parking and off street parking to support the “drive to not through” strategy and
(ii) To reduce the operating costs of the park and ride service.
|
|
|
UPDATE & OVERVIEW OF LEP FUNDED TRANSPORT SCHEMES IN GUILDFORD (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION)
The purpose of this paper is to brief members and the public on the current schemes which Surrey’s Transport Policy Team are overseeing in Guildford Borough in their role as Project Managers for LEP funded schemes.
In total there are currently eight schemes which have funding from the LEP and one which is awaiting confirmation of funding. These total nearly £33m in value with approximately £19m coming from the LEP and match funding coming from Guildford BC, Surrey CC and various other sources. Minutes: Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None
Officers present: Robert Curtis, Transport Strategy Project Manager, Transport Policy, SCC and GBC, Cherrie Mendoza Transport Strategy Proj. Mgr (Reigate) SCC and Stacey Capewell, Transport Strategy Project Manager (MV), SCC
Member discussion - key points:
The Chairman informed Members that Rob Curtis Transport Strategy Project Manager was leaving SCC and thanked for him for all his hard work on LEP Schemes and introduced Stacey Capewell and Cherrie Mendoza who would be covering his role.
Resolved:
The Guildford Joint Committee agreed to:
(i) Note the content of the report updating Members on LEP Funded Transport Schemes in Guildford.
Reasons:
The purpose of the report was to provide an update on current highway schemes and their funding status.
|
|
|
HIGHWAYS UPDATE (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION FOR DECISION)
This report provides an update on the 2018/19 programme of highway improvement and maintenance works funded by this committee, an update on other centrally funded projects being promoted in the local area, as well as details of the budgets allocated to the committee in 2018/19. Additional documents: Decision: The Guildford Joint Committee resolved to:
(i) To formally approve the Committee revised running list of Local Transport Plan schemes attached at Annex 1.
(ii) To note the committee approved list of capital and revenue works, together with the progress being made during this fiscal year, as identified in Annex 2.
(iii)To show initial support for the introduction of bus lane enforcement cameras in Guildford, which will be subject to further detailed studies and area specific agreements.
Reasons:
(i) To enable progression of works orders and expenditure of the Committee budget.
(ii) In order to reduce bus delays and improve bus lane discipline.
Minutes: Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: None
Officers present: Frank Apicella, Area Highways Manager, SCC
Member discussion - key points:
The Chairman referred to paragraph 2.7 Passenger Transport in the report and the option from SCC Cabinet for Local/Joint Committees to decide if any bus lanes in their area would benefit from enforcement. He proposed a new recommendation to Members to show initial support for the introduction of bus lane enforcement in Guildford (see below).
Resolved:
The Guildford Joint Committee agreed to:
(i) To formally approve the Committee revised running list of Local Transport Plan schemes attached at Annex 1.
(ii) To note the committee approved list of capital and revenue works, together with the progress being made during this fiscal year, as identified in Annex 2.
(iii)To show initial support for the introduction of bus lane enforcement cameras in Guildford, which will be subject to further detailed studies and area specific agreements.
The new bus lane enforcement recommendation (iii) was proposed and seconded by Members.
Reasons:
(i) To enable progression of works orders and expenditure of the Committee budget.
(ii) In order to reduce bus delays and improve bus lane discipline.
|
|
|
FORWARD PLAN (FOR INFORMATION)
The forward programme of reports for 2018/19. Minutes: Members noted the Forward Plan of reports. |