Agenda, decisions and minutes

Waverley Local Committee
Friday, 17 June 2016 10.00 am

Venue: Haslemere Hall, Bridge Road, Haslemere GU27 2AS

Contact: Carys Walker, Community Partnership & Committee Officer  Waverley Borough Council offices The Burys, Godalming, Surrey, GU7 1HR

Items
No. Item

15/16

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

16/16

MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING pdf icon PDF 155 KB

17/16

DECISION TRACKER pdf icon PDF 89 KB

    To review the progress of decisions made at previous meetings

    Minutes:

    The committee noted further updates to the decision tracker and agreed the removal of completed items.  With regard to the parking items: it was acknowledged that the parking enforcement team were very responsive in their duties but the Committee would like clarity regarding the schedule that they follow and the work that they do in the more rural areas.

     

    The Local Committee (Waverley) agreed that:

     

    (i)            The Area Highways Manager would provide a report on the petition relating to Portsmouth Road, Hindhead to members

    (ii)           The Community Partnerships and Committee Officer would send appropriate details on the parking enforcement team to Cllr Harmer

     

     

18/16

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:

    No declaration of interests were received

19/16

PETITION: TO ESTABLISH A 40 MILE SPEED LIMIT ON BAYNARDS LANE AND HOGGSPUDDING LANE

    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.

     

    A petition by Mr Craig Thomson has been received

     

    We the undersigned are residents of Baynards Lane  (aka Cox Green Road) Hoggspudding Lane (aka Baynards Road) and the private cul-de-sac roads (Lawn Road and Station Road) accessed from above. Our neighbourhood is on the southern fringe of the Surrey county border with West Sussex by the village of Rudgwick. We hereby petition Surrey County Council’s Local Committee for Waverley to establish a 40 mph speed limit on Baynards Lane and Hoggspudding Lane

     

    Minutes:

    Mr Craig Thomson presented his petition requesting a 40 MPH speed limit be implemented for Baynards Lane and Hoggspudding Lane.

     

    In presenting his case, Mr Thomson reported that he visited all 38 addresses in the immediate vicinity covered by his petition and the result was that this proposal was strongly supported. The road in question is used regularly by horse riders, cyclists and pedestrians as well as vehicles and there have been several near misses which have prompted this petition

     

    Mr Alan Young and Cllr Val Henry both indicated their support for the petition as the local Members for the County and Borough Councils respectively. The Parish Council is also in support.

     

    The Local Committee (Waverley) agreed to refer the petition request to the Cranleigh and Eastern Villages Task Group for consideration

20/16

FORMAL PUBLIC QUESTIONS

    To answer any questions from residents or businesses within the Waverley Borough area in accordance with Standing Order 69. Notice should be given in writing or by email to the Community Partnership and Committee Officer by 12 noon four working days before the meeting.

     

    Minutes:

    The Local Committee considered on public question. The text and response is attached as Annex 1.

     

    As neither Mr Wilks nor Mr Dennett was available to attend the meeting, no supplementary question was asked.

     

    The Committee noted that this was a complex problem involving a number of landowners and a strip of land that is unregistered. This had resulted in the Right of Way being closed for over a year due to safety concerns.

     

    As local Member for the County Council, Mrs V Young indicated that she would like to meet with the relevant parties to seek a way forward. Mr P Martin will join her in this.

     

    The Local Committee (Waverley) agreed that the Community Partnerships and Committee Officer would support Mrs Young and Mr Martin to facilitate a meeting of relevant parties.

     

     

21/16

MEMBER QUESTIONS

22/16

REVIEW OF TASK GROUPS AND EXTERNAL APPOINTMENTS (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION) pdf icon PDF 138 KB

    To agree the Terms of Reference and membership of task groups and to appoint a member of the Committee to be Champion for the County Council’s Family Friends and Communities initiative for the Council year 2015-16.

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    Resolved:

     

    (i)        That the Local Transport Plan (LTP) Task Group should continue for the council year 2016-2017 reporting to this committee.

     

    (ii)        That the following Local Task Groups should continue for the council year 2016-2017 reporting to the LTP Task Group on transportation funding priorities and directly to the committee on other matters:

     

    Farnham

    Godalming, Milford and Witley

    Haslemere and Western Villages

    Cranleigh and Eastern Villages

     

    (iii)       That the Terms of Reference set out at Annex 1 of the report for the Task Groups established in (i) and (ii) should be confirmed.

     

    (iv)       That the Youth Services Task Group should continue for the year 2016-2017, reporting to the committee and subject to the Terms of Reference set out in Annex 3 of the report

     

     (v)      To agree that the membership of the task groups for the council year 2016-2017 should be as set out at Annex 2 of the report and that representation from relevant partner agencies should be sought.

     

    (vi)        To appoint Ms Nikki Barton to be Champion for the County Council’s Family Friends and Communities initiative for the council year 2016-2017.

     

    Reason

     

    The task groups support the Local Committee in carrying out specific aspects of its work.  The role of Family, Friends and Communities Champion would assist the Committee in understanding the work of Adult Social Care and multi-agency activity to promote well-being in Waverley.

     

    Minutes:

    The Committee considered the arrangements for its task groups and external representatives. Mrs N Barton stated that she would be happy to continue the role of Friends, Family and Communities Champion for the coming year.

     

    It was recognised that the nominated borough members had changed from recent years and clarity was requested on whether or not the Local Committee had the final say on membership. The Chairman stated that the decision to nominate task group representatives was entirely with the Borough Council.

     

    Resolved:

     

    (i)        That the Local Transport Plan (LTP) Task Group should continue for the council year 2016-2017 reporting to this committee.

     

    (ii)        That the following Local Task Groups should continue for the council year 2016-2017 reporting to the LTP Task Group on transportation funding priorities and directly to the committee on other matters:

     

    Farnham

    Godalming, Milford and Witley

    Haslemere and Western Villages

    Cranleigh and Eastern Villages

     

    (iii)       That the Terms of Reference set out at Annex 1 of the report for the Task Groups established in (i) and (ii) should be confirmed.

     

    (iv)       That the Youth Services Task Group should continue for the year 2016-2017, reporting to the committee and subject to the Terms of Reference set out in Annex 3 of the report

     

     (v)      To agree that the membership of the task groups for the council year 2016-2017 should be as set out at Annex 2 of the report and that representation from relevant partner agencies should be sought.

     

    (vi)        To appoint Ms Nikki Barton to be Champion for the County Council’s Family Friends and Communities initiative for the council year 2016-2017.

     

    Reason

     

    The task groups support the Local Committee in carrying out specific aspects of its work.  The role of Family, Friends and Communities Champion would assist the Committee in understanding the work of Adult Social Care and multi-agency activity to promote well-being in Waverley.

     

23/16

REVIEW OF PROGRESS: WAVERLEY LOCAL PLAN (SERVICE MONITORING AND ISSUES OF LOCAL CONCERN)

    Cllr Brian Adams will present an update on the status of Waverley’s Local Plan

    Minutes:

    Cllr Brian Adams gave a verbal update to the Committee.

    The development of the local plan is split into 2 parts.

    Part 1: Strategic policies and sites

    Part2:  Neighbourhood Plan

    Part 1 is virtually complete and will be going to Overview and Scrutiny on the 27th June. All paperwork relating to this can be found on the Waverley Borough Council website.

    The next stages are as follows:

    Tuesday 12 July – Executive

    Tuesday 19 July – Full Council

    July/August – will be publication for pre-submission consultation. The dates of the consultation will be made available as soon as possible once approved by the Council.

    November – the plan will be submitted for examination by a planning inspector.

    Following Cllr Adams’ update the Committee discussed the following:

    Traffic infrastructure

     Highways England would be asked what their plans are for the A3 and whether any improvements can be made in respect of proposed developments

    Number of new homes

    A number of new residential developments will be identified as a result of this process and the committee recognised that pressure will be put on the infrastructure such as transport links, water systems, sewerage, utilities etc. It was suggested that even services such as broadband should be considered as a statutory consultee as this was now essential to modern living.

    Cllr B Adams reported that he has been advised by the county council that the plan is achievable on infrastructure grounds. Any developments that have been built since 2013 will go towards the target for new homes. One recent planning application was turned down because it was thought that the site in question would become overdeveloped. This shows that planners are being sensitive of this issue. A condition was suggested that Thames Water would be consulted as part of the planning process. This was removed from the draft but is likely to be reinstated at the behest of Thames Water. Whilst it is believed that the government target might be met, the borough might need to identify additional sites to act as a buffer to ensure the target is met.

    Mr B Ellis commented that if Cranleigh was to grow by the 1500 new properties as suggested by the Local Plan, this would make Cranleigh the third largest settlement in Waverley

    Mr David Harmer asked what work was being doing with the neighbouring counties as Waverly share a long border with them. Mr Adams reported thatthere were regular cooperation meetings with the respective authorities in bordering counties.

    It is possible that Section 106 money could be used for road improvements and discussions have been had at borough council level to look at this. Some Community Infrastructure levy (CIL) money may also be available.

    The Committee thanked Cllr Adams for his report and requested that he update Local Committee in December.

     

24/16

REVIEW OF NEW PROPOSAL FOR TRANSPORT PLANNING PROTOCOLS (SERVICE MONITORING AND ISSUES OF LOCAL CONCERN) pdf icon PDF 101 KB

    The Transport Development Planning Team (TDP) has introduced a new process for the Districts and Boroughs Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to consult the County Highway Authority (CHA) on planning applications.

     

    The aim of this new process is to bring the CHA into line with all other statutory consultees on planning applications and standardise the consultation process across the Surrey LPAs, to include consultation with County Members.

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    Resolved to:

     

    (i)    Waverley Local Committee noted that TDP will receive planning application consultations from each LPA which meet the criteria as set out in the new protocol (see attached document).

    (ii)   Waverley Local Committee noted that TDP will consult County Members on all planning applications which they receive from the relevant LPA, and this process is currently being refined. County Members are asked to inform the relevant TDP officer of any transport or highway related issues they may have to allow the TDP response deadline of 21 days to be met.

    Reasons:

    The Members of the Local Committee were informed of the new protocol for planning application consultation between Local Planning Authorities and Council Highways Authorities and of the need for these changes in order to make efficiency savings on the work conducted by the CHA, to allow TDP officers to spend more time providing technical highways and transportation advice to the LPAs on development related matters.

     

     

    Minutes:

    Mr Dominic Forbes (Planning and Development Group Manager) presented his report and explained that his service currently gets around 1,500-2,000 per year and each of these need to be responded to in 21 calendar days. This, combined with difficulties in recruiting skilled, planning officers, has lead to the service exploring ways that they can work more smartly and would therefore like to work more closely with members to use their local knowledge to identify areas of priority.

    Mr Forbes explained that county members are now being sent a weekly email with the new applications that are received in their area so that they can have input.

    A number of the councillors acknowledged that they had been receiving these emails but that these do not seem to have been sent recently. They welcome having this early notification.  It was also felt that the borough councillors would also benefit from this information.

    Mr Forbes said that he would investigate why notifications had not been received recently and how best to send out information to borough councillors.

    It was also noted that developer’s funding (Section 106) to improve the environment (such as lighting) is often contingent of them selling a large percentage of their new units whereas it would be more beneficial to residents if these improvements were made at the outset of the development.

     

    Resolved to:

     

    (i)    Note that Transport Development Planning (TDP) are due to receive planning application consultations from each local planning authority (LPA) which meet the criteria as set out in the new protocol as set out to the annex to the report.

    (ii)   Note that TDP will consult County Members on all planning applications which they receive from the relevant LPA, and this process is currently being refined. County Members are asked to inform the relevant TDP officer of any transport or highway related issues they may have to allow the TDP response deadline of 21 days to be met.

    Reasons:

    The Members of the Local Committee were informed of the new protocol for planning application consultation between Local Planning Authorities and Council Highways Authorities and of the need for these changes in order to make efficiency savings on the work conducted by the CHA, to allow TDP officers to spend more time providing technical highways and transportation advice to the LPAs on development related matters.

     

     

25/16

HIGHWAYS UPDATE (EXECUTIVE FUNCTION) pdf icon PDF 189 KB

    To receive an update on the 2016/7 programme of highway improvement and maintenance works funded by this committee and to agree further arrangements for allocation the budget in 2016/17

     

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    Resolved to:

     

          i.        Increase the localism budget to £65,000 as described in 1.8 of the report

     

        ii.        Delegate the submission of top priorities for the Project Horizon scheme to the Area Highways Manager in consultation with local committee members at a private meeting of the local committee in September.

     

     

     

    Reasons:

    Additional information has been requested to clarify the proposed schedule and funding sources so that Members can input into the proposed work in their respective divisions.

    Councillors have asked for a meeting in September to look at all the highways schemes taking place in Waverley to consider the priorities for the Horizon scheme.

     

    Minutes:

    Mr John Hilder (Area Highways Manager) presented his report. Mr Hilder explained that when planning works, he tries to use sources of funding that with receive from developers (such as Planning Infrastructure Contribution and Section 106) that were generated locally.

    All members have been issued with a list of Integrated Transport Schemes (ITS) in their area.

    Members felt that the information provided did not give them the level of detail that would be useful to the task groups when it came to them deciding their priorities. It wasn’t clear what funding was available for each proposed project and what funding had already been allocated.

    Mr S Cosser shared that he would soon be meeting with a senior transport planning officer and invited Mr Hilder to join them at the meeting so that he can be acquainted with the work going on in his area.

    On a positive note, the Chairman reminded members that all the schemes featured in the list were new schemes as all previous schemes had been completed in the last financial year.

    The Chairman proposed that an informal committee was held in September which would be dedicated to discussing Project Horizon and Pavement Horizon.

     

     

    Resolved to:

     

          i.        Increase the localism budget to £65,000 as described in 1.8 of the report

     

         ii.        Delegate the submission of top priorities for the Project Horizon scheme to the Area Highways Manager in consultation with local committee members at a private meeting of the local committee in September.

     

     

     

     

    Reasons:

    Additional information has been requested to clarify the proposed schedule and funding sources so that Members can input into the proposed work in their respective divisions.

    Councillors have asked for a meeting in September to look at all the highways schemes taking place in Waverley to consider the priorities for the Horizon scheme.

     

26/16

UPDATE ON PAVEMENT HORIZON (SERVICE MONITORING AND ISSUES OF LOCAL CONCERN) pdf icon PDF 78 KB

    An update on Surrey County Council’s programme to maintain pavements and highways as it pertains to Waverley.

    Additional documents:

    Decision:

    Resolved

     

          i.        Delegate the nominations of priority schemes for the Pavement Horizon programme to the Area Highways Manager in consultation with local committee members at the private meeting of the local committee in September.

     

     

    Reasons:

    Additional information has been requested to clarify the proposed schedule and funding sources so that Members can input into the proposed work in their respective divisions.

     

    Minutes:

    The committee discussed the list of projects that had been provided to be included in the pavement scheme over the next five years. Members felt that they hadn’t been adequately consulted and asked for clarity over what research was carried out at a local level. 

     

    Mr Hilder added that the list only featured paths which were to be re-constructed and not those which were receiving surface treatments which would be a much longer list.

    Members agreed that this could be addressed in the informal meeting in September.

     

     

    Resolved

     

          i.        delegate the nominations of priority schemes for the Pavement Horizon programme to the Area Highways Manager in consultation with local committee members at the private meeting of the local committee in September.

     

     

    Reasons:

    Additional information has been requested to clarify the proposed schedule and funding sources so that Members can input into the proposed work in their respective divisions.

     

27/16

LOCAL COMMITTEE FORWARD PROGRAMME 2016-17 (SERVICE MONITORING AND ISSUES OF LOCAL CONCERN) pdf icon PDF 20 KB