Agenda item

This report provides an update on the petition heard by the local committee on 5 September 2018, following the agreement by the Local Committee (Mole Valley) to ask officers to reconsider the proposal, and in discussion with the Chairman and the petitioners, what the way forward might be, in light of the strong views expressed by the committee, to introduce a trial period.

The Local Committee (Mole Valley) AGREED to:

(i) Note the joint statement from Surrey County Council (SCC) Local Committee Chairman Mr Tim Hall and Mole Valley District Council (MVDC) Cabinet Member for Prosperity Councillor Simon Edge, as an update on the Petition (Annex 1). In particular to note the actions going forward.

(ii) Note that a safety review, which considers all High Street users, to assess the risk of conflict between vehicles and pedestrians, particularly for children, is to be carried out by SCC and is scheduled to be completed by March 2019.

(iii) Note that SCC has commissioned a repair of the walling to the ramps at the foot of the High Street, to improve the visual impact of this feature. This will be the removal of the damaged tiles and replacing this tiling with new rendering. This will be funded 50:50 by SCC and MVDC, with MVDC applying public realm planning contributions, and is scheduled to be carried out in February 2019, subject to normal construction delays, weather conditions and reducing inconvenience to traders and High Street users. The timing of the works was the result of consultation with

the market operator, Leatherhead and District Chamber of Commerce.

(iv) Note that a further petition about Leatherhead High Street has been submitted to the 12 December 2018 Local Committee (Mole Valley) for consideration.

(v) Agree that, following a review of the signs in Leatherhead, that SCC and MVDC will work together to put forward proposals for a new car park signing scheme, and existing direction signs in the town centre. Also, that MVDC and SCC will review existing Leatherhead gateway signs, identify approaches where no existing signs are, and to agree appropriate type, location and wording for any possible new signs. The Task Group and Committee will be updated following discussions between MVDC and SCC regarding the detailed proposals, funding streams and timings.

Reasons for Decision

To propose measures to work with representatives of the Leatherhead Residents’

Association and the Leatherhead and District Chamber of Commerce, in advance

and alongside the Transform Leatherhead project.

Declarations of interest: None

Officers present: Zena Curry, Area Highways Manager

The report was published with the supplementary papers. It was accompanied by a petition and response. To facilitate the discussion, the petition and Item 13 were heard together, after Item 4b and with Item 5.

A petition had been received from Mrs Susan Leveritt, with regards to Leatherhead High Street. The petition was sponsored by the Leatherhead Residents Association and the Leatherhead & District Chamber of Commerce.  It is a request for the return of free parking to Leatherhead High Street at 3.30pm, with the Pedestrian Zone finishing an hour earlier than the current end time of 4.30pm. This petition follows on from the discussion the local committee had in September 2018 when Mrs Leveritt  also presented a petition on this matter. At that meeting, members asked for officers to reconsider their response, and so officers have provided this update report to the local committee.

Mrs Leveritt spoke on the petition and her statement included the following points:

• High streets in neighbouring communities have some free parking between 8am and 6pm. Leatherhead has none.
• The first petition since losing parking, was brought in 2013, by 56 town centre traders, 13 of whom have since gone. There are now five sites vacant. In 2015 traders asked for a parking trial but consultation results were 50-50 so the proposal was dropped. Over 1000 people have now signed this users petition presented at this meeting.
• Safety review and feasibility study – this should have started in September after the first petition was heard. This seems onerous as what the petition is asking for is already permitted every Sunday and evening. The crash map website indicates only one accident on the high street in the last five years; at midnight between cars and not involving pedestrians.
• The petition is only asking for access for 2 hours and 15 mins in the late afternoon at a time when there are fewer pedestrians in the High Street. The timing should help to capture families after the school run and could save some of the banks. Traders need more footfall.
• Both Surrey Highways and Mole Valley District Council in published strategies commit to supporting business prosperity. Will the committee please remember this today. All other considerations seem more important than business needs.
• The closure of Eden Flowers, and news that Martyns, including the Post Office, will close in 2019 - how many more have to close until the traders get the return of free parking?

Mr John Howarth, on behalf of Leatherhead and District Chamber of Commerce also spoke on the petition, and his statement included the following points:

• There is reference in the report at 2.6 (p36) to a feasibility study. However the 6 month trial proposed in the first petition was effectively proposing a feasibility study in situ. Has an opportunity been missed in this respect?
• There are five vacant units with more closures on the way. Does the committee agree there is a need for urgency? Does the committee agree that these studies need to be completed ASAP? The committee should insist on completion dates for these studies.
• There is a risk that retailers have looked at Leatherhead, enticed by the promises of Transform Leatherhead, seen the vacant units, and left. Is this not potentially damaging to the Transform Leatherhead vision?
• Given this risk, does the committee agree this must be dealt with as a matter of urgency?

Councillor Simon Edge, Cabinet Member for Prosperity at Mole Valley District Council spoke in response and his statement included the following points:

• The petition is not as straightforward an issue as it appears. Many high streets are facing challenges. A lot of the challenges are beyond the control of a local authority. The district council is doing a huge amount of work to help where it can. This includes the Economic Prosperity Strategy, and the Transform Leatherhead regeneration programme. Work has already been completed on Church Street, and some works have been completed on the Swan Centre. A refurbishment of the Swan Centre itself is also planned. The district council has also invested in high street property itself.
• The district council are also working with the county council on strategic transport studies, a significant review of traffic flows, and an economic viability study of Leatherhead. Some of the initiatives will be quick, some will take time.
• There have been events in the town centre to boost footfall, and free parking in the lead up to Christmas. 
• Work on signage and the waterless feature has also been commissioned, as noted in the recommendations. The district council has also instituted a business reference group to connect better with the business community.
• Having additional high street parking may be a viable option, and may be one that Transform Leatherhead can support once the studies have been done. However there could be better solutions – such as opening the road one way, or full pedestrianisation. Some people have equally contacted the council to say they do not want more cars on the high street.
• National research indicates that retailers can overestimate the impact of nearby parking on their footfall.
• It is important to wait until the studies have provided evidence, before taking action on what is likely to be a complex, and multi-faceted issue.
• As at September 2018, Leatherhead had a vacant retail space of 4.2% compared to the south east average of 3.8%. In Horsham, the figure is 3.4% and in Dorking it is 5.2%. This suggests that Leatherhead is not doing as badly as the petitioners suggest.
• County officers concur with these views, and that there are considerations that would need to be worked through, with expected cost of £30,000 to do as the petitioners request, for which there is no budget.
• With regards to Martyns and the Post Office, officers are working to look at this. 

Member discussion – key points:

·         Members noted this is a difficult issue to balance. It is demoralising to see the empty shops. It takes time to do anything because of the legal requirements that councils have to follow.

·         Could free parking be provided in the Swan Centre instead? It was noted that the cost of this would be about £18,000 for a three month trial, and could also lead to calls for the same from the other towns in the district.

·         Has the free parking on Saturdays made a difference to businesses? Could the district’s own car parks become free from 3pm? Members noted that the free parking has made a big difference.

·         Members asked if a shorter trial could be held to reduce the cost? Members noted the need to listen to officer advice because there are statutory requirements around implementing Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) even on a short-term basis.

·         Introducing free parking in Mole Valley car parks would carry a significant cost implication. The district council made changes to its car park charges last year and at this point looked carefully at different models, including free parking at certain times of the day. A full parking review and strategy is underway. Traffic modelling is due to report in February 2019, so by the time a trial was able to start, the results of the traffic modelling should be known. . The high street viability study is due to report in June/July.

·         Why was the opportunity missed not to do the feasibility study earlier? High streets are dying and traders having to close. The council should be helping, and putting them first. Parking right outside is much more convenient for shoppers.

·         The chairman acknowledged the need for urgency, and the feeling of neglect from the town. There is a feeling of decline. The studies need to be sped up if possible. The improvements to the Swan Centre car park need to be promoted. The problem of increasing parking in the Swan Centre is that customers would just use Sainsburys and leave.

·         Given that the county council is looking for a new Headquarters, could Leatherhead be considered, as this would give a boost to local traders. It was noted a number of options in Mole Valley were being looked at.

The Area Highway Manager made the following points in response:

·         There will be a full parking review across Mole Valley next financial year. But there are things that officers are proposing to do before that, in consultation with the district council and the Transform Leatherhead team, as set out in the recommendations. 

·         In terms of timing, a TRO has to follow a statutory process, including an assessment of safety. A statutory consultation period is also required, during which time people can raise objections. It is a long and expensive process. At present, there is no funding to start this process. However, the proposal remains on the table, but needs to be fed into the Transform Leatherhead programme. Officers cannot justify trying to find that level of funding only to find out a few months down the line, that it was not the right solution.

·         Parking in the Swan Centre is the responsibility of the district council, and therefore not within the remit of the local committee.

·         Since September, officers have been looking at the TRO processes, and commissioning the safety review, which will be undertaken in January. This will feed into the wider economic review and transport review.

Resolution:

The Local Committee (Mole Valley) AGREED to:

(i) Note the joint statement from Surrey County Council (SCC) Local Committee Chairman Mr Tim Hall and Mole Valley District Council (MVDC) Cabinet Member for Prosperity Councillor Simon Edge, as an update on the Petition (Annex 1). In particular to note the actions going forward.

(ii) Note that a safety review, which considers all High Street users, to assess the risk of conflict between vehicles and pedestrians, particularly for children, is to be carried out by SCC and is scheduled to be completed by March 2019.

(iii) Note that SCC has commissioned a repair of the walling to the ramps at the foot of the High Street, to improve the visual impact of this feature. This will be the removal of the damaged tiles and replacing this tiling with new rendering. This will be funded 50:50 by SCC and MVDC, with MVDC applying public realm planning contributions, and is scheduled to be carried out in February 2019, subject to normal construction delays, weather conditions and reducing inconvenience to traders and High Street users. The timing of the works was the result of consultation with

the market operator, Leatherhead and District Chamber of Commerce.

(iv) Note that a further petition about Leatherhead High Street has been submitted to the 12 December 2018 Local Committee (Mole Valley) for consideration.

(v) Agree that, following a review of the signs in Leatherhead, that SCC and MVDC will work together to put forward proposals for a new car park signing scheme, and existing direction signs in the town centre. Also, that MVDC and SCC will review existing Leatherhead gateway signs, identify approaches where no existing signs are, and to agree appropriate type, location and wording for any possible new signs. The Task Group and Committee will be updated following discussions between MVDC and SCC regarding the detailed proposals, funding streams and timings.

Reasons for Decision

To propose measures to work with representatives of the Leatherhead Residents’

Association and the Leatherhead and District Chamber of Commerce, in advance

and alongside the Transform Leatherhead project.