Agenda item

Surrey County Council maintains Forward Programmes of proposed transport schemes that would deliver each borough and district’s Local Transport Strategy, subject to funding and feasibility. The Mole Valley Forward Programme is presented to Committee for approval, and approval to publish online, as part of a proposed new regime of publishing an up-to-date Forward Programme for each district and borough annually.

The Local Committee (Mole Valley) agreed:

i. To note the timeframes and approach for updating the District’s Local Transport Strategy and for future updates to the Committee regarding the Forward Programme.

ii. The revised version of the Forward Programme (Annex 1)

Reason for decisions:

The above decisions were made to:

i. Provide a confirmed timeline and process for working with the Local Committee to develop and maintain future Local Transport Strategies and Forward Programmes to ensure the Local Committee and officers are well positioned to work together.

ii. Allow Members and officers to progress with a common understanding of proposed transport schemes for the district (based upon the existing Local Transport Strategy, and ahead of decisions relating to a new Local Plan).

iii. Allow the Forward Programme to be published online, giving members of the public sight of the latest proposals and progress.

Declarations of Interest: None

Officers attending: Stacey Capewell, Transport Strategy Project Manager (Joint Post MVDC/SCC)

Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: The Transport Strategy Project Manager introduced the report noting the Forward Programme list in Annex 1 was an aspirational list of schemes. The document was a living document and the full update for the Local Transport Strategy Schemes would be completed in line with the Mole Valley Local Plan.

Key points from the discussion:

· Members raised the following points about specific schemes detailed on the list:

· DW2 – a request was made for signage for the cycle track to be included at the entrance to Thorncroft Drive. Many people didn’t know the cycle track was there and if they did would use it rather than cycling down Dorking Road, holding up traffic. Officers noted they would take this request back to look at.

· SRN1 – It was commented that this scheme would be expensive and indeed aspirational as finding the funds could be hard.

· LBC2 - In light of the recent news regarding the 479 bus route, members questioned whether this was still to be considered. Officers confirmed the report had been written prior to the Buses Excetera liquidation and despite this they were hopeful they could bring a quality bus corridor to Mole Valley.

· BF3 – It was noted there was no cost estimate for the scheme to create a formal cycling route between Fetcham and Bookham and asked if an approximate figure could be provided for this. Officers stated the figure would be hard to calculate without looking at the specifics of the scheme in question. Rough figures could be provided based on similar schemes elsewhere in the county.

· ASH3 – The current delivery stage of the scheme was indicated as Scheme Identification when it should be Design. This was noted and would be changed by the Transport Strategy Project Manager before the list was published.

· DW6 – Queries were raised over whether the promotion of the lift share and car clubs needed to be part of the local plan. Members asked where they should refer residents to if they wished to start their own car club. Officers confirmed information could be found on the SCC website about how to go about doing this.

· AR9 – It was requested that the cycling route from Ockley village up to the station be extended down to Capel as many people from Capel travelled up to Ockley station. The extension would create a safer route for them too.

The Transport Strategy Project Manager noted all the comments made and confirmed she would make any necessary changes before publishing the updated list.

Resolution: