Witnesses:
Matt Furniss, Cabinet Member for Transport, Infrastructure and
Growth
Katie Stewart, Executive Director – Environment, Transport
& Infrastructure
Paul Millin, Assistant Director, Strategic Transport
Lucy Monie, Director, Highways and Transport
Steve Howard, Transport Strategy Manager, Environment, Transport
& Infrastructure
Key points
made in the discussion:
General
- The Chairman asked a
question on the impact of delays in the development of the Surrey
Transport Plan. The Transport Strategy Manager, Environment,
Transport & Infrastructure said that the Council had been
waiting 18 months for the Department for Transport to issue
guidance and an associated carbon reduction toolkit . The Cabinet
Member had written to the Secretary of State. The response would be
shared with the Committee.
- A Member asked how
national attitudes would affect motivations for delivery. The
Cabinet Member emphasised that the service was offering residents
as many sustainable transport options as possible. The Member noted
that some residents had encountered issues with EV cables running
over pavements. This was considered an obstruction. The Cabinet
Member explained that the Trojan Trial Project which allowed
residents to charge their vehicles by way of a gulley laid across
the pavement. A trial was underway. The Cabinet Member agreed to
revert to the Member with the cost to resident of implementing this
approach.
Delivery Plan Approach
- A Member asked a
question about pace of delivery of the Transport Plan –
numbers of car movements in Surrey had increased not decreased. The
Cabinet Member said that progress was being made where there was
public support for example for walking and electric biking
schemes. The Executive Director for
Environment, Transport and Infrastructure noted that even though there was no formal delivery plan yet in
place, delivery was nonetheless taking place.
- A Member asked if the
Council would bid for additional funding for the Transport Plan.
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Infrastructure and Growth
answered that HS2 diverted funds would be bid for by the Council
for major infrastructure improvements. Additionally, the Council
had recently been awarded £3.9 billion for bus services in
Surrey and the £2 bus cap fare remained in place.
Engagement
- A Member asked how
consultation could be managed in the context of residents feeling
that car ownership was under attack. The
Cabinet Member stressed that motorists were
not being attacked. A new and slower
co-design process was being adopted. This involved longer and more
thorough consultation to make sure residents were on board with any
plans.
Governance, Monitoring & Measuring Success
- A Member asked a
question on what measures might be considered to make short car
journeys less attractive. A range of possible options were flagged
including reducing parking, traffic calming and management measures
and road user charging. The Cabinet Member emphasised that this was
not currently under consideration. The Member also asked how the
Council would define the acceptable level of public support from
residents for any new measures. The Cabinet Member answered that
Councillors had an important role in deciding what was acceptable
in their division. An effective
codesign process was critical.
- A Member asked a
question on the timeline of the Local Cycling and Walking
Infrastructure Plans (LCWIPs) for all districts and
boroughs. The Transport Strategy
Manager said that the plan would be completed
by 2024 as there was a 5 stage Department for Transport process.
The Member noted that most of these plans were centred around town
centres and asked about cycling infrastructures in those areas. The
Transport Policy Team Manager noted that the Local Cycling and
Walking Improvement Plan addressed the issue. Local street
improvements would improve connectivity from people’s front
door to their destination. Connectivity across surrey was the
biggest consideration. The Cabinet
Member noted that space was an issue, but
allocation of space was still being considered between motorists,
walkers, and cyclists.
- A Member asked a
question on cycling lanes. The Cabinet
Member stressed the importance of providing
infrastructure for residents to have the option to choose their
mode of transport.
Delivery
Progress
- A Member asked if the
EV rollout was too ambitious considering the lack of progress. The
Cabinet Member noted that non-EV vehicles could park in EV spaces
in some town centre and residential locations. The Transport Policy
Team Manager noted that the original pilot EV scheme had issues,
but the service had developed a road map with government bodies
that laid out how to deliver infrastructure. The Member asked if
the plan was being developed in Tandridge and pushed for a rollout
in rural locations. The Cabinet Member
said less commercially viable areas like rural
locations were targeted by the Council through subsidised
funding.
- The Cabinet Member
answered a question to a Member regarding transport measures in
residential areas. Measures were being put in place in residential
areas only with resident’s support and measures including
lower speeds in school and residential areas, healthy streets
– planting trees, minimal impact on motorists but high impact
on walkers and cyclists. The Transport
Strategy Manager answered the Member’s question on Key
Performance Indicators and said that local
data monitoring would need to take place.
- A Member asked a
question on public support for liveable neighbourhoods.
The Cabinet Member said that
it would depend on area to area and stressed the importance of
addressing the root issues and creating solutions. The Member asked
a question on the compatibility of the Carbon Assessment Tool from
the DfT. The Transport Strategy
Manager noted that based on draft forms seen,
the service was hopeful on compatibility.
- A Member asked a
question on the adaptability of on demand bus services. Could local
intelligence be fed into the design of services.
The Assistant Director, Strategic Transport
said that the busses were designed to meet the needs
of the community and had built in flexibility to meet requirements.
Local bus services were less flexible, but where
there was a notable change in demand, bus services could be adapted
through operator and Council collaboration to meet the
demand.
- A member asked a
question on road safety outside of schools. The Assistant Director, Strategic Transport
said just under 10% of schools had been earmarked for improvement,
funded from a £3 million Council investment over three years.
The Member noted that parent parking was a major issue for children
walking in and out of schools and asked if drop off area’s
being banned was still the Council’s
policy. The Assistant Director, Strategic
Transport said drop off points at schools
could create large traffic lines and congestion. The Service
preferred to identify ‘Park and Stride’
sites a short distance from the school, which decentralised the
issue of congestion.
- A Member asked a
question on the process of safety routes to schools.
The Assistant Director, Strategic Transport Group
Manager answered that the Safer Travel Team
assess the safety of routes to schools to identify issues, making
recommendations for improvements .
- A Member raised
concerns over Danetree Primary School’s road safety.
The Cabinet Member for Transport, Infrastructure and
Growth offered to hold a conversation with
Cllr Mason.
- The Chairman asked a
question on Highway Maintenance policies and if there was appetite
to align the Highway Maintenance with cycling routes.
The Director of Highways and Transport
answered that there were currently many footways
that were being assessed and the aim was to create more footways
that could be categorised highly. Cycleways were also being
assessed. The team had also been identifying areas for increasing
the number of bus stops.
- A Member asked when
the report on footways would be shared. The Director answered that
the aim was for the end of 2023.
Actions/requests for further information:
- The Cabinet Member
for Transport, Infrastructure and Growth would share the response
regarding guidance and the carbon reduction toolkit from the
Secretary of State and the Transport Minister when
received.
- The Cabinet Member
for Transport, Infrastructure and Growth to share with the
Committee the cost to residents of EV charging pavement gulleys
currently being piloted under project Trojan.
- The Assistant
Director, Strategic Transport to hold a conversation with Cllr
Richard Tear on on-demand busses.
- The Cabinet Member
for Transport, Infrastructure and Growth to advise Cllr Jan Mason
on actions to improve road safety for Danetree Primary School.
Recommendations:
That
the Communities Environment and Highways Select
Committee:
- Endorses the proposed approach to developing the plan,
specifically that it would include a prioritised programme of
measures and interventions supported by a clear
prioritisation process and funding strategy. These
would be vital in maximising the effectiveness of spend and
ensuring carbon reductions can be maximised in a resource
constrained environment.
- Supports the proposed annual progress report and ongoing
involvement of the Select Committee and the alignment of the Surrey
Transport Plan Delivery Plan cycle to the Climate Change Delivery
Plan (noting that the former was the single most critical component
of the latter and that if it fails, so too does the Climate
plan).
- Recommends that an update was provided to members on
progress aligning Highways
Maintenance and Inspection policies and procedures with LTP4 by end
2023; and that this be combined with the update that the Cabinet
Member had already committed to provide Council members on the Task
& Finish Programme (Streets and Environment Services) if
appropriate.