Agenda item

The Local Committee Tandridge, at the meeting on 9 December 2011 determined that a development related speed management scheme should be introduced in Godstone Road, Lingfield for a period of one year in the first instance in order to monitor the impact and to make amendments if necessary.

The Local Committee determined that the monitoring would be on the basis of congestion, traffic diversion, traffic speeds and recorded personal injury accidents.

This was legally recognised in the Section 278 Agreement between the County Council and the developer. This was completed on 18 September 2012 and the highway works in their entirety were completed on 5 September 2013, although the kerb-build outs were completed in December 2012.

This report summarises the outcome of the monitoring and considers the impact of the scheme.

Report and Annexes 1 – 6 attached.

The Committee AGREED:

To defer the committee decision until the next meeting of the local committee.

Reasons:

In order to prepare a new report by March 2015 (proposing potential amendments to the scheme), continue the monitoring and to consult with the Lingfield and Dormansland parish councils prior to the report being submitted to the Committee.

Declarations of Interest: None

Officers attending: Caroline Smith, Transport Development Planning Team Manager East

The Transport Development Planning Team Manager reported that the Parish council did some work in monitoring congestion; however they stopped monitoring in March 2014 as they felt their information did not fully represent the main concerns. Surrey County Council monitors journey times as opposed to just congestion and the journey time data is derived from sat nav information supplied by the Department for Transport.

Sat Nav data is only available up until August 2013.  The latest data will not be available until the new year. The data showed average journey times increased by 23 seconds north bound and 20 seconds southbound during peak times. The increase in journey times does not constitute congestion.

The Transport Development Planning Team Manager relayed concerns expressed by the Parish council regarding traffic diverting from this route to Lingfield Common Road/Station Road and/or Saxby’s Lane. Therefore traffic counters were placed in Station Road and Saxby’s Lane, in order to monitor this. Unfortunately there have been significant problems with the Station Road counter and there is very little data available. However traffic levels in Godstone Road and Saxby’s Lane have fluctuated during the monitoring period and mirror each other. If one drops, so does the other therefore there appears to be no trend in traffic diverting.

Prior to the introduction of the scheme, the 85%ile traffic speed on Godstone Road adjacent to the site access was around 41 mph with a mean speed of 35/36 mph. The most recent data, from October 2014, shows that the 85%ile speed has reduced to 35 mph and the mean speed to 30 mph N.W bound and the 85%ile speed to 34 mph and the mean speed to 27/28 mph S.E bound. Consequently mean speeds are now at or below the 30mph speed limit.

According to the County Council’s records of personal injury accidents, there have been none reported related to the pinch points.

Member Discussion – key points:

·         The Local Committee Vice Chairman stated that Surrey County Council (SCC) has a responsibility to monitor the roads. Therefore when action is required it comes back to the County or Local Committee. So as a highways authority SCC would continue to have a responsibility. 

·         Members agreed that the positive outcome was that the speed limit had been reduced and that there had been no recorded personal injuries.

·         Mrs Sally Marks enquired whether, although part of the planning permission was to have no illumination at one of the pinch points, can a request be lodged to request illumination. Mrs Marks commented that  it seems to be poor driving that could be causing the issues. She continued in asking whether the signage could be improved.

·         Members agreed that the latest traffic monitoring results were needed and that drivers should apply better judgement and patience.

·         Members agreed that HGVs should also take a share of the blame and that they should be written to in order to ask them to improve their code of conduct within the district.

The Transport Development Planning Team Manager responded that as the highways authority SCC may be able to go against the planning permission and provide illumination at the pinch point but this would be at their own expense.  She added that the signage in place meets the relevant criteria and was improved. However this is something that can be looked at again.

·         Mrs Sally Marks requested that the officer pursues the illumination option and looks again at the signage which the Transport Development Planning Team Manager agreed to do in liaison with the South East Area Team.

·         Mr David Hodge proposed that the Transport Development Planning Team Manager return to the March Local Committee meeting in order to present options on what additional measures could be provided and to present further monitoring data.

·         Members were reluctant to see the pinch points removed. However it was agreed to defer the decision until the March 2015 meeting where a new report will be brought to the Committee.

·         Members requested that a copy of that report be shown to the Lingfield and Dormansland parish councils and that SCC also ask if the parishes will consider financing VAS.

·         All members agreed to the proposed recommendation to defer the decision to the March 2015 Local Committee meeting.

Petitions, Public Questions, Statements: Chris D’avray from Lingfield Parish Council asked whether a video camera could be installed for the further monitoring.

The officer responded that she would be happy to continue with the monitoring. However there is no budget available and does not consider it appropriate to ask the developer to fund it.

The Transport Development Planning Team Manager agreed to return to the March Local Committee meeting and confirmed that under the terms of the S278 agreement, there is a 6 month period following monitoring  after which the developer is not obliged to undertake further work.

·         Mr David Hodge agreed to speak with the officer outside of the meeting to take this further and members discussed that a special formal local committee meeting may need to take place in February in order to make the decisions before the legal 6 month time period elapses.

Resolution:

The Committee AGREED:

To defer the committee decision until the next meeting of the local committee.

Reasons:

In order to prepare a new report by March 2015 (proposing potential amendments to the scheme), continue the monitoring and to consult with the Lingfield and Dormansland parish councils prior to the report being submitted to the Committee.

The Chairman returned to Item 4 to hear the remaining 2 petitions received.