Councillors and committees
Community Call in: Surbiton Crescent
To respond to a Community Call-in with reference to a report at Appendix B of the agenda
(1) At its meeting on 14 June 2017 the Residents Committee had considered a report on the ‘Surbiton Crescent Traffic Management Order and Traffic Assessment’. Surbiton Crescent is a key link in the RBK’s Go Cycle Programme; it forms part of both the Surbiton to Kingston and Kingston to Tolworth routes and also facilitates a connection to the Portsmouth Road scheme. A trial scheme to restrict traffic using Surbiton Crescent as a through-route was put in place in September 2016. The purpose of the scheme was to reduce traffic volumes sufficiently to allow cyclists to safely share the road with the remaining traffic.
(2) After hearing representations and deliberations, the Residents Committee had resolved that:
1. the formal objections received in response to the publication of the Experimental Traffic Management Order (TMO-P236) as set out in paragraphs 19-22 be noted;
2. the results of the Surbiton Crescent trial traffic restrictions assessment, as set out in paragraph 8-13 be noted;
3. a Traffic Management Order be made to give permanent effect to the Surbiton Crescent trial traffic restrictions contained in TMO P-236 ; and
4. the Director of Place be authorised to make design or construction variations to the above scheme in consultation with the Resident Services Portfolio Holder or any successor portfolio holder and the Opposition Spokesperson.
(3) A community call in was received on 27 June 2017, supported by 274 signatories, which gave the following reasons for the decisions above to be called in for review at full Council:
“We, the undersigned Call-in the Surbiton Crescent Traffic Management Order and
Traffic Assessment for review at full council for the following reasons”:
- The committee failed to call in a parking enforcement officer to discuss the issue of fines.
- The traffic assessment surveys did not publish the volume of vehicles in Maple Road and Surbiton Road before and after the trial restrictions.
- There was no published assessment of the vehicle pollution levels, before or after the trial restrictions, in Maple Road and Surbiton Road.
- The formal objections to the experimental TMO - 236 were not properly discussed or noted. Some were edited before publication and some were not published at all despite receiving responses from the Go Cycle team.
- The health and safety of schoolchildren and staff from Surbiton High School has not been addressed in any part of the Surbiton Crescent Traffic Management Order and Traffic Assessment report.
(4) The Council’s procedures relating to Community Call-ins provide opportunity for a representative of the signatories to the call in to address the Council meeting on the subject. The Council heard representations from Mr James Giles, (representing the organiser of the Community Call-in, Ms Helen Hinton) who explained in more detail the reasons for the Call-in.
(5) The options available to the Council in responding to a Call-in are to: reaffirm the decision of the Committee; modify the decision of the Committee; or overturn the decision of the Committee; or refer the decision back to the Committee for further consideration; or refer the decision of the Committee to a Task and Finish Group for further consideration.
(6) Councillor Terry Paton proposed, and Councillor Phil Doyle seconded, that the above decisions of the Residents Committee be re-affirmed, and implemented as soon as possible so that the need for camera enforcement can be removed without further delay. (Information about the GO Cycle Programme was tabled at the meeting, showing how Surbiton Crescent was an important link in the network of cycle routes connecting the town centre to Surbiton, Tolworth and Portsmouth Road.)
(6) The Leader of the Opposition, Councillor Liz Green proposed, and Councillor Rebekah Moll seconded, an amendment to the Motion, as follows:
1. To address residents’ valid concerns about pollution, congestion, safety and fairness, this Council agrees to set up a Task and Finish Group.
2. The Task and Finish Group should cover, but not be limited to:
a) how the implementation went so wrong
b) how the signage needs improving
c) a full safety audit and air quality evaluation on all surrounding roads; and
d) the Task and Finish Group should report back to Residents Committee to implement a fairer scheme.
3. This Council also agrees, given the recognition that the implementation was extremely poor, all fines for the first time motorist contravening the restriction should be refunded and first offence fines going forward be suspended.
(7) On being put to the vote, the amendment was defeated as follows:
For: 17 members of the Council (Councillors Sushila Abraham, John Ayles, Patricia Bamford, Bill Brisbane, Hilary Gander, Liz Green, Sheila Griffin, Shiraz Mirza, Rebekah Moll, Rachel Reid, Lorraine Rolfe, Malcolm Self, Thay Thayalan, Margaret Thompson, Jon Tolley, Yogan Yoganathan and Diane White)
Against: 26 members of the Council (the Deputy Mayor, Mike Head, Roy Arora, Geoff Austin, Rowena Bass, Paul Bedforth, Jack Cheetham, Linsey Cottington, Andrea Craig, David Cunningham, Kevin Davis, Andrew Day, Phil Doyle, David Fraser, Ian George, David Glasspool, Chris Hayes, Richard Hudson, Eric Humphrey, Andy Johnson-Creek, Maria Netley, Raju Pandya, Priyen Patel, Terry Paton, Cathy Roberts, Hugh Scantlebury, and Ken Smith)
Abstaining: 2 Members (the Mayor, Councillor Julie Pickering, and Councillor Mary Clark
(8) After further debate, the original Motion proposed by Councillor Paton (seconded by Councillor Phil Doyle) was put to the vote and it was RESOLVED that the decisions of the Residents Committee be re-affirmed.
For: 27 members of the Council (the Deputy Mayor, Mike Head, Roy Arora, Geoff Austin, Rowena Bass, Paul Bedforth, Jack Cheetham, Linsey Cottington, Andrea Craig, David Cunningham, Kevin Davis, Andrew Day, Phil Doyle, David Fraser, Ian George, David Glasspool, Sheila Griffin, Chris Hayes, Richard Hudson, Eric Humphrey, Andy Johnson-Creek, Maria Netley, Raju Pandya, Priyen Patel, Terry Paton, Cathy Roberts, Hugh Scantlebury, and Ken Smith)
Against: 15 members of the Council (Councillors Sushila Abraham, John Ayles, Patricia Bamford, Bill Brisbane, Mary Clark, Liz Green, Shiraz Mirza, Rebekah Moll, Rachel Reid, Lorraine Rolfe, Malcolm Self, Thay Thayalan, Margaret Thompson, Yogan Yoganathan, and Diane White)
Abstaining: 3 members of the Council (the Mayor, Councillor Julie Pickering, and Councillors Hilary Gander and Jon Tolley)
[From 9.20pm-9.35pm the Council adjourned.]
- FINAL Surbiton Crescent Call in report, item 19. PDF 93 KB
- Annex1CommunityCallinProcedureOctober2016extract, item 19. PDF 47 KB
- Annex2SurbitonCrescentCommunityCall-in, item 19. PDF 89 KB
- Annex3ResidentsCommitteeminuteseExtract, item 19. PDF 90 KB
- Annex4ResidentsCommitteeReportSurbitonCrescentTrafficManagementOrderandTrafficAssessment, item 19. PDF 156 KB
- Enclosure 1 to Annex 4 _RBK Response to TMO-P236 Objections, item 19. PDF 812 KB
- not in printed pack_Annex 2 of the Residents Committee Report- TMO_P236, item 19. PDF 803 KB
- Enclosure 2 to Annex 4_ Formal Objections to TMO-P236, item 19. PDF 114 KB