Transcript

Good afternoon. Welcome to Cabinet Member for Highways, Transport and Economic Growth Decisions on the 29th of October at 12 p.m. I'm Matt Furniss. I am the Cabinet Member who will be chairing the meeting today. Just quickly run through the preamble. No declarations of interest. We've had no public members' questions. So we can move straight to item three, which is a petition to improve the safety of pedestrians crossing the A30 Egham Bypass. 317 people signed this petition and a response is within the agenda. I understand the lead petitioner, Isabelle Mullins, is online. Ms Mullins, you've got three minutes if you would like to say anything and then I will go to the divisional councillor and to our officer for any comments they would like to raise also. OK, well, thank you very much for your time today. I'm councillor Isabelle Mullins. I'm an Egham town. I represent Egham town at Rymie Borough Council. I'm sorry that my camera is not working and you can't see me. And I would just like to thank Joss Butler and Oscar Corran for their support in presenting this petition. So I'm speaking for 317 residents of Egham and Surround, most of whom I've spoken to individually, and we're petitioning Surrey County Council to improve the safety of pedestrians crossing the A30 Egham Bypass at the end of Hummer Road, Egham, by firstly decreasing the speed limit on the bypass from 50 miles an hour to 40 miles an hour. Secondly, enforcing the limit by operating average speed cameras over the length of the bypass. And thirdly, installing a signalised pedestrian crossing across the bypass in place of the unregulated crossing to enable more people to access Runnymede fields and pleasure grounds safely on foot and by bicycle. And, you know, which supports our health and wellbeing agenda at Runnymede and no doubt Surrey's. So I understand very well that the average speed of vehicles along Egham Bypass is less than 50 miles an hour. I've been told this many times, but more than 5,000 of them, 5,000 vehicles every day exceed the speed limit. And it's these cars that I've referenced in my petition. And I haven't seen any reference to these thousands of cars in the answer that I've received. And I just think that's extraordinary. You think about it, 5,000 every day. It doesn't matter that there are some going at 40 miles an hour when there are some that go up to 85 miles an hour. But secondly, I'd like to know why we even need to justify the need for a crossing over the bypass when it was agreed in principle several years ago as part of the Egham Sustainable Transport Program when the Runnymede roundabout was built, but it was postponed due to a lack of money. So that doesn't make sense to me that we're making this argument yet again when it was already agreed. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Frans. Thank you for keeping us time as well. Marisa, as a divisional councillor, you in this case might like to say a couple of words as well. Yeah, I mean, sure. This road's been on the radar for some time, which is why I paid for a vehicle actually designed to be put on it. It's got a lot of history, this road, because actually it used to go nowhere. It used to be zero miles an hour because it was so congested before I and some of my colleagues managed to get the money to redo the Runnymede roundabout, and now it's a moving road. I think that under here we know that the LCWIP is looking at how this is made safer, and there is thinking going on around that. We know there's currently no funding to put a crossing at the moment, so I think this issue is being addressed through that consideration by the LCWIP. So I remain quite satisfied with that piece of work going forward. Even if we said today, okay, we'll have a crossing, which is impossible on a road going at that speed, even 40 miles an hour, I consider that to be dangerous. I think that we just wouldn't be able to take it forward anyway. So I think the issue here is to be talking to, working with the police to make sure people know that that road is being monitored and watched. Now we haven't had much police overview of there, and most of the people using the road are using it on a regular basis and considering it is safe to go over the speed limit because people aren't being caught and issued with a ticket. As soon as you do that, I think we'll see some change in behavior, and we'll get back to the majority, which is people get traveling on the speed that is allowed on that road. I think we do have to have roads that are moving people. This is a strategic road that is taking people towards the M25 and keeping traffic moving, and I think that needs to be considered as well. We have a number of crossings heading in that direction as you come down Egham Hill that have been implemented over the last few years, and I think this road is one that I want to see carrying on moving. There are also issues to do with cars stopping and starting in regards to air quality, which I consider to be an issue around there as well. So I think we should carry on thinking this through, through the LCWIP as we're doing at the moment. And I would like to also point out, I think we had a number of signatures on this petition, but I also had a number of emails from people saying they didn't support this, and that brings me to the point that we need to continue with the ongoing engagement and consideration on this piece of road. I'm not a highways engineer by any stretch, but I think putting a crossing on a road that's 40 or 50 miles an hour is something that needs to be really, really carefully thought about. I take Councillor Mullen's point that it has been considered before in the past, but we are at a new place now with traffic movements and funding and all sorts of other implications. So I think it's useful to have the debate. I think that we've got to carry on having the conversation. And I will personally go and speak to the police myself to ask if they can do some active work on this road in the next coming weeks. Thank you. Thank you. Yes. And your point about, sorry, police who are the speed enforcement body is very important. Anne-Marie, was there anything as the officer here today would you want to add or make any points from what has been said by the two speakers? Yeah, thank you. Just briefly, yes, it is on the speed management plan, this road, so there is some enforcement carried out by the police. And also, I agree that there are people that are going above 50 miles an hour, 5,000 I believe that Councillor Mullins indicated. And that just demonstrates that if we were to reduce the speed limit using signs alone, we would have little to no impact on those drivers. And unfortunately, we are not able to install traffic calming measures, which are some of the most effective measures to encourage people to reduce their speeds. On a 40 mile an hour road, we're not legally permitted to do it. So I do think that the LCWIP has requested and suggested that a crossing be installed as part of that scheme. And I think that will obviously work with the borough to progress that scheme. Thank you. Yes. And I do think that the LCWIP in particular, the fact that a new Toucan crossing is proposed on the Egg and Bypass near the junction with Hummer Road and improved cycle facilities along the A30 Egg and Bypass, it would probably be that will be the best way of progressing this. So Councillor Mullins, thank you very much for bringing the position. You've had the response, we've got the debate and everything, but I do think that progressing it through the LCWIP does attract funding from Active Travel England as well. And you've got Councillor Heath here as well, who can follow up with the police about speed enforcement on this stretch. I think that will sort of cover most, but not all of what you've requested today. But I hope you understand why we can't drop the speed limit with signs only. And it would require the police support for any changes to the speeding enforcement on this section. But the LCWIP will be probably the best option for changing the nature of the road and seeing a reduction in any speed limit. So thank you and thank you for coming. Is it possible to speak again? Is it possible to ask a supplementary? Very briefly, if you wish. Yes, thank you very much. So just with regard to the LCWIP, and I agree with you, you know, signs only, I can see that that's not sufficient. But with regard to the LCWIP, so as a Runnymede Councillor, I was involved in the drawing up of the LCWIP. It was in, I think, 2020, 2021. And at the time, we were told that Runnymede's LCWIP was going to be in the first tranche in Surrey. And I don't think that's happened. And whenever I've asked when the public consultation will happen, when I've asked many times, I've been given a date in the future, which never materialises. And I'd like to know for sure when this will happen in Runnymede. So in the response which you have had, it says that stage two of the LCWIP is currently taking place, involves developing the proposals identified on the high priority corridors and zones in more detail. The designs are expected to be finalised in 2025, early 2025, and engagement is planned over the next few months with divisional councillors and district councillors, so the next few months. Okay. Okay. Well, thank you. I'll believe it when I see it. Thank you. Very well. Thank you very much for everyone attending. I'll draw the meeting to a close at 12 minutes past 12.