Surrey County Council cabinet told to look again at £6m London Road Active Travel scheme evidence

On October 29, Surrey County Council’s cabinet took the “political” decision to reject investment from Active Travel for cycle and pedestrian safety upgrades along the busy London Road in Guildford.

The cabinet, in a vote of six to three, rejected the opportunity to redevelop the major route linking Guildford town centre and the A3, despite both its own officers and external experts advising it would greatly improve safety along the corridor.

The cabinet argued that a single narrow 80 metre stretch of shared space, about 5 per cent of the entire project – presented too much of a risk and rejected the investment opportunity.

Their views were shared by disability groups who felt the shared spaces, where cyclists and pedestrians would mix, made the plans unsafe.

On that basis, together with concerns HGV wing mirrors could clip pedestrians Surrey County Council’s cabinet decided to maintain the status quo – which features shared spaces used by cyclists and pedestrians together on pavements.

That decision, however, will now be reconsidered – though not necessarily changed – after a call in meeting of the communities, environment and highways select committee decided it needed to be looked at again – with a fresh look at the evidence, as well as the impacts of not going ahead with the scheme.

Finally, it will be asked to show how its decision chimes with active travel polices and the county’s net zero ambitions.

The call-in was made by Councillor Lance Spencer (Liberal Democrats; Goldsworth East and Horsell Village) due to the “overwhelming evidence, from multiple sources” that said the scheme would benefit Guildford as a whole.

Improving traffic flow is also key to the borough council’s housing delivery targets.

First to speak during the Tuesday meeting was Cllr Paul Follows (Liberal Democrat: Godalming South, Milford & Witley) who said the council should be committed to “evidence based decision making” .

He questioned the grounds for refusal, saying they went against the project’s safety audit and challenged the cabinet to explain why it wanted to reject a scheme where 5 per cent of the route was on narrow shared space; in favour of keeping the existing layout where 40 per cent of the route was shared.

He added: “I appreciate the cabinet takes a political decision but it should be based on evidence.”

Two of the cabinet members who voted against the project suggested they would be unlikely to change their stance.

Cllr Denise Turner-Stewart (Conservative, Staines South and Ashford West) defending her decision to refuse the project said it was the evidence that had guided colleagues.

She told the meetings: “It was evidence that we say led us to the conclusion. That is, introducing a potential element of risk to a scheme that is deemed to be a safety improvement.

“We are not here just to implement schemes that are compliant with policies when we are made aware of elements of risk.”

The final vote, seven to four in favour of sending the decision back for reconsideration, swung back and forth as councillors had their say.

Cllr John O’Reilly said he had come into the meeting expecting to back the cabinet’s decision but changed his mind during the course of the debate.

He said: “It should go back to cabinet as the scheme represents an enhancement of safety”.

Reading the report, he said that, while there might be an element of discomfort in on some stretches, there were six mitigating measures to reduce them.

He asked whether the new lay out would enhance safety, keep things largely similar, or increase risks overall, because, largely the report came down on the side that it would greatly benefit the wider community.

Committee chair, Cllr Matt Furniss said “ Yes, I do think it would be enhanced, (along) the entirety of the scheme there is a significant increase in crossings, improvements to pavements, and reductions to speed.

“It was probably not best not to announce that we would close the road for six months to build it.

“The engagement process created a much better route and it’s a shame it wont be implemented in full.

“But it’s a democratic system we operate in and I was in the minority.”

Surrey County Council’s cabinet will reconvene on Tuesday, November 26 to go over its decision.