Appendix to Minutes of 24th June 2002                   Click here for minutes

Traffic Calming

In the presence of Mr Derek Lake, Surrey County Council's Transportation Manager

The Guildford Local committee of SCC has agreed to the funding of a Safety Scheme Feasibility Study for East Clandon. Mr Lake complimented the Council on the excellence of its Village Safety Scheme Report, produced for them by Paula Southern in July 2001.

There are two basic problem areas:
i. A246 and the junctions off it.
ii. Village / Ripley Road. (currently a 'derestricted road: ie, a legal speed limit
of 60 mph)

Points made by members of the public present:

  • Residents in the village feel very vulnerable to the speed of traffic
  • There is no pavement in parts of the village with homes very close to the road.
  • This is the only village in the Borough with no speed restrictions. (In a recent police speed check along the Ripley Road the maximum recorded speed was 59 mph.)
  • There is no village street lighting (If there is lighting, there is automatically a speed limit of 30mph.)
  • There is need for a sign along the A246 announcing the village
  • Ditto along the Ripley Road.
  • No 'give way' sign along Staple Lane approach to A246.
  • There are too many small signs along the A246 approach to the village, causing confusion to drivers.
  • Do we need a roundabout at the A246/The Street junction?
  • Is there a connection between "Rat Race" times and accidents? (Only one incident in the village report at these times.)


Mr Lake responded with the following points:

i. Speed limits
A Traffic Order is always needed before a speed limit can be put in place; this is a legal process There is a complex policy whereby the nature of the road is looked at on a points system (density of footways, nature of properties, homes for the elderly, schools, etc) to determine an 'ideal' speed limit, the number of points is then compared with the speed level at which drivers actually travel. Once a speed limit is in place, it is not usually revoked. Speed limits cannot be imposed if they are not enforceable.

ii. Priorities
Members of the Guildford Local committee are always faced with a long list of potential projects. All funding is from Government, and there is never enough money! There has therefore to be some means of saying which projects have priority. In reality, priority is given to those areas where there is an accident record. By law, all accidents involving personal injury have to be reported. So therefore, priorities are on the basis of personal injury.

iii. Options for the A246
New Road closure. It had been recommended by the ECPC Report that New Road be closed to through traffic. This suggestion must be looked at in detail, with residents in both New Road and The Street to be consulted (because of traffic increase through The Street. It is very easy to just move a problem elsewhere.)

A roundabout. The potential cost of constructing a roundabout is probably prohibitive (in the region of £1/4 million to £1/2 million), especially if it involves digging up and resiting of cables; it would also involve lighting.

Narrowing of the carriageway with 'hatching' lines. This would be a low cost option, which could also promote a cycle lane

(Cllr David Davis added that he personally was against the idea of a roundabout: He couldn't persuade his colleagues on the Local Committee to spend this amount of money. He prefers the solution of narrowing the road)

iv. Village speed limits
Through the village itself, 30mph is an appropriate limit, but not all the way along the Ripley Road to Send Prison. Speed surveys will be carried out. But, "just because you put in a limit it doesn't mean driver behaviour will change." This could be implemented without lighting.

v. Traffic calming measures
There are a wide range of alternatives, these cannot be installed without lighting. Do they work? There is no simple answer, local people probably have strong ideas. What works in one village does not necessarily work in another. Rumble-strips: these depend on the location.

vi. Village gateway signs
with, eg. "Please drive carefully through our village". Many parish councils have found that they do not like the standard ones made by GBC and so design their own, and then also accept maintenance liability. These signs probably do not make any difference to speed levels unless they delineate a complete change of environment.
(Cllr Davis here added that it would be a good idea to ask other local Parish Councils who have put in gateway-signs, etc what their experience has been as a result. He thinks that they will say that it has not been worth the expense.)

vii. There is no sign indicating a T-junction on the approach from the Ripley Road
A 'priority' sign might be of use.

Mr Lake then outlined what is already being done

i. The Guildford Local Committee has agreed to the funding of a Feasibility Study; a Brief is now being written to identify the problems (the Report of July 2001 from ECPC forms the basis of the Brief). The completion of this Study probably involves at least two months' work. Data collection is not done during holiday time, nor on Mondays and Fridays which are regarded as atypical days.

ii. The Study will also include access to Blakes Lane.

iii. There is a *time scale (*to the length of which he would not be committed). Some of the suggestions could be implemented fairly quickly after their next meeting (never more than 6 weeks away) but money for this financial year has already been committed. Closure of New Road, or a decision on a roundabout, would certainly not be this year. Because of the legal process involved in the imposition of any Speed limit the earliest we might see one imposed would be Christmas / April 2003.

iv. Resurfacing of the A246. There are no plans in the immediate future to resurface with a noise reducing surface. (Reduced speeds would reduce noise.) Similarly on the Ripley Road.

v. The Feasibility Study is in no way confidential and anyone can look at it, but it is a very technical document.

vi. All decisions are made by the Guildford Local Committee, and not by Mr Lake himself.


Mr Lake was warmly thanked for coming to the meeting.


Mary Leech
Parish Clerk

If anybody wants to contact his department by e-mail the address is: gts@surrycc.gov.uk This will go straight to his department.