Notices

Proposed New No Cold Calling Area – Bookham/Fetcham/Ashtead

Proposed New No Cold Calling Area – Bookham/Fetcham/Ashtead – information from Ashtead Residents Association.

Surrey Trading Standards and Surrey Police are currently working together to look at ways of reducing the levels of distraction burglary and doorstep related crime within Surrey. With this in mind we are considering introducing a No Cold Calling Zone in the Bookham/Fetcham/Ashtead area.

No Cold Calling Zones previously established in Guildford, Maybury and Horley, have shown great reductions in this type of crime by raising residents’ awareness and empowering them to be more confident when dealing with unwanted doorstep callers.

They help to reduce the number of callers that residents receive as the zones have No Cold Calling Zone road signs erected at various entry points which act as visible deterrents to businesses. In addition, residents will receive a ‘No Cold Calling Household Pack’, which will include a door sticker for you to display and information on how to deal with uninvited
callers safely.

During the initial phase of this process we want to be able to consider all points of view about the proposed zone, and are especially interested in the views of residents and local businesses that may be affected.

Therefore we would like to take the opportunity to welcome all views, comments and opinions from members of the public on the proposed new zone.

To give us your views please contact Mr Amir Ali on amir.ali@surreycc.gov.uk or telephone him on 01372 371 775.

For information on the zones and how they work please go to the Surrey County Council website Trading Standards pages on www.surreycc.gov.uk/tradingstandards.

Please note that this public consultation will close on 15 June 2008 and after this we cannot guarantee your views will be considered when making our final evaluation.

I wonder why Leatherhead is not included in this? A question has been sent to Trading Standards.

LRA Publicity & Marketing – Duck Race

Does any one have links with the Leatherhead Festival Committee?

The Annual Duck Race is looming (21st June 2008). This is another opportunity to market the LRA to lots of families in the Leatherhead area. My proposal is:

  • Sponsor a duck or two.
  • Sponsor a HiVi vest for one of the ‘divers’ in the river.
  • Have a stand/tent down by the river.
  • Have some sandwich boards located in prominent places.
  • Prepare new publicity material.
  • Get some balloons made up with LRA logo & web address on them (c 150 GBP for 1000 units).

Comments please.

Town Centre Parking Suggestion

One possible solution to the problems of day time parking, would be for local business to club together and lease to top floor of the Swan Centre.  Employees would then have this option open to them and would save them the hassle of trying to find a spot on the Epsom Rd or Winfield.  A similar system is used in Staines by Samsung.

Church Road Developments

Concerted efforts by residents in Church Road have fought off ill conceived plans by developers to over-develop parts of the Conservation Areas. Developers will always try to maximise profits to the detriment of the local residents. In summary:

  • No1 Church Road (demolish & erect 7 new dwellings) – this went to appeal by public inquiry. Several residents turned up to Pippbrook to voice their opinions. The Planning Inspectorate rejected the developers appeal.
  • The Bungalow, Byron Place (demolish & replace by 4 new dwellings) – this was rejected by MVDC. Over 100 letters of objections were received by MVDC.
  • No.29 Church Road (build two semi detached houses in the back garden) – this went to a written appeal. The Planning Inspectorate rejected the developers appeals.

The site in questions have still the potential for development, however, residents are keen that any proposals are in keeping for the local area.

If developers are planning something inappropriate in your area, contact the LRA they will be able to advise.

LRA Publicity Material

The current media (web site & leaflets) does not really tell prospective members of the LRA what the organisation does and how it can help. Effort needs to be made to review this literate (electronic as well) with the view of attracting more locals into the Association.

The current material seems to dwell on the formation of the LRA but doesn’t really make it obvious how the Association can help and how it hopes to influence the local bodies. We should state quite clearly that the LRA monitors & comments on:

  • control of building and development
  • preservation of buildings, trees and open spaces
  • road safety and traffic matters
  • footpaths and rights of way
  • schools in our area
  • public transport
  • recreation facilities
  • law and order.

Comments from the committee welcome.

LRA Meetings

The LRA meeting schedules are published on the LRA website. It would be useful for the proposed agenda to be posted up in advance. This would allow those that cannot attend the opportunity to send in their views in advance and then the Chairman could make these opinions know to the meeting delegates.

In addition, it would also be useful if the minutes of the meeting were published on the LRA website to allow those LRA members that did not attend the chance to find out what is going on. This should also apply to committee meetings; these should be minuted and made available to rank & file members. This will show that the organisation is transparent and not run by an isolated bunch of individuals with their own agenda.

Car Club for Leatherhead

One possible way to reduce congestion & parking in & around Leatherhead would be to introduce a Car Club. The concept & operation of Car Clubs are described on this web site :

http://www.carplus.org.uk/carplus/whatcarplus.htm

Guildford & Sutton both have car clubs. MVDC should get involved & promote such a scheme.

What do Leatherhead Residents think of this idea?

The Green Mole Forum is also looking at this idea. Visit their site to see what they do.

Church Street

I have looked at the plans (they are available in the Help Shop) and have the following comments:

1. It will be nice to see the pavements and road surface renewed, but …
2. Accessability to the town by lorry or even large van could be impeded by the strong curve in the road around the “civic space.”
3.It is a real shame that the three established trees should have to go, that the 8 that are to be planted are all down one end and that there is no shade planned for the semi-circle in front of the theatre.
4. Are the bollards there to stop people parking on the pavement? I am not sure of their function.
5.Although the outside eating areas for the café and the restaurant will be pleasant, I am concerned that other, similar businesses in the town have been denied that luxury!
6. Finally, and no doubt a small point, but I could not understand why traffic lights were drawn on the draft plans outside Canons, as opposed to Gascoigne-Pees.
7. I would also have liked to have seen a lot more flower beds, as we have at the moment.

Council moving from democracy

Peter Seaward, chairman of Bookham Residents’ Association, has kindly given our Association to publish this copy of the letter which appeared in last week’s Leatherhead Advertiser:

…………………………………………………

The letter published in the Advertiser on December 13 from Councillor Malcolm Johnson titled “More transparency and a lot less talk” omitted to record the fact that the focus groups he refers to consisted of a total of just 18 people, according to the ABA report.

From a Mole Valley population of 80,000, this is hardly enough to justify the undemocratic changes now being enacted.

The words below are comments from John Pagella, deputy chairman of the Bookhams Residents’ Association and reflect the disappointment and disillusionment felt by our organization, and, I suggest, other similar bodies in the Leatherhead area over this whole process:

“There is a sad inevitability about the whole process.   Increasingly, our public life today is managed as a parallel world for the convenience and satisfaction of those within, with little real understanding or regard for the attitudes and day-to-day concerns of the wider population outside that it is meant to represent.

“Consultation is managed on their terms and regard for local opinion is invariably confined to accepting the views they hear when it coincides with what they intend to do, and ignoring those views for the rest of the time.

“Will forums add anything?   I rather doubt it.   

“If our elected representatives paused for a moment, they might reflect on the fact that residents’ associations locally have greater democratic legitimacy than they do.   Our membership in Bookham covers about 50% of the population.   We count our membership in thousands.   They manage to get elected on votes in the hundreds.   It would be nice to get back to the days when the former Leatherhead Council was run on non-political lines.   I can’t see it happening, I’m afraid.”

Peter Seaward,  Chairman of the Bookhams Residents’ Association, Atwood, Little Bookham.