If Tory-led Surrey County Council has its way, it will soon cost 41p to buy a first class stamp at Esher Post Office, and 50p to park outside to do so. This is madness. SCC protests that its proposed on-street parking charges will help shops and businesses, by "improving turnover of the available parking space", but we are unconvinced: surely a more effective way of increasing throughput would be to cut the current two hour free parking period? And, of course, in terms of infrastructure and capital costs, alterations to existing signage would be far cheaper and less disruptive than installing and maintaining ticket machines.

Nor has the response of the village's shops and businesses been favourable. Comments we have heard vary from the gloomy to the unprintable. And residents have overwhelmingly told us that they will shop elsewhere, or park at Waitrose and walk. Free parking behind the Bear is particularly valued by library users: what are the library's chances of survival in the current climate if usage drops? SCC admits that "An equality impact assessment has been undertaken on the overall scheme. This has identified potential negative impacts for certain groups, especially those with a low household income". In other words, this is a system whereby the less well off can be disenfranchised of the most basic rights of living in an area where they pay council tax - to use its shops, its library, its Churches, its cinema, its Post Office.
Esher's High Street is already heavily skewed towards chain shops and businesses rather than independents, and towards "high-end" and specialist retailing. One can choose a house from one of the many estate agents; a new kitchen from one of the many kitchen designers; or eat a meal at one of the many restaurants - but try to have a shoe heeled, or a key cut, or match a reel of cotton, and you will strike out. It is still possible to fill a prescription, and to buy a paper, but for how much longer?

It seems to us that SCC's proposals will tip that balance further. Those visiting Esher to trawl estate agents and designers in search of a new house or a new kitchen will probably not baulk at spending a couple of pounds on parking..... after all, it will fade into insignificance in the context of the whole transaction. But that is the crux of the matter: overwhelmingly, it is visitors to Esher who are using those businesses. Residents do not buy a new house or a new kitchen on a day-to-day basis: they post parcels, buy a card, have a coffee with a friend, or change a library book - but the figures posted on the SCC's website make clear that it is exactly this sort of transaction that is key to the "success" of the new charging proposals: "It has been suggested that a free parking period would be preferable in some locations. Many drivers would not pay a parking fee as they would only stay for a short period of time. In these circumstances, the estimated drop in income could be in excess of 50%".

So we will be billed for daring to use our own High Street. Inevitably, shoppers will drive somewhere where there is more choice. And, of course, in Hinchley Wood or Thames Ditton they will find that on-street parking is still free, thanks to the efforts of their Residents Association councillors at borough and county level.

In summary, one-size-fits-all parking charges are inappropriate to Esher. Our solution is for the first hour or half-hour of parking to be free so that those who are ‘popping’ to their local shops are not taxed on the privilege. On street parking should always be limited to one hour - thus genuinely improving "turnover of the available parking space". Those making a long visit in the context of a more significant transaction (having a leisurely lunch, seeing a film, buying a house), should park in the civic centre car parks, and pay accordingly. That is only fair.

Please write to or e-mail SCC to give your views on these damaging proposals: the consultation period runs out on 1 April 2011. A petition at http://petitions.surreycc.gov.uk/ParkingCharges/ has been set up to demand the abolition of the proposed charges - we urge you to sign it by 23 March.

A major new development on Esher High Street received planning permission on 15th September 2010.

The project will involve the complete redevelopment of 42 - 50 High Street, that is the building between HSBC and Magnet (the north side of the High Street, east of Church Street).



The existing building (1,673 sq m) will be demolished and four retail/restaurant units with offices above (3,034.1 sq m) will be constructed.

Most development with a net increase of one or more dwellings or 50 square meters or more of commercial floor space is required to contribute financially towards improvements in local infrastructure. This is the Infrastructure Payment.

The planning permission for this new building was granted subject to an obligation to make infrastructure payments to Elmbridge Borough Council in the following terms:-

Infratructure Payments Obligations

infrastructure item	Amount
Community Facilities	£12,247.45
Recycling	£ 2,694.24
Environmental Improvements	£20,416.72
Transport	£12,247.45
Total (including 5% administration and monitoring)	£98,690.20

Architect's impression of new building.

Architect's impression of the new building at night.

Opinion is very divided over the design for the proposed new building. It has been referred to by some as "The Hanging Gardens of Esher" and many feel that anything is better than the existing building. Whereas others, including the ERA, would have preferred something a little more stylish and also would have hoped to have retained the post office facility and smaller businesses on site. Obviously all wanted the new units to be retail outlets rather than more restaurants.

However, what most agree upon is that the existing 1960s style building has had its day and the developer's proposals are a real improvement.

On 11th November 2010 Elmbridge Council refused planning application number 2010/2257.

The application was for the construction of two pairs of four bedroom town houses (plans below) on three floors following the demolition of the existing house "White Gates".

The reasons given for the refusal were:-

The proposed dwellings would by reason of their size, design, bulk and siting, in particular the eastern flank elevation, be out of keeping with the character and appearance of the surrounding area and street scene of that part of Milbourne Lane  and the proposed garages would, by reason of their size, bulk siting and design form a visually obtrusive form of development detrimental to the character and appearance of the street scene to this part of Milbourne Lane.

Surrey Police is appealing for witnesses to a collision on a road bridge which resulted in a cement mixer lorry leaving the road and landing on a carriage of a passing train before coming to rest on the rail embankment.  

Shortly before 3.30pm on Friday 5 November 2010 a concrete mixer lorry travelling from the A3 towards Leatherhead collided with the wall of an over bridge on the A244, Warren Lane at Oxshott.

The lorry broke through the wall and fell onto the railway line which passes under the bridge near Oxshott rail station. The lorry bounced off the roof of a passing train and came to rest on the embankment. Arrangements are being made to recover the lorry.

The lorry driver and one of the train passengers sustained serious injuries and were taken to St George’s Hospital, Tooting where their condition today is described as stable. Three other passengers were taken to local hospitals for treatment to minor injuries.

An investigation into the circumstances of the incident is being conducted by the Surrey Police Roads Collision Investigation Unit. Officers are keen to speak with any witnesses who saw the cement mixer lorry being driven prior to the collision or who have any information relevant to the circumstances of the collision. Anyone with any information is asked to call Surrey Police Collision Investigation Unit on 01483 639922 and quote reference ICAD P10346612 or CIU/147/11721/10.

The A244 at Oxshott is currently closed between the Warren Lane junction with Sandy Lane and the road bridge at Fairoak Lane, and will remain so while the investigation is completed and until the bridge is structurally assessed to be safe for use. The A244, Copsem Lane, at its junction with the A3 at Esher Common is open to local traffic only.  Until the road is re-opened people are requested to stay away from the area.

It is not known at this time how long the road closures will be in place and it is anticipated that there will be traffic disruption during the Monday morning rush hour. This will have an impact  not only on local traffic around Oxshott and surrounding areas which will need to find alternative routes, but the congestion is anticipated to impact on the M25. People intending to use the M25, in either direction in the SW quadrant, on Monday morning should allow extra time for their journey or use an alternative route.

This incident has caused major disruption locally and the patience and understanding shown by members of the public and local residents is appreciated.

Call 0845 125 2222 for all non-emergency policing matters.
Call 999 if you have a genuine emergency requiring the attendance of the police (eg a crime is in progress or someone is in immediate danger).
Call independent charity Crimestoppers on 0800 555 111 if you have information about crime and don't want to leave your name.

For those who thought that our local council is relatively benign in their intrusion into our lives, think again. Elmbridge Council bureaucrats were barred, recently, from accessing the national DVLA database because their use of it was for unauthorised purposes; that is to say they used it for spying on local residents.

The DVLA database holds the details of the registered owner of every car in the UK.

Permission had been given for councils to have restricted access to the DVLA in order to deal with problems associated with abandoned cars and other vehicles. However, in line with the general tenet that given any sort of authority, it will always, always be abused, this access was used for, amongst other purposes, notably to track down people for a variety of offences including horse fouling, littering and owning out-of-control dogs.

Following an audit of the use by councils accessing the database, the DVLA sent out letters to chief executives of 56 authorities where serious breaches of the system had been uncovered and the councils received a red coded warning. A further 99 also received warnings about abusing the system and 12 (including Elmbridge), which failed to make the changes requested by the DVLA have been banned altogether.

Dylan Sharpe, campaign director of Big Brother Watch, said: “The outrageous and often illegal abuse of the DVLA database is yet another example of the way in which local councils will use any available means to keep a check on their residents. They are being spied on for nonsensical reasons by these inflated town hall bureaucrats."

Following a move by the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs the access was upgraded to help council staff investigate so called SDHp “environmental crimes”.

A DVLA spokesman was reported to have said: “We carry out regular audits of users to ensure they respect the terms and conditions of the contract and user agreements which cover this service. The reasons for suspension range from failure to respond to an audit letter to failure to comply with record keeping or data access requirements. In most cases, suspensions were related to mismanagement and record keeping, rather than inappropriate access.”

So how did Elmbridge Council explain to the local residents how and why it was barred? Answer - nothing in their publicity machinery! However, it was either for unauthorised spying or incompetence. And just who was it in the council who instigated this business and was responsible for getting banned? Answers please?

An enquiry to the Press Officer of Elmbridge Council, requesting clarification of the banning, resulted in the response:

"Elmbridge Borough Council is happy to clarify the circumstance of a short suspension last year from the WEE system provided by the DVLA for investigating environmental crimes. The system enables the Councils (sic) enforcement officers to identify the owners of vehicles believed to be dumped or used for fly-tipping. The Councils (sic) access to the DVLAs (sic) system was temporarily withdrawn for a few weeks last year, whilst we updated our procedures to meet new stringent DVLA data control standards. The need for improved procedures was identified as part of a routine check by the DVLA. A Council spokesman said," In response to the DVLAs request, we quickly improved our procedures which were passed by the DVLA and the system put back in use to help our enforcement officers investigate illegal fly-tippers and similar environmental crimes."

So that'll be OK, then --- Elmbridge Council got banned and are now compliant. Their spin on this story is worthy of high government. Business as usual.