Banstead West Division – Nork Appraisal

In response to Government legislation, Reigate and Banstead Borough and Surrey County Councils are developing a Community Plan aimed at improving their services and residents’ well being as a whole. To determine the key issues for their Wards in preparation for this Plan, the Nork and Tattenhams Councillors decided to carry out a thorough appraisal. Using software developed by the Countryside and Community Research Unit, Cheltenham, a Steering Group formed from volunteer residents of all ages produced a questionnaire adapted to be specific to each Ward. After scrutiny from both Borough and County officers, the questionnaires were printed by the Borough Council and then delivered in early 2003 by volunteer residents to every household. Completed responses were collected some 10 days later, the last ones being received in May. Data inputting took on average 12 minutes per questionnaire, and each written comment was recorded. The outcomes so far as Nork Ward is concerned follow in this report.

HOUSEHOLD SECTION

Question Number 1. Completed responses were received from 1014 households representing 2437 residents, a response of 35%

Question Number 2. The number of people in these households was as follows, a much older population when compared to that of the Borough as a whole as given in the 2001 Census.

Question Number 3. Of these households 967 (95.4%) were owner occupied, 33 (3.3%) were Housing Association rented and 12 (1.2%) were rented privately. Owner occupation being significantly higher than the Borough -the corresponding being 79%, 12% and 9% respectively).

Question Number 4. The households were made up of the following dwellings, with a significantly higher proportion living in detached houses compared to the Borough as a whole (30.2%).

Question Number 5. Asked whether the household was in a Neighbourhood Watch Scheme, there was great uncertainty even among near neighbours. 497 (49.0%) thought they were in a Neighbourhood Watch Scheme, while 153 (15.1%) said No and 355 (35.0%) did not know.

Question Number 6. Energy saving features are widespread in Nork with 88% of dwellings having a lagged hot water tank, loft insulation and double-glazing. 30% have cavity wall insulation and 42% use energy saving light bulbs. Only 10% have a water saving device.

Question Number 7. The number of children under 16 attending some form of education was:

Question Number 8. The number of people over 16 attending other forms of education was:

Question Number 9. The reasons given why children under 16 are unable to take part in after school activities were as follows:

Question Number 10. 1981 vehicles were kept by the 1014 households, that is 1.95 per household or on average each person over 17 yrs has a vehicle. This is markedly above the Borough average of only 87% households owning a car. The actual breakdown was as follows:

PERSONAL SECTION

This section was intended to be completed by each member of the household over the age of 11yrs however it was clear that in many households it was completed by a single member.

Question Number 11. The number of respondents was 2074 of which 997 (48.1%) were male and 1077 (51.9) were female.

Question Number 12. The age group of respondents was:

Question Number 13. Respondents had lived in their current home for:

Question Number 14. Some 60% of respondents moved to Nork because it was an attractive area, 9% because of employment in the area and 13% because of family connections and 22% coming with the family.

Question Number 15. This question "What is most important to you about Nork" amassed some 1500 comments, almost entirely favourable. In summary respondents considered Nork was a semi rural, quiet, pleasant residential area with attractive housing, tree-lined roads with grass verges, secluded large gardens giving privacy and a feeling of spaciousness. It had easy access to the countryside, the Downs, good shopping towns such as Epsom, Sutton, Kingston and Croydon, the M25, the coast, airports, and ports and easy commuting to London. The hilly landscape provided good views of London and the Thames Valley. Neighbours were friendly, and there was a community spirit. It was not over-crowded and had a good balance of age groups. There were good local shops and restaurants, and good local schools particularly primary. Nork Park was a most important asset. The crime rate was low. The area was generally well maintained and tidy. On the debit side there was concern at the threat of infill housing developments and mindless youth vandalism.

Question Number 16. As might be expected from the degree of car ownership the car is the overwhelming means of transport. The major means of transport given as?

Question Number 17. Only 5.5% admitted usually keeping their vehicle on the road. The usual places of parking were given as:

Question Number 18. The usage of the vehicle was described as:

Question Number 19. In the main trains were only used occasionally for social/ leisure:

Question Number 20. Improvements were sought in the train service with regard to?

Some 5% commented that improvements were required to Banstead Station. Residents considered it dirty and unpleasant. Vandalism had to be tackled and graffiti removed promptly. There was a fear for their personal safety particularly at night. The presence of staff would help and they could catch ticket dodgers and ensure the ticket machine worked. Earlier morning and later night trains would be welcome. A Sunday service was required. Similar though less comments were made about Epsom Downs Station.

Question Number 21. At most 20% used the bus and then only occasionally. However for some 5% as confirmed in Question 16 above it was their main form of transport.

Question Number 22. Improvements in the bus service were sought by 895 respondents with regard to:

Some 7% commented on the importance of the 166 bus for transport from Nork to Epsom and Epsom General Hospital. Greater reliability, increased frequency and later running buses would encourage more passengers. There was also some 6% seeking a direct bus to Sutton and Cheam. There was criticism of the publicity given to timetables.

Question Number 23. There were only 40 responses rating the Dial-a Ride bus service. Some 60% were content. However there was criticism of the Zone fare system making a trip from Nork to Epsom expensive. It was also clear that some respondents were unaware of this service.

Question Number 24. Only 14% considered a school bus would benefit them for their children to go to school outside Nork.

Question Number 25. Some 69% used the local taxi service monthly or occasionally while 27.7% never used them.

Question Number 26. Only 5.1% were unhappy with the local taxi service while 64.7% considered the service adequate. 30.2% had no opinion.

Question Number 27. 1030 (58.3%) considered there were major danger spots on the roads in Nork. The most frequently mentioned comments were:

Nork Way

• 12% were concerned at the situation at Nork Way shops, with parking both sides of the road (many all day), on pavements, cars linked to the car dealer being parked on the hatched white lines, and cars parked down to Warren Road.

• 9% raised the junction with Fir Tree Road, a mini-roundabout and pedestrian crossing being suggested.

• Its junction with Green Curve and the parking on both sides of this road was mentioned by 4%.

• 4% were concerned with its junctions with Partridge Mead, Nork Rise, Roundwood Way and Warren Road due to poor sight lines caused by parked cars.

• 2% raised the junction with Reigate Road and the problem of parked cars at that end of Nork Way.

• 5% mentioned the danger of speeding in Nork Way and the poor street lighting. The need for centre white lines was mentioned

• Finally 3% were concerned at the parked cars on the brow of the hill by the Nork Community Association and the danger for mothers with children, prams, dogs etc trying to cross the road to visit the Childrens’ Playground and Nork Park.

Drift Bridge 8% considered this a dangerous junction due to Reigate Road becoming single lane. It was suggested that the outer lanes should have filters for right turn only. This would deter red light jumping and aggressive overtaking at the junction to get into the single lane.

Fir Tree Road (Banstead) 4% were concerned with its junction with Banstead Road. 2% thought that the junction with the A217 could be made safer by improved street lighting, sign-posting and road markings particularly those for right turns. 2% considered the junction with High Beeches was dangerous, made worse by the speed of traffic near the bend. 1% were concerned at the Warren Road exit.

Fir Tree Road (Epsom Downs) 2% were concerned at the speed of traffic in this road and argued that it should be subject to a 30 mph limit.

Burgh Wood 4% commented that the junction with the A217 was dangerous, particularly when trying to turn south across the slip road and the northbound lanes with speeding traffic. 2% mentioned the danger of trying to cross the A217 from Burgh Wood on foot to the footpath to The Horseshoe.

Reigate Road 2% considered the junction with Rose Bushes was a danger spot. Similarly 2% mentioned Yew Tree Bottom Road junction and a further 2% the junction with Claremount Gardens

Yew Tree Bottom Road 2% were concerned at the speed of traffic in this road and the junction with Garlichill Road. Buckles Gap roundabout was mentioned by 1% as being dangerous for walkers.

Warren Mead Schools The roads near these two schools were mentioned by 3% as being dangerous because of the indiscriminate parking by mothers and the lack of pedestrian crossings.

The Drive 1% mentioned the exit into the A217 made worse by parked cars and Beacon School children

Question Number 28. The responses to suggested speed control measures were as follows with no clear cut solution:

Question Number 29. Residents were generally very critical of the state of our roads etc, the pavements in particular:

• The road surfaces of Claremount Gardens, Hillside and part of Nork Way were specifically mentioned as was the collapse of High Beeches by Beecholme.

• Most pavements were mentioned but those of Ruden Way, Green Curve, The Drive, Nork Way and Warren Road received most mention. The pavement of Reigate Road east side has little surface at all

• The street lighting in Nork Way, Fir Tree Road, Ruden Way, The Drive, Buckles Way, Tumblewood Road, and Warren Road was noted as poor

Question Number 30. The respondents gave support to the following. Again the state of pavements calling for most improvement:

Some respondents suggested other improvements and these have been recorded. Some are included under other questions, none of the others however received significant general support.

Question Number 31. Only 463 respondents answered whether Nork needed more education facilities:

Question Number 32. Less than 8% of the respondents consider Nork can accommodate more housing:

Question Number 33. Undoubtedly because of the strong opposition to more housing in Nork, only 213 respondents answered what type of homes are needed in Nork:

Question Number 34. Only 58 (3.6% of 1601) respondents indicated that adaptations were required to their homes to make them suitable for their health needs.

Question Number 35. Only 421 (22.8% of 1844) respondents considered mobile telephone pole masts and their associated equipment cabinets were acceptable in Nork. Well over 50% considered these masts to be unsightly, a health hazard and devalued nearby property

Question Number 36. Asked whether they would prefer a number of single mobile telephone pole masts (10-15m high) for each company or fewer much taller lattice masts (20-25m) for use by a number of companies, many residents refused to answer and simply wrote NONE. Of the remaining 1218 respondents opinion was almost equally divided

Question Number 37. Only some 46% were satisfied with the way the planning system is implemented in Nork: