Wey Road and Round Oak Road privatization

I was notified today that Surrey has consulted residents in both roads and that officers recommend that the cabinet member decides in favour of applying for a stopping up order. The officer's recommendation is as follows: It is recommended that an application be made to the Magistrate’s Court for an order stopping up Wey Road and Round Oak Road as highways, in accordance with the provisions of section 116 and 117 of the Highways Act 1980 and subject to the conditions of the County Council’s approved policy on stopping up applications. This is the reason given: The results of the consultation exercise carried out in November 2012 show that a significant majority of the owners of the properties fronting Wey Road and Round Oak Road wish them to be stopped up as highways. I have read the officers report and I am not convinced that a rigorous consultation which could withstand close examination has been undertaken.  I have, therefore, recommended to John Furey, Surrey's cabinet member for transport, that the consultation exercise be undertaken again.  John Furey assures me that he will not move forward to the next stage unless all residents of Wey Road and Round Oak Road have been made fully aware of the implications of such a decision. From the telephone calls and emails that I have received today from residents in both Wey Road and Round Oak Road I believe that, on the face of it, a decision to seek an order from the Magistrate's Court would be precipitate and procedurally unsafe. Surrey council policy is that where a significant majority of the owners of the properties fronting a road wish it to cease to be a highway, Surrey will apply to the Magistrate’s Court for an order stopping up the road.  There are 94 properties in the two roads and according to the consultation 56 property owners were in favour of stopping up - that makes 59.5%.  Such a figure is not normally regarded as significant.  I am not sure that all 56 owners are fully aware of what they letting themselves in for. What do you think?