Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Decision details
Decision Maker: Executive Councillor for Communities.
Decision status: Recommendations Approved
Is Key decision?: No
Is subject to call in?: No
Whether to work in partnership with the YMCA to pursue an option for a youth venue at their Cambridge premises.
Matter for Decision:
The report set out a proposal to work in partnership with the
YMCA to explore options with young people to look at the practicalities of
providing a new venue for young people in the centre of Cambridge.
Decision of Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health
The Executive
Councillor resolved to:
I.
Agree that the
Council should work in partnership with the YMCA to explore options with young
people, as set out in section 4 of this report, with the aim of providing a new
facility for young people in the centre of Cambridge;
II.
Agree that
£80,000 from the East Area Capital Grants Programme be provisionally allocated
to the project until firm proposals have been worked up and agreed and costs
have been established; and
III.
Appoint three scrutiny members who would provide a
sounding board for officers as they take this project forwards with the YMCA.
Reason for the Decision:
The
Council is committed to prioritising services for children and young people.
This commitment was reinforced in January when the outcomes from the review of
the Children and Young People’s Participation Service (ChYpPS) were reported to
this committee.
Any alternative options considered and
rejected:
Not applicable.
Scrutiny Considerations:
The committee
received a report from the Head of Community Development regarding the options
and practicalities of providing a new venue for young people in
the centre of Cambridge.
Councillor
Kerr proposed an additional recommendation to read:
·
To appoint three scrutiny members who would provide a
sounding board for officers as they take this project forwards with the YMCA.
Members
welcomed the additional recommendations.
The
committee made the following comments.
I.
Young people who are residents of the YMCA who potential have a high
level of needs and young people who would be using an entertainment venue were
two distinct groups.
II.
They had distinct needs and risk factors which could be problematic in a
shared space.
III. Concerns were
expressed about the potential interactions of the two groups.
IV. Crating two
separate spaces, perhaps with separate entrances, was also seen as potentially
problematic.
V.
Would parents want their younger teens using a mixed-use venue?
VI. Members questioned
the validity of the survey results, as most respondents were not in the target
age group.
VII. The concerns of
local residents needed to be taken into account.
The Head of
Community Development confirmed that his team shared the members concerns. The
survey respondents were self-selecting. However, demand for this type of venue
had been recoded over a long period. He confirmed that the YMCA managed this
type of venue in other locations and that the options was worth considering.
Councillor Bick
stated that the proposal was potentially a good idea. However, if the issues of
co-existence in the single venue could not be managed to members’ satisfaction
the proposal would not go ahead. He further confirmed that a dedicated facility
was beyond the reach of current resources. Working with a partner agency to
share an existing, staffed, facilities was the only viable option at
present.
The Scrutiny Committee considered and
endorsed the amended recommendations in the report by
8 votes to 0.
The
Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health approved the
recommendations.
Conflicts of interest declared by the
Executive Councillor (and any dispensations granted)
Publication date: 05/04/2012
Date of decision: 15/03/2012