Decision details

Matter for Decision

The Officer’s report considered the results of the statutory consultation exercise conducted by the council, during February and March 2023, in relation to the proposal to extend and vary the Public Spaces Protection Order (Dog Control) 2017 (“Order”), in respect of irresponsible dog control (including dog fouling, dog exclusion, dogs on leads seasonal requirements, meant to pick up dog faeces, restriction on maximum number of dogs able to be walked and dogs on leads in designated areas) within Cambridge.

 

The council received 736 responses to the consultation survey (735 via Citizen Lab and one paper copy), during February and March 2023. Several written responses were also received. The council had considered all of the responses and reviewed the proposal again against Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) evidential ‘tests’ and based on the results, was recommending the variation and extension of the current Order, as set out in Appendix A of the Officer’s report, for a further three-year period, ending October 2026.

 

The Community Engagement and Enforcement Manager updated her report by saying Hobson Park would be excluded from the recommendations for seasonal dogs on leads restrictions.

 

Decision of Executive Councillor for Open Spaces and City Services

      i.          Approved the extension and variations of the Order as set out in Appendix A of the Officer’s report excluding Hobson Park for seasonal dogs on leads restrictions.

     ii.          Approved the geographical areas covered by the Order, as indicated in the maps at Appendix B of the Officer’s report excluding Hobson Park for seasonal dogs on leads restrictions.

   iii.          Delegated to authorised officers’ the authority to install, update and/or remove signage appropriate to the approved Order.

   iv.          Increased the fixed penalty notice amount for breach of the Order to £100 (with a reduced amount of £60 for early payment).

 

Reason for the Decision

As set out in the Officer’s report.

 

Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Not applicable.

 

Scrutiny Considerations

The Committee received a report from the Community Engagement and Enforcement Manager.

 

The Community Engagement and Enforcement Manager said the following in response to Members’ questions:

      i.          The number of complaints about dog attacks was low.

     ii.          Hobson Park incidents would be reviewed over the next three years to see if it needed to be included in the PSPO. The three year review enabled officers to consider what was appropriate to protect the area/wildlife and allow dogs to exercise.

   iii.          Officers would also monitor dog fouling on sport pitches over the next three years and liaise with council teams to see if any restrictions were needed eg putting dogs on leads.

   iv.          Based on experience from Byron’s Pool up to four dogs on a lead(s) to one walker was an acceptable number/ratio to allow responsible control of the dogs so this was used in the PSPO.

    v.          The PSPO was put in place to deter irresponsible behaviour. Enforcement Officers would attend hot spots based on intelligence from residents and businesses. The PSPO did not set the number of officers needed and they did not ‘patrol’ the PSPO. There were six Enforcement Officers across the city and this amount was considered sufficient.

   vi.          Signage was in place from 2017. Officers were looking to redesign and improve it to include details such as QR codes and how to report issues (if the PSPO was approved). Signage details and locations would be reviewed to ensure it was appropriate and informative.

 vii.          Maps of the PSPO could be included on signage for areas such as Logan’s Meadow.

viii.          Information on the reasons/need for seasonal dogs on leads requirements would be included in the signage.

   ix.          The Council was learning lessons based on the signage experience of other local authorities.

    x.          Officers could liaise with nature reserve friends’ groups about signage and seek their views on proposals.

 

The Committee unanimously resolved to endorse the amended recommendations.

 

The Executive Councillor approved the amended recommendations.

 

Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any Dispensations Granted)

No conflicts of interest were declared by the Executive Councillor.