Issue - meetings

Balfour Beatty and County Council representatives invited to discuss the lighting on Burrell’s Walk.

The Committee received a presentation from a representative from Balfour Beatty who made the following points:

       i.          10% of street lights would be removed and not replaced due to a late amendment to the contract by the County Council.

     ii.          Burrell’s Walk was taken out of the heritage scheme so was subject to the 10% street light reduction.

   iii.          Footpaths were now lit to the same standards as roads (ie higher than normal footpath standards).

   iv.          Trees close to the Burrell’s Walk street lights affected lighting levels. A meeting would be held 11 October 2016 between Balfour Beatty, City and County Council representatives to address issues.

Members of the public made the following comments in response to the presentation:

       i.          They were unhappy with the lighting scheme and lighting levels.

     ii.          Too many lights had been removed.

   iii.          Some lighting columns were too tall (6m instead of the usual 5m).

In response to the presentation the Committee commented the high turnover of Balfour Beatty staff frustrated stakeholders’ attempts to address issues.

Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below.

1.       Mr Rosenstiel asked why 6m lighting columns were used on Christ’s pieces and Pike’s Walk instead of the usual 5m ones.

The Balfour Beatty representative said this was done to meet the higher lighting class.

2.       A member of the public asked why Burrell’s Walk was taken out of the heritage scheme.

Councillor Cantrill said the wrong councillors were consulted. The City Council Leader could have requested the process be delayed whilst the correct councillors were consulted, or the process could continue and Burrell’s Walk would lose the protection of being in a heritage area. The Leader chose to continue with the project and not delay by putting Burrell’s Walk back into a heritage area.

3.       A member of the public asked why East and West Road columns looked different.

The Balfour Beatty representative said the scheme had not been signed off as lighting was 1/3 of expected levels.

4.       A member of the public asked what happened to old street lights.

The Balfour Beatty representative said they had been scrapped as they were 20 years old and in poor condition.

5.       A member of the public asked why new lighting columns on Queen’s Road had been painted white.

The Balfour Beatty representative said the colour was set by the City Council Heritage Officer, although it had been queried by Balfour Beatty.

Action Point: Councillor Cantrill to clarify if new lighting posts on Queen’s Road painted white on the advice of City Council Heritage Officer. Another colour would be preferred by residents.

Update from Urban Design & Conservation Manager following meeting: The lighting on Burrell's Walk was previously agreed by the County Council, City Council and Balfour Beatty to be changed for heritage style lamps, though from feedback earlier this year the height of the Windsor-style replacement lighting is considered by some members and the public to be too tall.  This does not however affect the fact that Burrell's Walk remains part of both the Central and West Cambridge Conservation Areas.