Issue - meetings

John Richards, Project Manager

Cambridge City Council

Councillor Scutt left the meeting.

The Committee received a report from the Project Manager regarding the Environmental Improvement Programme (EIP) for north area. The report outlined progress of existing schemes and new suggested schemes for 2017/18.

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

1.   Matthew Danish referred to scheme N7 listed in Appendix A to the report, and objected to any obstruction being erected on the existing Leys Road/ Highworth Avenue cycle route. The result would impede access of legitimate users of the route such as tricycles and trailers. Asked if CCTV could be implemented rather than using obstructive planters.

Councillors Sargeant and Manning confirmed that motor cycles’ using this route were a major issue which needed addressing so a physical barrier such as a planter was a good idea but they also appreciated the need to accommodate larger cycles.

2.   Richard Taylor referred to existing scheme 7 listed in Appendix C and asked if the trees could be replaced because the ones previously installed had failed. He also suggested that the EIP application process should be open all year round with a deadline each year to enable assessment and recommendations to Area Committees, rather than it just being open for a small window of time.

The Project Manager confirmed that the Council would endeavour to replace the trees. He further stated that the EIP application process was dependent on financial and staffing capacity and that a limited application window ensured bids were targeted towards current needs. There had been no shortage of bids received for north area in the recent round, but he would ensure the suggestion was considered further as part of the ongoing review work.

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

     i.        Welcomed the reintroduction of improvement to Craister Court.

    ii.        Referred to the new application scheme N9 and confirmed that this should be a jointly funded approach with the management company of Vie.

   iii.        Highlighted that it would be useful for residents to know when the EIP application window was open so that they could report ideas to local councilors.

  iv.        Made reference to new application scheme N21 and stated that this idea may be difficult to implement because of obstacles underground leaving very little room for a tree to develop.

In response to Members’ questions the Project Manager answered:

     i.                Referred to new application scheme N19 and confirmed that a previous commitment to make improvements had been made at Craister Court but this appeared to have been deferred. It was never formally abandoned by Committee and renewed public appetite suggested there may still be scope to achieve improvements via EIP.

    ii.                He encouraged Councillors to build a priority list of ideas received from the public that they supported to work from when the EIP window opened.

   iii.                Made reference to scheme N21 and confirmed that it was possible for trees to grow in difficult environments if the right methods were used, and that he was reasonably confident of success.

Councillor Sarris Left the meeting.

Following discussion, Members resolved (unanimously) to-

1. Note progress, and delays where experienced, in delivering the identified programme of projects since 2011-12

2. Support the allocation of £6,616 in 2017-18 towards the provision of 40 summer hanging baskets in Chesterton High Street and Campkin Road

3. Not to continue to pursue through EIP those projects (as listed in paragraphs 5.4 and Appendix C) that are within scope of Greater Cambridge Partnership work

4. Continue with a £5,000 EIP funded project to improve the environment within Craister Court

5. Support the allocation of remaining EIP funding available in 2017-18 to the 21 new project applications as detailed in Appendix A.

6. Approve those projects selected for implementation, subject to them being viable, obtaining consents as necessary, positive consultation and final approval by Capital Programme Board and Ward Councillors where required.