Issue - meetings

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

 

1.    They understood from County Councillor Scutt that a proposal had been put forward for a modal filter at the Arbury Road/Milton Road junction. Asked if the impact of traffic on Stretten Avenue been considered. Currently there was significant additional noise and vibration issues, particularly when HGVs and large delivery vehicles hit the speed bumps whilst using it as a cut through with the temporary closure of Histon Road. Asked how would this be prevented if a modal filter was approved?

 

County Council Officers from the Covid Transport Team provided the following response:

i.               Appreciated that the initial inclusion of Arbury Road within the first tranche of Active Travel Funding last year (before Officers recognised the need for more technical work on any project delivered on this road) had led to confusion in terms of what might be happening and when. There were considerable time pressures surrounding the Government’s tranche 1 funding last summer as Officers looked to provide better provision for cycling and walking, as well as social distancing, during the pandemic.

ii.             Tranche 2 funding came with longer timeframes, which meant they were able to spend more time on scheme design and development as well as engagement and consultation with local communities.

iii.            Outlined how officers were looking to engage on the Arbury Road scheme:

1)   Looking to consult across a range of Active Travel Fund projects initially. Due to pre-election restrictions in the lead up to the local elections in May, this was likely to happen in the summer. This was likely to take the form of a survey covering different proposals in different places, as they are considering a large number of projects at the moment. They may be working with the Greater Cambridge Partnership on this as they are also considering Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETROs) in Cambridge and are likely to be consulting at the same time. The survey will focus on gaining feedback about the key issues and concerns people have about the various projects, as well as considering whether projects should be pursued. The data would be taken back to the Chair, Vice Chair and senior officer who were delegated authority to make decisions on how to progress the Active Travel Fund projects last September. (Please note that it is quite possible that they may decide to refer some or all of the projects back to Committee for further debate and decision making but delegated powers mean that they do not have to do so at this stage.)

2)   It is likely that should changes go ahead on Arbury Road, then it would be in the form of an Experimental Traffic Regulation Order (ETRO) which would start a trial scheme. ETROs can last up to 18 months. With ETROs there are technically two statutory (or legally required) stages which can be considered consultation.

a.    The statutory period – a form of consultation – included in the making of the Order i.e. when it is published on the County Council’s website and in the press when feedback is welcomed and;

b.    there is also the statutory 6 month consultation period which runs alongside any trial changes. Under the text of the order these 6 months are a “period for objections” and these objections have to be made in writing to the County Council.

c.    Like Mill Road, they would seek to do some additional type of consultation within these 6 months as well as asking people to write in. Whether this would be in the form of a survey or some other type of consultation such as focus groups was to be determined.

iv.           Appreciated ETROs were less well known than standard Traffic Regulation Orders (TROs) and the concept of consulting alongside temporary changes is unfamiliar to many people, however, trialling road changes actually offers more opportunity for engagement and consultation than TROs as well as more opportunities to develop a project which works for the community.

v.             Trials of road changes (ETROs) shouldn’t be taken as fait accompli for permanent changes (TROs), there would need to be further decision making and at least statutory consultation for any ETRO to be replaced with a permanent TRO. If you’d like more background on Traffic Regulation Orders, then please do take a look at www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/etro.

vi.           It was likely to be several months before any changes might be made to the road.

 

Councillor Sargeant commented that the County Council were currently consulting on a modal filter on Arbury Road. There were a number of schemes proposed for the north in tranche 1, concerns were expressed to the County Council regarding Gilbert Road and Victoria Avenue proposals.

 

2.    a. Installation of a MVAS speed camera display was promised for Orchard Avenue over a year ago.  Paint marks on the footpath indicating the positioning of a new post are still visible.  Asked if there was any news on when this might happen.

 

Councillor Sargeant commented that the speed display had been held back because of the lockdown. Had been in conversations with officers and would follow up.

 

b. Asked if the last round of LHI bids had been adjudicated and asked where he could find a listing of the results / score cards.

 

Councillor Meschini commented that they sat on the panel on the 10 February and assessed the bids. An un-precise deadline (March – June) was given when councillors would know the outcome there were various rounds and panels involving councillors and officers.

 

c.When City Fibre were installing their cables in our area, residents were encouraged to write to Cllr Manning with any instances where the company was in breach of its customer care commitments.  We were told that a county council compliance officer would then be making claims for breach against the company.  Asked what the outcome of this was.

 

Councillor Sargeant commented that they had had good success with CityFibre through the County Council. Was happy to follow any issues up.

 

d. At last Wednesday’s North East Cambridge Community Forum a large number of questions were posted on the Chat function which could not be answered during the webinar.  We were told that answers would be forthcoming afterwards.  There is no reference to this or a video recording on the joint planning website – can the committee assist in progressing this.

 

Action: Councillor Sheil to follow up with officers.

 

e.What is the latest status regarding the redevelopment of the Tivoli building at Mitcham’s Corner?

 

Councillor Sargeant commented that he thought that the developer had pulled out of the Tivoli development. Planning permission had been granted but it would be whether this permission was relevant to a future company. 

 

3.    The Borrowdale bus stop featured a bus shelter on a narrow island and a pedestrian crossing in the 1.3 m wide cycle lane.  They had been assured by the officers that they would not be splashed by the cyclists passing in the cycle lane due to the new and effective drainage system installed on the pavement kerb.   However, safety for the pedestrians crossing the cycle lane to the island must be insured.  Raised tables, white zebra crossing markings in the road and signs alerting the cyclists about the crossing before they reach the bus stop must be included in the design. This is essential for bus-users with mobility issues.

 

The new COOP Bus stop and shelter, which is moved from the Aldi side, is similar to the present Aldi stop.  At the moment, they believed that the shelter would be on the pavement and have the wall side towards the parked cars by the stores (it was not marked in the design).  The bus-users would face the cycle lane.  Asked what safety precautions had been made to ensure that the bus-users can reach the bus safely.  Waiting in a bus shelter should be safe as well as reaching the bus. 

 

HRARA asked that the councillors contact the officers and request their special attention to the safety of the bus users whether in “floating bus stops” or in smaller bus shelters.

 

Councillor Todd-Jones stated that concerns would be passed on to the GCP and the project manager Paul Van de Bulk.

 

Councillor McQueen commented that a lot of residents had raised concerns that they would not be able to get to the floating bus stop in time. Queried what other measures there could be on Green End Road to stop speeding.

 

Action: Councillor McQueen would contact GCP and offer suggestions.

 

4.    Background: The Joint meeting of the Histon Road Local Liaison Forum and Milton Road Local Liaison Forum confirmed unanimously a resolution to ensure a prompt start of the Milton Road Project following finalisation of the Histon Road Project.

 

Understood that the Joint Local Liaison Forum meeting supported the proposal that a 20mph limit be set on Histon Road from Gilbert Road to Huntingdon Road, and requested whether support could be given by North Area Committee for that limit to be extended to the point where traffic comes in from Histon, namely in the vicinity of Kings Hedges Road. This would be appreciated by residents all along Histon Road.

 

Councillor Richards read out the resolution from the Local Liaison Forum (LLF) on behalf of Councillor Scutt. ‘Milton Road LLF is concerned to ensure that the Milton road project advances to construction no later than the beginning of 2022 to bring back the much needed improvements as set out in the detailed plans. Milton Road LLF is aware that residents were keen to have the construction commence so that planned safety improvements were delivered sooner rather than later’.

 

Councillor Richards was aware that residents were keen for the 20mph issue to move forward. Had worked with the Benson Road Residents Association and would support a resolution to support 20mph on Histon Road from Gilbert Road to Huntingdon Road.

 

5.    Residents were concerned about the flats above Milton Road Library remaining unoccupied, neither leased nor sold. Could information be provided as to what is happening, why the flats remain unoccupied, and if there was a resolution on the horizon.

 

Councillor Sargeant expressed disappointment with this development and management of the project.

 

Councillor Meschini also expressed disappointment with the development and thought this was due to the model used and a lack of expertise in housing.

 

6.    Resident concerned about pot holes on Milton Road, especially around Highworth Avenue.

 

Councillor Meschini asked members of the public to get in touch with her if anything remained outstanding. The County Council contracted a company to fill the pot holes, works were meant to start that day.