Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
63 Devolved Decision-Making and Developer Contributions: Update Following West Area Workshop PDF 137 KB
Additional documents:
Minutes:
The
Committee received a report from the Urban Growth Project Manager summarising
suggested needs and project ideas for new or improved local facilities arising
from the recent consultation workshop in the Area. The report also assessed
those projects in terms of eligibility for developer contributions funding and
deliverabilityin the short-term (by the end of March 2014). Councillor Kightley
reported that a
number of representations had been received from Residents Associations and from
Councillor Hipkin in Castle Ward, broadly in support of the range of projects under
consideration.
Recommendation 2.2 of the Officer’s report was amended to
read:
To identify which
of the proposals that are deliverable in the short-term to prioritise for
delivery, subject to project appraisal and identification of appropriate
funding for any associated revenue and maintenance costs.
Members discussed
the proposal for improvements to pathways on Jesus Green and Midsummer Common
(longer-term project, M05). It was suggested that this project be reported to
the Community Services Scrutiny Committee as a project of strategic/city-wide
importance, alongside the proposal to drain Jesus Green (M06). Councillor
Cantrill stated that some of the paths are classified as highways and
therefore, are County Council responsibility.
County Councillor Whitebread agreed to investigate County Council
funding and would report back to the next meeting. Members agreed to ask
officers to highlight the importance attached to this project by the Area
Committee as part of the prioritisation of the city/county council joint Cycleways
Programme.
Action
Councillor Bick reminded the Committee that future,
additional funding could not be guaranteed. Funding short-term projects now
could result in insufficient funding for longer-term projects, which might be
of greater benefit to the local community.
Members discussed the merits of proposals to improve two
play areas in Newnham (N18 and N19). Residents of Gough Way had highlighted a
deficit of play equipment at Penarth Place play area. However, Cockcroft Place
play area also had a need for equipment as many properties in the area lacked
gardens. Members suggested that it might be harder to design something suitable
for Cockcroft Place due to the limited space and the level of traffic in the
area caused by the nearby school and nursery. Members agreed that the two play
areas served different needs and that both had merit.
Councillor Kightley reported that Windsor Road
Residents Association, The Friends of Histon Road Recreation Ground and Richmond Road
Residents' Association had emailed to express
satisfaction with the process to date.
The proposal to improve the entrances to Histon Road
Recreation Ground (C04) were discussed. Members expressed a desire to do
something more than repair and repaint the existing gates – the report had highlighted
that the incorporation of public art in this project could extend the time
needed for project delivery. The successful combined EIP and Public Art project
recently delivered in Wulstan Way (South Area) was sited as an approach the
Committee may wish to consider. The committee suggested that local artists be
used for any public art element of the project.
Members made the following points:
i.
Members asked for more information on outdoor table
tennis tables and were directed to the existing tables at the Abbey Pool play
area. An external funding bid has been made, so alternative funding might be
available for this project.
ii.
Strategic projects benefiting more than one area of the
city would be considered at the January Community Services Committee for city-wide
funding.
iii.
The costing for improved access to Midsummer Common
orchard (M03) appeared to be over-stated and a clearer estimate would be
investigated.
Members were reminded that, with the exception of
applications for grant applications to other organisations which were ready to
be processed, the Area Committee would need to limit their short-term
priorities to three projects for delivery by the end of March 2014. Recognising
that the other area committees would also be identifying their own short-term
project priorities as well, it was important to make sure that the overall
project delivery programme was realistic and achievable in the context of
organisational capacity.
Members agreed that, should it be possible to deliver the
priority projects sooner than March 2014, their next priority would be to
consider one or both of the improvements to the play areas at Penarth Place and
Cockcroft Place (N18 and N19).
All the projects being prioritised will be subject to
project appraisal and local consultation in order to develop the details of the
projects.
Resolved to;
i.
Note the
summary of all consultation feedback arising from the West/Central Area
workshop and related emails
ii.
Agree (on a show of hands) the following proposals that were deliverable in the
short-term to prioritise for delivery, subject to project appraisal and
identification of appropriate funding for any associated revenue and
maintenance costs.
A01 Seats and benches in parks (Area-wide)
C04 Improved
entrances to Histon Road Recreation Ground (Castle)
M03 Improved access to Midsummer Common orchard
(Market)
In addition, the following project was agreed unanimously
M01 Community meeting room at Centre 33 (Market),
as a community facilities grant which could be processed quickly.
iii. Agree Table 2 of the Officer’s report, with the addition of the eligible components of item M05 (Jesus Green and Midsummer Common pathways) as city-wide ideas from West Central Area Committee as possible uses of city-wide developer contributions funding to be reported to the Community Services Scrutiny Committee in January 2013. Top priority projects were agreed to be M05 and M06.