Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the 25 May were confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Mayor.

Mayor’s Day Out

 

The Mayor confirmed that the Mayor’s Day Out would take place on Wednesday 16 August and the venue was once again Great Yarmouth.

 

Harvest Festival Civic Service

 

Members were advised the Harvest Festival Civic Service would take place on Sunday, 8 October at 9.30am at Great St. Mary’s Church. 

 

Presentation of Resolution of Thanks to Councillor Jeremy Benstead

 

On behalf of the City Council, the Mayor presented Councillor Benstead with a framed copy of the Resolution of Thanks for his service as Mayor during the 2016/17 municipal year, passed at the annual meeting of the Council on the 25 May 2017.

 

Declarations of Interest

 

Name	Item	Interest
Councillor Smith	17/37/CNL	Personal: Member of Cambridge Cycling Campaign

 

See the foot of the agenda for details of the scheme

The complainant (reference item 17/37/CNL) addressed the Council:

     i.        Stated that he felt that both he and his wife had been the subject of intimidation and a vendetta which originated from an originally flawed decision by the Council.

    ii.        The sequence of events experienced meant that he was not represented at the planning meeting on 6 April 2016 and then denied further access to a follow up planning meeting because schedule 21 (exclusion of the press and public) had been applied.

   iii.        The opportunity to examine committee reports had also been denied, in addition to a lack of basic information on plans and procedure. Overall, he felt that natural justice had been denied.

  iv.        The Independent Complaints Investigator report found in favour of the complainant but their recommendations had not been actioned by the Council.

   v.        Believed that this issue was of public interest, he wanted to raise awareness of the amount of time and money which had been needlessly wasted.

 

The Chair of Planning Committee responded:

     i.        Agreed that the Council had failed to properly discharge the planning matter as the Ombudsman report later confirmed.

    ii.        Apologised on behalf of the Council, the Planning Committee and the planning officers involved for the anger and distress that the complainant had experienced.

   iii.        Confirmed that the Council was happy to follow the Ombudsman’s recommendation. Highlighted however, that there had been nothing in the report to suggest that had the mistake regarding the measurements not been made the decision would have been any different. 

  iv.        Commented that Cambridge had one of the busiest planning departments in the country. 95% of applications were determined by officers and the remaining 5% came before committee. On this occasion a mistake had been made which they were very apologetic for.

 

The complainant made the following supplementary points:

     i.        Thanked the Chair of Planning Committee for his response and his apology.

    ii.        Protested that his only avenue for gathering accurate information at every stage of the case was to submit Freedom of Information requests. So much information had been published incorrectly or had been overlooked more generally.

   iii.        Asked what use the Local Plan was if decisions did not adhere to its guidelines.

  iv.        Given the experience, he felt that he now had no choice but to move house because he could no longer tolerate living next door to the development.

 

 

Resolved (26 votes to 0) to:

 

                      i.        Carry forward requests totalling £914,330 revenue funding from 2016/17 to 2017/18, as detailed in Appendix C of the officer’s report. 

                     ii.        Carry forward requests of £34,384k (including £20,000k for PR038 Investment in Commercial Property Portfolio and £2,896k relating to the Housing Capital Investment Plan) of capital resources from 2016/17 to 2017/18 to fund rephased net capital spending, as detailed in Appendix D – Overview of the officer’s report.

Resolved (26 votes to 0) to:

 

          i.   Approve the Annual Treasury Management (Outturn) Report which included the Council’s actual Prudential and Treasury Indicators for 2016/17. 

 

Resolved (39 votes to 0) to:

 

                       i.       Approve additional funding for the Office Accommodation Scheme of £450,000 to be met from General Fund Reserves.

 

Resolved (26 votes to 0) to:

 

          i.             Approve carry forward requests of £2,896,000 in Housing Revenue Account and General Fund Housing capital resources from 2016/17 to 2017/18 to fund rephased net capital spending, as detailed in Appendix D and the associated notes to the appendix of the Officer’s report.

Civic Affairs – June meeting

 

Resolved (unanimously) to:

 

     i.     Agree the adoption of the new procedures as outlined in the Officer’s report

    ii.     Confirm the change to the Key Decision threshold.

   iii.     Agree a corporate contracting strategy.

  iv.     Agree a shared documentation approach

   v.     Agree the new procedures would take effect as of 01/08/17.

  vi.     Mandate all staff and managers responsible for procurement to attend a Contract Procedure Rules Update Briefing session.

 

Councillor Robertson proposed and Councillor Herbert seconded the following amendment to the recommendation (deleted text struck through, additional text underlined):

 

    i.             That two a new Special Responsibility Allowances (SRA) be created, Executive member without portfolio, for the Chair of the City Deal Board (if that be a member of the City Council) the Councils representative and on the Greater Cambridge Partnership (Member of the City Deal) Board.

  ii.             That the SRA for the Chair of Planning be raised in relation to the Chairs of all other committees.

 iii.             That SRAs be removed from all committee members with the exception of the Planning Committee and regular attendees at Licensing Sub-Committees.

iv.             That the Chair and Vice-chair of the Planning Committee do not receive an additional SRA as a Member of that committee.

  v.             That the SRA for the Minority Group Leader be removed.

vi.             That SRAs for spokespersons of both Opposition and Minority groups be retained for scrutiny committees only,  with the Opposition spokes paid marginally more, and SRAs for spokes of other committees be removed.

vii.             That the number of SRAs that any Councillor may hold be limited to two three.

viii.             That the SRAs be set as in the Table below.

 

Role	Percentage of basic allowance
Leader	275%
Executive Councillor including Deputy Leader	200%
Exec Councillor without portfolio ( Member Chair of City Deal Greater Cambridge Partnership  Board)	50%
Chair of Planning	1050%
Chair of Scrutiny	40%
Chair of Licensing	2520%
Chair of Civic Affairs	25%
Chair of Area Committee	20%
Lead Councillor on JDCC	50%
Group leader, main opposition party (fixed multiple regardless of size of the group)	100%
a) Opposition and b) Minority spokes (fixed multiple regardless of size of the group)	a)40% b)30% 35%
Vice-chair of Planning	50%
Member of Planning	15%
Member of Licensing Sub-Committee where they attend at least 4 daytime hearings per year	7.5%

 

  ix.        To agree the recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel on the Allowances Scheme for SRAs, with these amendments and implement for the full 2017/18 year

   x.        That the Council approves any budgetary requirement up to a maximum of £9,000 (including £2,240 for the Greater Cambridge Partnership (City Deal) from Reserves for 2017/18 and with subsequent years’ funding coming from efficiencies in Democratic Services budgets.

  xi.        That Council also ask the Panel to assess and report by November 2017 on appropriate and modest remuneration for other external Council representatives on

·        the Combined Authority including as a Cabinet Member (1), and Council members on its Scrutiny (2) and Audit Committees (1)

·        the Greater Cambridge Partnership Assembly (3)

·        the Police and Crime Panel (1).

 

On a show of hands the amendment was carried by 39 votes to 0.

 

It was resolved (votes 39 to 0) that:

 

    i.             That a new Special Responsibility Allowances (SRA) be created, Executive member without portfolio, for the Councils representative on the Greater Cambridge Partnership (City Deal) Board.

    ii.        That the SRA for the Chair of Planning be raised in relation to the Chairs of all other committees.

   iii.        That SRAs be removed from all committee members with the exception of the Planning Committee and regular attendees at Licensing Sub-Committees.

  iv.        That the Chair and Vice-chair of the Planning Committee do not receive an additional SRA as a Member of that committee.

   v.        That the SRA for the Minority Group Leader be removed.

  vi.        That SRAs for spokespersons of both Opposition and Minority groups be retained for scrutiny committees only,  with the Opposition spokes paid marginally more, and SRAs for spokes of other committees be removed.

 vii.        That the number of SRAs that any Councillor may hold be limited to three.

viii.        That the SRAs be set as in the Table below.

 

Role	Percentage of basic allowance
Leader	275%
Executive Councillor including Deputy Leader	200%
Exec Councillor without portfolio ( Member of Greater Cambridge Partnership  Board)	50%
Chair of Planning	100%
Chair of Scrutiny	40%
Chair of Licensing	25%
Chair of Civic Affairs	25%
Chair of Area Committee	20%
Lead Councillor on JDCC	50%
Group leader, main opposition party (fixed multiple regardless of size of the group)	100%
a) Opposition and b) Minority spokes (fixed multiple regardless of size of the group)	a)40% b)30%
Vice-chair of Planning	50%
Member of Planning	15%
Member of Licensing Sub-Committee where they attend at least 4 daytime hearings per year	7.5%

 

  ix.        To agree the recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel on the Allowances Scheme for SRAs, with these amendments and implement for the full 2017/18 year

   x.        That the Council approves any budgetary requirement up to a maximum of £9,000 (including £2,240 for the Greater Cambridge Partnership (City Deal) from Reserves for 2017/18 and with subsequent years’ funding coming from efficiencies in Democratic Services budgets.

  xi.        That Council also ask the Panel to assess and report by November 2017 on appropriate and modest remuneration for other external Council representatives on

·               the Combined Authority including as a Cabinet Member (1), and Council members on its Scrutiny (2) and Audit Committees (1)

·               the Greater Cambridge Partnership Assembly (3)

·               the Police and Crime Panel (1).

Adoption minute to follow

 

Resolved (unanimously) to:

 

     i.     Note that the LGO has upheld a complaint relating to the determination of a planning application.

    ii.     Note that in these circumstances the Head of Legal Services as the Council’s Monitoring Officer has an obligation to report the findings to Council and that Committee is satisfied with the action that has been taken (set out in Section 4 of the Officer’s report).

Adoption minute to follow

 

 

Resolved (unanimously) to:

 

     i.     Note that the LGO has upheld a complaint relating to the determination of a planning application.

    ii.     Note that in these circumstances the Head of Legal Services as the Council’s Monitoring Officer has an obligation to report the findings to Council and that Committee is satisfied with the action that has been taken (set out in Section 4 of the Officer’s report).

What has been the benefit of recent changes at the City Deal, now called the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP)?

 

The Leader responded that the GCP leadership team had taken time in the first part of this year to reflect on the partnership’s progress to date, its future role and focus. This had led to consensus on a number of issues including:

 

     i.        Reaffirming its role as the partnership body for delivering the City Deal investment to Greater Cambridge, securing future prosperity and quality of life. Ensuring Cambridge’s success and opportunities further afield as it continued to grow.

    ii.        A refreshed vision, branding and name to broaden and deepen awareness and understanding. Improved public engagement which included a new website in response to feedback from residents.

   iii.        Proposals for adapting governance arrangements to ensure greater involvement of the expertise from the public and private sector in the Joint Assembly.

  iv.        Closer working with the newly elected Mayor and Combined Authority, to ensure the opportunities of devolved funding and powers could be fully realised for the benefit of local communities.

   v.        Improved evidence building with a clear plan to identify the longer-term investment solutions, starting with a study, commissioned jointly with the Mayor, on potential future transport solutions.

 

The Leader concluded there more work to be done but the feedback so far had been positive. He believed people could see the programme had been re-energised to deliver against its commitment to improve the lives of local people, businesses and future generations as the city continued to grow and thrive.

 

2) Councillor Cantrill to the Executive Councillor for Housing

 

The thoughts of this council and the people of Cambridge continue to be with those who tragically lost their lives and those impacted by the Grenfell Tower tragedy in London.

 

The City Council has issued a number of press statements following the disaster regarding the fire safety measures and procedures for its housing stock

 

Can the Executive Councillor provide an update to reassure residents that every step is being taken to ensure their safety?

 

The Executive Councillor affirmed that the council had in place a robust programme of fire safety risk assessments for all flats and maisonettes. This ensured the communal areas and fire precautions were inspected at least once every three years by a professional fire risk consultant.

 

In recent years, work had been carried out to improve fire safety, including emergency lighting. But the Council were not complacent; officers were reviewing all risk assessments, and worked to make sure works were carried.

 

Residents were reminded of the importance of keeping doorways, stairwells and other accesses clear, and regular checks were taking place to ensure compliance. Outbuildings were being assessed in the light of recent advice from Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) about cladding. The Council were watching the inquiry carefully to learn from this dreadful tragedy, and the Council would actively consider if there were any additional measures that should be considered. In addition, officers were reviewing council specification for new build council housing to ensure the installation of safety measures at the very outset.

 

3) Councillor Bick to the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport

 

In the aftermath of the Grenfell fire and national concerns over the application of building regulations, does the Executive Councillor think that the vision and objectives of our Building Control Service (supplied in response my written question) adequately reflect an overriding focus on the safety of buildings and those who use them?

 

The Executive Councillor responded he believed the vision and objectives of the Council’s Building Control Service adequately reflected an overriding focus on the safety of buildings and those who used them.

 

4) Councillor Ratcliffe to Executive Councillor for Streets and Open Spaces

 

What arrangements are in place to deal with the additional litter on public spaces over the summer?

 

The Executive Councillor replied it was great to see that the city’s open spaces were so popular with residents and visitors. This was testament to the beauty of these spaces and the outstanding facilities and events that were provided on them.

 

Council staff worked incredibly hard, starting early in the morning to keep the open spaces as clean as possible. From May to September the Council employed two additional staff members whose sole responsibility was to collect litter.  During this period two mobile teams worked 7 days a week and were responsible for the clearing of litter. At the weekend two mobile teams were deployed to ensure that those areas under the most pressure were targeted.

 

Additional bins were installed over the summer months in the parks that had the popular splash pads. The graffiti and rapid response team were also deployed to support the cleaning operation team if required, and the council also used a team of volunteers for litter picking.

 

There was also education and enforcement work to help ensure that litter was not being dropped and placed in the bins provided.

 

5) Councillor Sheil to the Executive Councillor for Finance & Resources

 

What are the priorities and benefits from improving energy efficiency at the Guildhall?

 

Members were reminded by the Executive Councillor that In December 2015, the Council appointed an external contractor (Bouygues Group PLC) to identify energy efficiency projects within the Council’s buildings and estate. A package of proposed measures to significantly reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions from the Guildhall and deliver on-going financial savings for the council had been identified which included the following:

       i.      Solar PV, Installing a 30kW solar photovoltaic (PV) array on the upper section of the roof.

      ii.      Re-roofing works to the upper section of the Guildhall roof, additional insulation and replacement roof safety system.

    iii.      Replacing existing light fittings with more energy efficient LED lighting.

    iv.      Combined Heat and Power (CHP) unit to be installed in the plant room at the Guildhall.

     v.      Implementing a number of measures to significantly increase the level of control the Facilities Team at the Guildhall had over the heating systems.

    vi.      Replacing outdated, inefficient elements of the existing heating and hot water systems in the building with more up-to-date and energy efficient measures

  vii.      Insulating pipework and valves in the plant rooms.

 viii.      Installation of secondary glazing to those rooms that currently had single glazing.

 

The Executive Councillor stated that the estimated cost of the measures outlined was just over £572,000, although the precise costs would be refined when options were finalised and discussions with the Council’s conservation team progressed further. It was estimated at this stage that these measures would deliver the following benefits:

     i.        Saving 427,269 kWh of energy per annum, which represented a 24% reduction in the annual energy consumption at the Guildhall.

    ii.        Reducing the Council’s energy costs by £28,843, per annum, which represented a 33% reduction in the annual energy cost at the Guildhall.

   iii.        Reducing the Council’s carbon emissions 109 tCO2 per annum, which represented a 40% reduction in the current annual carbon emissions from the Guildhall.

 

6) Councillor Barnett to the Executive Councillor for Housing

 

How much affordable housing is planned at Mill Road Depot?

 

The Executive Councillor replied this development was a Cambridge Investment Partnership between the Council and Hill Investment as outlined in Mill Road Development Brief document, which had been agreed in March 2017. Public consultation on this site would be made live shortly.

 

In planning terms the Local Plan referenced a total of 40% affordable housing on site. It was the council’s ambition to increase this to 50% which would be delivered through the housing revenue account and the devolution grant.

 

7) Councillor Todd-Jones to the Executive Councillor for Housing

 

Would the Executive Councillor for Housing please update council on how the Cambridge Street Aid programme is progressing?

 

The Executive Councillor responded that residents, businesses and visitors to the city had donated more than £16,000 to Cambridge Street Aid, a charitable fund launched before Christmas 2016, and supported by Cambridge City Council, which was helping people to get off, or stay off the streets.

 

Every penny of the money donated to Cambridge Street Aid was allocated towards grants of up to £750 to help vulnerable people get the support, accommodation and employment they needed.

 

The money donated had started to change people’s lives, with more than £10,000 having been paid out in 30 grants.

 

The Executive Councillor said he had been delighted by the generosity of local people and other donors. One resident had raised more than a £1000 for Street Aid by running the Cambridge marathon, and several others donated their winter fuel payments. 

 

The fund was just one of the ways in which the council and other organisations provide assistance to rough sleepers, homeless people and those at risk of homelessness in the city.

 

Other ways in which the council and its partners provide support for vulnerable people, included:

 

    i.       Giving more than £700,000 a year in grants to a number of charities and services assisting homeless people and people on the street

  ii.       Forging strong links with well-known local homeless charities Jimmy’s Cambridge, Wintercomfort, Change Grow Live, Riverside Care and Support, Cambridge Cyrenians, the Cambridge Churches Homelessness Project, and a range of smaller providers. 

 iii.       Working with local organisations who provide over 500 beds, of which 300 are for single homeless people in hostels and other accommodation

iv.       Ensuring up to 40 council or housing association tenancies a year are available exclusively for former rough sleepers are ready to move on from hostel accommodation.

  v.       Working with a range of enforcement agencies to initiate a series of patrols intended to deter begging and let the public know how best they can help people on the streets. 

 

8) Councillor Tunnacliffe to the Executive Councillor for Streets and Open Spaces

 

How effective are the twin bins installed on the parks and open spaces to encourage recycling

 

The Executive Councillor responded that she did not have the statistics to hand to answer this supplementary question but she would have to refer to the Executive Councillor for Waste Services and City Centre who could provide an answer after the meeting.

 

There had always been an issue of cross contamination of the bins so education was vital to ensure the correct bins were used by the public when getting rid of their waste.

 

 

9) Councillor Page-Croft to the Leader

 

The emergency response of Kensington and Chelsea borough council to Grenfell fire has been widely criticised. How prepared would the city council be to coordinate the response to a similar housing-focused disaster in Cambridge?

 

The Leader replied that he like the rest of the county was shocked and saddened by the Grenfell tragedy but had been surprised by the response from Kensington and Chelsea Council.

 

The Council had an emergency plan, and business continuity plans for its individual services to ensure that critical services were kept running in an emergency and met the needs of those affected. This included the situation of fire in high rise building. 

 

The only way to be confident of the Council’s ability to respond was to regularly review the emergency plans which would link to the Council’s community centres, train staff and to carry out desktop practice exercises.

 

As a small authority, the council would need to work really closely with neighbours and partners in the event of a major incident.

 

The Leader advised that a full response to this question would be sent to all Councillors.

 

10) Cllr Smart to the Executive Councillor for Streets and Open Spaces

 

The pictorial meadows have been highly successful. What are the next steps?

 

The Executive Councillor replied that the pictorial meadows planted on Chesterton Recreation Ground; Parkers Piece; Jesus Green, Nightingale Garden, Victoria Meadow, Fison Road, Ditton Recreation Ground and Kings Hedges Recreation Ground had been one of the council’s most popular initiative.

 

It was hoped that the number of sites would increase in the future following public consultation. The Nightingale Garden volunteers were assisting the Council to trial perennial plants and flowers which would also give some plant cover during the winter.

This would also encourage the expansion of planting and improvement on those sites.

 

The following oral questions were tabled but owing to the expiry of the period of time permitted, were not covered during the meeting. The Mayor asked Executive Councillors if a written response could be provided to those questions that had not been covered.

 

11) Councillor Austin to the Executive Councillor for Streets and Open Spaces

 

With insufficient bike racks in the city centre it is increasingly difficult for people to safely park their cycles without cluttering pavements. What plans are being considered for additional racks?

 

12) Councillor Roberts to the Leader

 

What were the outcomes from the recent Coercive Control event?

 

13) Councillor Sinnott to the Executive Councillor for Communities

 

What follow up is planned after the recent Council-led anti-poverty Conference?

 

Air Quality in Cambridge

 

Council notes that in common with many towns and cities, air quality in parts of Cambridge periodically exceeds legal limits; that this has potentially serious public health consequences especially for children and the elderly from Nitrogen Dioxide and particulate matter; and that vehicle emissions, predominantly from diesel engines, are the leading contributor. It believes that tackling this problem requires both national and local government to take complementary action.

 

Council regards national governments over a long period of time as having failed the public by actively encouraging the use of diesel vehicles and by presiding over a regulatory regime allowing deception by manufacturers.

 

Council welcomes the direction set for zero emission vehicles by the current government’s recent draft plan to improve air quality; however it is disappointed that while it is full of examples of what local authorities can do, the commitment for necessary central government action is largely absent.

 

Council in particular calls on the government to establish urgently a national scrappage scheme for diesel vehicles to enable owners to respond rapidly to new deterrents to their use without financial loss.

 

Meanwhile Council welcomes measures being explored or undertaken locally:

·        to consider a Clean Air Zone in Cambridge, potentially with financial penalties for polluting vehicles providing fair alternatives are in place;

·        to encourage bus companies to acquire and operate lower emission vehicles

·        to progressively convert this Council’s fleet to electric vehicles

·        to encourage taxi operators to purchase electric or hybrid vehicles

·        to provide charging facilities for electric vehicles

 

It now also requests the Executive to bring reports on the following further measures which are or could be within our control, to change the behaviour of some drivers in allowing their vehicle engines to idle while they are out of traffic, which adds to air pollution:

·        a general campaign on the practice as operated by Westminster City Council, and further consideration of an application for statutory enforcement powers, as adopted by Islington Borough Council;

·        an increase in the levels of enforcement of existing rules against engine idling that lie in our own conditions for taxis and the County Council’s Quality Bus Partnership.

 

Councillor Gehring proposed and Councillor T Moore seconded the following motion:

 

Council notes that in common with many towns and cities, air quality in parts of Cambridge periodically exceeds legal limits; that this has potentially serious public health consequences especially for children and the elderly from Nitrogen Dioxide and particulate matter; and that vehicle emissions, predominantly from diesel engines, are the leading contributor. It believes that tackling this problem requires both national and local government to take complementary action.

 

Council regards national governments over a long period of time as having failed the public by actively encouraging the use of diesel vehicles and by presiding over a regulatory regime allowing deception by manufacturers.

 

Council welcomes the direction set for zero emission vehicles by the current government’s recent draft plan to improve air quality; however it is disappointed that while it is full of examples of what local authorities can do, the commitment for necessary central government action is largely absent.

 

Council in particular calls on the government to establish urgently a national scrappage scheme for diesel vehicles to enable owners to respond rapidly to new deterrents to their use without financial loss.

 

Meanwhile Council welcomes measures being explored or undertaken locally:

·        to consider a Clean Air Zone in Cambridge, potentially with financial penalties for polluting vehicles providing fair alternatives are in place;

·        to encourage bus companies to acquire and operate lower emission vehicles

·        to progressively convert this Council’s fleet to electric vehicles

·        to encourage taxi operators to purchase electric or hybrid vehicles

·        to provide charging facilities for electric vehicles

 

It now also requests the Executive to bring reports on the following further measures which are or could be within our control, to change the behaviour of some drivers in allowing their vehicle engines to idle while they are out of traffic, which adds to air pollution:

·        a general campaign on the practice as operated by Westminster City Council, and further consideration of an application for statutory enforcement powers, as adopted by Islington Borough Council;

·        an increase in the levels of enforcement of existing rules against engine idling that lie in our own conditions for taxis and the County Council’s Quality Bus Partnership.

 

Councillor R Moore proposed and Councillor Herbert seconded the following amendment (deleted text struck through, additional text underlined): 

 

Council notes that in common with many towns and cities, air quality in parts of Cambridge periodically exceeds legal limits; that this has potentially serious public health consequences especially for children and the elderly from Nitrogen Dioxide and particulate matter; and that vehicle emissions, predominantly from diesel engines, are the leading contributor. It believes that tackling this problem requires both national and local government to take complementary action.

 

Council regards national governments over a long period of time as having failed the public by actively encouraging the use of diesel vehicles and by presiding over a regulatory regime allowing deception by manufacturers.

 

Council welcomes the direction set for zero emission vehicles by the current government’s recent draft plan to improve air quality; however it is disappointed that while it is full of examples of what local authorities can do, the commitment for necessary central government action is largely absent.

 

Council in particular calls on the government to establish urgently a national scrappage scheme for diesel vehicles to enable owners to respond rapidly to new deterrents to their use without financial loss.

 

Meanwhile Council welcomes measures being explored or undertaken locally:

·        to consider a Clean Air Zone in Cambridge, potentially with financial penalties for polluting vehicles providing fair alternatives are in place;

·        to encourage bus companies to acquire and operate lower emission vehicles

·        to progressively convert this Council’s fleet to electric vehicles

·        to encourage taxi operators to purchase electric or hybrid vehicles

·        to provide charging facilities for electric vehicles

 

It now also requests the Executive to bring reports on the following further measures which are or could be within our control, to change the behaviour of some drivers in allowing their vehicle engines to idle while they are out of traffic, which adds to air pollution:

·        a general campaign on the practice as operated by Westminster City Council, and further consideration of an application for statutory enforcement powers, as adopted by Islington Borough Council;

·        an increase in the levels of enforcement of existing rules against engine idling that lie in our own conditions for taxis and the County Council’s Quality Bus Partnership.

 

This Council notes that anti-idling measures are currently being considered for inclusion in the new Air Quality Action Plan for 2017-2022, wherein the Council is currently undergoing a full review of all existing and new measures to reduce air pollution.

 

This Council notes that the Environmental Quality and Growth Team are currently preparing the new Air Quality Action Plan 2017-2022, which is scheduled to be circulated internally in September and for public consultation in October. The report, which covers the feasibility of anti-idling measures alongside other options to improve air quality, will also be brought before Environment Scrutiny Committee for further debate.

 

This Council resolves to hold a full briefing for members on the Air Quality Action Plan 2017-2022 ahead of the public consultation, wherein councillors may ask detailed questions at the first available opportunity about the measures under consideration.

 

On a show of hands the amendment was carried by 39 votes to 0

 

It was resolved (votes 39 to 0) that:

 

Council notes that in common with many towns and cities, air quality in parts of Cambridge periodically exceeds legal limits; that this has potentially serious public health consequences especially for children and the elderly from Nitrogen Dioxide and particulate matter; and that vehicle emissions, predominantly from diesel engines, are the leading contributor. It believes that tackling this problem requires both national and local government to take complementary action.

 

Council regards national governments over a long period of time as having failed the public by actively encouraging the use of diesel vehicles and by presiding over a regulatory regime allowing deception by manufacturers.

 

Council welcomes the direction set for zero emission vehicles by the current government’s recent draft plan to improve air quality; however it is disappointed that while it is full of examples of what local authorities can do, the commitment for necessary central government action is largely absent.

 

Council in particular calls on the government to establish urgently a national scrappage scheme for diesel vehicles to enable owners to respond rapidly to new deterrents to their use without financial loss.

 

Meanwhile Council welcomes measures being explored or undertaken locally:

·        to consider a Clean Air Zone in Cambridge, potentially with financial penalties for polluting vehicles providing fair alternatives are in place;

·        to encourage bus companies to acquire and operate lower emission vehicles

·        to progressively convert this Council’s fleet to electric vehicles

·        to encourage taxi operators to purchase electric or hybrid vehicles

·        to provide charging facilities for electric vehicles

 

It now also requests the Executive to bring reports on the following further measures which are or could be within our control, to change the behaviour of some drivers in allowing their vehicle engines to idle while they are out of traffic, which adds to air pollution:

·        a general campaign on the practice as operated by Westminster City Council, and further consideration of an application for statutory enforcement powers, as adopted by Islington Borough Council;

·        an increase in the levels of enforcement of existing rules against engine idling that lie in our own conditions for taxis and the County Council’s Quality Bus Partnership.

 

This Council notes that anti-idling measures are currently being considered for inclusion in the new Air Quality Action Plan for 2017-2022, wherein the Council is currently undergoing a full review of all existing and new measures to reduce air pollution.

 

This Council notes that the Environmental Quality and Growth Team are currently preparing the new Air Quality Action Plan 2017-2022, which is scheduled to be circulated internally in September and for public consultation in October. The report, which covers the feasibility of anti-idling measures alongside other options to improve air quality, will also be brought before Environment Scrutiny Committee for further debate.

 

This Council resolves to hold a full briefing for members on the Air Quality Action Plan 2017-2022 ahead of the public consultation, wherein councillors may ask detailed questions at the first available opportunity about the measures under consideration.

 

Members were asked to note the written question and answer that had been placed in the information pack circulated around the Chamber.

 

A copy could be viewed at the following link:

 

http://democracy.cambridge.gov.uk/documents/b11003/Information%20Pack%2013th-Jul-2017%2018.00%20Council.pdf?T=9