Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Council Chamber, The Guildhall, Market Square, Cambridge, CB2 3QJ [access the building via Peashill entrance]. View directions
Contact: Martin Whelan Committee Manager
No. | Item | |||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 23 February 2012 PDF 169 KB Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 23 February
2012 were confirmed as a correct record and signed by
the Mayor.
|
||||||||||||||||
Mayors Announcements Minutes: 1. Apologies
Apologies were received from
Councillors Bird, Hipkin and Wright. 2. Application for Lord Mayor status The Mayor confirmed that the City Council’s submission to receive
Lord Mayor status in connection with Her Majesty The Queen’s diamond jubilee
celebrations had been unsuccessful. The honour had been awarded to the City of
Armargh. 3. Reach
Fair The Mayor confirmed that the annual Proclamation of Reach
Fair would take place on Bank Holiday Monday, 7th May. Newly minted pennies
were available from the Sergeant-at-Mace. 4. Elections
The Mayor confirmed that Councillor Margaret Wright and Councillor Roman Znajek would not be standing in the forthcoming elections. They were thanked for their contribution to the work of the Council during their respective terms in office. It was also noted that the Mayor would not be standing for re-election. 5. Twinning At the meeting of the Council held on 20th October, 2011, it was agreed to present the Honorary Freedom of the City to the City of Szeged. The Mayor confirmed that unfortunately it had not been possible to arrange a date for representatives of the City of Szeged to visit Cambridge during this calendar year. However it was hoped that a visit could be planned for 2013. It was also noted that the Mayor and Consort would be
visiting Szeged during the period 18th/20th May at their
own expense. 6. City
Council annual meeting The Mayor confirmed that the Council’s annual meeting
would take place on Thursday, 24th May. Members were asked to let
Sue Edwards know as soon as possible if they would like to reserve any guest
seating. 7. Declarations
of Interest
|
||||||||||||||||
Public Questions Time Minutes: Mr Woodcock highlighted the significant role that universities in the
city had to play in the provision of suitable and affordable housing. Mr
Woodcock also expressed concern that new provision was often the wrong type,
built in the wrong place and at the wrong price. Mr Woodcock challenged the Motion presented on houses of multiple
occupation, and indicated that in his view it started from the wrong point, and
that the focus should be on providing decent and affordable places to live. The Executive Councillor for Housing acknowledged the concerns raised,
and expressed considerable sympathy for the need to ensure the provision of
affordable housing. It was highlighted that on the fringe sites, the City
Council had been successful in obtaining 40% provision of affordable housing
(split between social rented and intermediate housing). The Executive
Councillor acknowledged the major role that the universities could play in the
delivery of affordable housing. The Executive Councillor explained that the
current situation was partially as a result of the system reaching “boiling
point” due to building slowing, and noted that any efforts to further regulate
the sector was likely to make the problem worse. Mr Woodcock re-iterated concerns regarding the level of fees charged by
letting agents and the negative affect that this had on developing cohesive
communities. Mr Woodcock encouraged the Council to invest in a significant
increase in the building and acquisition of new council housing. The Executive Councillor explained that changes in the rules related to
housing finance would allow the Council to invest in new council house
provision. The Executive Councillor also encouraged tenants to report issues to
the Citizens Advice Bureau, as charges may be illegal. 2)
Mr Richard Johnson addressed the Council and requested the support of the
Executive Councillor for Planning and Sustainable Transport for a campaign to
increase the quality of bus services between Abbey Ward and Addenbrookes
Hospital. Mr Johnson explained that the campaign sought to put pressure on
Stagecoach to either add or amend an existing service. Mr Johnson explained
that the existing services from Barnwell Road to Addenbrookes involved two
separate bus journeys and over 50 minutes journey time. It was also noted that
taxi and car travel was either prohibitively expensive, or difficult due to the
limited provision of car parking. It was noted that Unison were also supporting
the campaign. Mr Johnson also highlighted that he was currently organising a
petition, and was hoping to present it to a future Council meeting. The
Executive Councillor for Planning and Sustainable Transport agreed with the
principle of the campaign, and acknowledged that the existing level of service
in Abbey was poor when compared with most other parts of the city. The
Executive Councillor explained that in other parts of the county the current
level of service would represent a significant improvement in existing
provision. The Executive Councillor expressed reservations about the ability of
the County Council to provide subsidy to new services, as they were in the
process of reducing service subsidies. The Executive Councillor explained that
the current City Council support for public and community transport would be
reviewed in the next 12 months, and this issue would be considered as part of
that review. Mr Johnson welcomed the comments and sought the support of the Executive
Councillor for the campaign. He requested a meeting with the Executive
Councillor to discuss the campaign further. The Executive Councillor for Planning and Sustainable Transport agreed
to meet with Mr Johnson, but declined to support the campaign at this stage
without sight of the detail of the petition. 3) Mr Richard Taylor addressed the Council and questioned the Executive
Councillor for Community Development and Health: ·
An update was
requested on the current status of the proposals for dispersal zones in the
City Centre and the east of the city. ·
Clarification
was requested on whether the decision to implement Neighbourhood Restorative
Justice would be reconsidered in light of the discovery of a significant error
in the information presented to the committee, which implied that the approach
would also be available for more serious offences than previously intended.
Comment was also requested on the view of the magistrates on the proposals, in
the light apparently negative comments with regards to the scheme. ·
An update was
requested on the status of the negotiations regarding the formation of the
Shadow Police and Crime Panel. ·
Clarification
was requested on the relationship between the Executive Councillor and the
recently appointed Superintendent. The Executive Councillor was also asked if he
had any role in the appointment of the Superintendent (Vicky Skeels) for the
City. ·
An update was
requested on whether the City Council was considering requesting police powers
for City Rangers. The Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health responded: ·
There were no
active discussions regarding a dispersal zone in the east of the city, and the
Police were not pursuing a Section 30 dispersal zone for the City Centre. It
was noted that the latter had been discussed at West/Central Area Committee on
1st March 2012, and that the withdrawal of the Police request was to
be formally reported to West/Central Area on 26th April 2012. ·
The oversight
in the proof reading of the Neighbourhood Restorative Justice documentation
presented to the Executive Councillor and Scrutiny Committee was acknowledged,
however it was explained that the intention of the proposals was clear. The
Executive Councillor explained that there would be further opportunities to
refine the process. ·
The Executive
Councillor challenged the assertion that the magistrates were against the
scheme. It was noted that the response from the magistrates covered a wider
range of issues. It was also highlighted that the response from the magistrates
emphasised that they were committed to the common goal of making and
maintaining Cambridge as a safe place. ·
The Executive
Councillor explained that each Council was eligible for a seat on any Shadow
Police and Crime Panel, but there was also a requirement to ensure political,
geographical and skills/knowledge balance. Discussions on these issues were
ongoing. ·
The Executive
Councillor explained that he had no role in the appointment of Vicky Skeels. It
was also explained that Cambridgeshire Police was a partner organisation, and
that the Executive Councillor was not responsible for their actions. ·
The Executive
Councillor clarified that the discussion on the power of City Rangers had been
initiated by officers, and not by elected politicians. There was no intention
to extend the existing role of City Rangers. 4)
Ms Alison Power addressed the Council and spoke in objection to Motion 6b. Ms
Power explained that she had been a resident of Cambridge for 18 years, and was
worried by the proposal. Ms Power expressed concern that the current approach could unfairly
discriminate against various parts of the community. Concerns were also raised
that the approach of the City Council appears to contravene the Housing Act. Ms Power highlighted the positive benefit of housing co-operatives and
the need to support the vital role of houses of multiple occupation in the
future development of the city. The Executive Councillor for Housing clarified the definition of houses
of multiple occupation, and that the approach adopted by the City Council was
consistent with the Housing Act. The Executive Councillor noted that the
proposed Motion was potentially discriminatory and confusing, and did not have
her support. The positive benefits of housing co-operatives were acknowledged,
and that shared houses provided an essential role in the city. Ms Power thanked the Executive Councillor for clarifying the current
position of the City Council, and welcomed the opportunity for further
discussions with the Executive Councillor. In response to a suggestion, the
Executive Councillor agreed to ensure that the position of the City Council was
clarified on its website. 5)
Mr Meftah spoke in objection to the Motion 6b. He explained that shared housing
was often the only option for many residents who were not served by social housing. The
Executive Councillor for Housing clarified what constituted a house of multiple
occupation, and emphasised the positive benefits that shared housing provided
to the city. |
||||||||||||||||
To consider the recommendations of Committees for Adoption |
||||||||||||||||
Additional documents: Minutes: Resolved (22 votes to 0) to: Amend the terms of
reference of Area Committees, as contained in Section 12 of Part 3 of the
Constitution, in accordance with the Appendix to the officer’s report.
|
||||||||||||||||
Review of the Council's Audio and Visual Recording Protocol PDF 16 KB Additional documents:
Minutes: Councillor Boyce proposed and Councillor Rosenstiel seconded
an amendment to insert at the end of item 1 of the revised protocol: “The Council will supply
signs which will be deployed at any meeting all or part of which is to be recorded” On a show of hands the
amendment was carried by 22 votes to 11 Resolved (Unanimously) to: Approve the revised
Audio and Visual Recording Protocol as amended. |
||||||||||||||||
To deal with Oral Questions PDF 563 KB Minutes: 1. Councillor Dryden to the Executive
Councillor for Customer Services and Resources Is the Council’s emergency out of hours telephone number 457457, still
the correct number to call when residents need to contact the Council for that
reason? The Executive Councillor for Customer Services and
Resources confirmed that the emergency out of hours number was still in
operation and manned by a dedicated call handler. When the call handler is
dealing with an enquiry, any new callers would be given the option of leaving a
message. These messages were then screened and dealt with in priority order.
The Executive Councillor agreed to review the content of the recorded message
and amend if more clarity was needed. 2. Councillor
Herbert to the Leader of the Council What further effort is planned to recover the missing Folk Festival
ticket money? The Leader of the Council responded and noted that
Councillor Herbert had asked a similar question at a recent meeting. Whilst a
full written response had been provided on that occasion, the Leader and the
Head of Legal Services would still be happy to meet with Councillor Herbert to
discuss the issue in more detail. 3. Councillor Brierley to the
Executive Councillor for Environmental and Waste Services The litter in the
area between Cambridge Regional College (CRC) and Campkin Way Tescos has
been\is a persistent problem. I know a significant number of Kings Hedges
residents are interested in what actions are being taken to reduce and mitigate
the problem? The Executive Councillor for Environmental and Waste
Services acknowledged that this was a heavily littered area but confirmed that
work was being undertaken to address the problem. Enforcement Teams undertook
regular visits to CRC to discuss the problem with students, and the Tescos
store and the Ocean Dragon takeaway had signed up to voluntary clean up
activities. Five additional litterbins had also been installed and the City
Rangers arranged regular ‘clean-up days’ in the local area. The City Council
also worked closely with national bodies such as ‘Keep Britain Tidy’ who
engaged with national campaigns to lobby supermarkets to use less packaging. 4. Councillor Reiner to the
Executive Councillor for Community Development and Health Could you please report back to
the Council on the result of your discussions with the Post Office on the
shortcomings of its new office on St. Andrew's Street? The Executive Councillor for Community Development and
Health confirmed that, after moving in December 2010, local residents had
complained of limited floor space, narrow doorways and the lack of an external
post box at the St Andrew’s Street location. The Executive Councillor had met
with both the Regional and the Branch Manager to discuss the issue and it had
been agreed that the Post Office would reposition its floor space, submit a
planning application for a new front entrance and install an external post box.
Public consultation on the planning application for the new front entrance
expired on the 20 April, and as yet no objections had been received. 5. Councillor Price to the Executive
Councillor for Customer Services and Resources How effective has the Cam-Conservators
implementation from April 1st of only granting punt licences to businesses operating
from the 6 identified punt stations been, and, subsequently, what has been the
effect on the numbers and behaviour of punt touts operating in the City Centre? The
Executive Councillor for Customer Services and Resources confirmed that since
the 1 April 2011 the number of touts operating in the City Centre had decreased
and that local shops and colleges had reported that their behaviour had
improved. In June 2011 there was reported to be 29 touts operating in the Kings
Parade area, whilst a recent count had noted 2 on a Sunday and 7 on a Bank
Holiday. The Executive Councillor also noted that only two complaints had been
received since 1 April and that any ongoing issues would be looked at in
partnership with the Cam Conservators and the local Police. 6.
Councillor Owers to the
Executive Councillor for Environmental and Waste Services In light of the Council's catastrophically
poor record at taking enforcement action against irresponsible dog owners for
dog-fouling, are there plans to co-operate with PCSOs and/or Police Officers to
bolster enforcement efforts against dog-fouling? The
Executive Councillor for Environmental and Waste Services confirmed that City
Council officers continued to target the known hotspots and monitor the
situation. To address the problem, over 70,000 dog waste bags had been
distributed, three additional Enforcement Officers had been trained and 8
suspected offenders had been contacted by letter. However it was noted that in
order to take formal enforcement action, the offence had to be witnessed. A
suggestion was made by the Executive Councillor that Area Committees propose
this as a police priority. 7. Councillor Pogonowski to the Leader of
the Council The Citizens Survey results show increasing
dissatisfaction with the Lib Dem-led Cambridge City Council. Particularly,
results of how well the Council keeps residents informed of how it spends
money, committee meetings and what they are for, and how residents can get
involved scored high levels of dissatisfaction. What will the Leader and her
group do to remedy this situation? The Leader of the Council responded that results of the Citizens Survey confirmed that overall dissatisfaction had not increased, but remained constant at 15%. It was also noted that, on questions relating to how well residents were being kept informed, the Council had performed well. Ongoing work by the Council included; improvements to the website, continuation of written information and the increased use of social media. The Leader highlighted that delegating more
functions to Area Committees would also ensure that decisions were being made
at a local level and with the input of residents. 8. Councillor
Pogonowski to the Executive Councillor for Customer Services and Resources What powers does the City Council have to prevent
punt-operating companies having too great a market share in Cambridge? The Executive Councillor for Customer Services and Resources said that the Council had taken a number of initiatives to ensure diversity of punt operators on the River. These included establishing opportunities for independent punt operators to offer services to the public from La Mimosa, as well as providing a base for punt operators at the Mill Pond and Mill Pit West in addition to the sites used by Scudamores. Other punt operators used sites not within the Council's ownership such as Trinity Punts, based at Trinity College. 9. Councillor Reiner to the
Executive Councillor for Environmental and Waste Services Could the Executive Councillor please report
to Council on the success of the Cam Cleanup, which happened over the weekend? The Executive Councillor for Environmental and Waste Services confirmed that the Cam Cleanup was a volunteer event supported by the City Council. Thanks were expressed to the 100 volunteers that took part and the City Rangers that had helped to manage the event. It was noted that over 100 bags of rubbish had been collected along the river bank from Fen Causeway to Fen Ditton. The
Executive Councillor confirmed that, once appointed, the Street Champion Co-ordinator
would encourage other communities to have Cleanup events such as this. 10. Councillor
Herbert to the Leader of the Council Will she support
the merging of the Cambridge Local Plan to 2030 into a single joint plan with
South Cambridgeshire? The Leader
responded that the current timetable for adopting a new Local Plan was April
2014. South Cambridgeshire District Councils (SCDC) timetable was October 2015.
Adopting a single plan and timetable for delivering it would delay adoption of
a new joint plan to at least the slower of the two current timetables. It was
noted that neither Council has proposed producing a joint plan during the
initial plan making stages over the last 12 months. The Leader
confirmed that it was not necessary to have a single plan in order to deliver a
successful Local Spatial Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire. Each
new Local Plan would have potentially quite different visions and have a number
of different issues to address. It would however be necessary to co-operate for
the successful planning of the sub-region, particularly with developments on
the fringe sites. It was noted that,
in order to take this forward, new political governance arrangements between
the three Councils had been put in place, supported by officer working groups
(the Strategic Transport and Spatial Planning Group). These would oversee and
advise in relation to those issues that were of genuine mutual interest and
which required a strategic approach. The arrangements were working well and two
meetings had already resulted in consensus around the process that the three
Councils should be considering for the fringe sites as part of their issues and
options consultation stages. This will be an appropriate approach to securing a
joint planning outcome, without needing a single plan to be developed. The Leader confirmed that both Council's also have discrete issues for
their Local Plans that could add to the overall timetable but which may not be
of mutual interest e.g. the review of village envelopes in SCDC's 100 or so
parishes would result in significant representations being submitted through
the local plan consultation stages. These would all have to be dealt with and
considered through the democratic process, which would take time. The Leader questioned whether it would be
right to delay adoption of a plan for the City whilst these issues were being
dealt with. It was noted that a delayed adoption timetable could result in
unwanted, speculative development coming forward and the planning of the City
being carried out through the appeal process rather than by influencing it
locally through a new local development plan.
|
||||||||||||||||
To consider the following Notices of Motion, notice of which has been given by: |
||||||||||||||||
Councillor Price In the light of
complaints about work quality following the transfer of the planned maintenance
contract to an outside contractor, and the promises made that the first year’s
scheduled work would be completed on time and to quality standards after delays
in mobilisation, this Council calls for a full internal audit investigation
into the effects of the delayed handover, work delivery, management, and costings
relating to this contract. Minutes: Councillor Price proposed and Councillor Dryden seconded the following
motion: “In the light of complaints about work quality
following the transfer of the planned maintenance contract to an outside contractor,
and the promises made that the first year’s scheduled work would be completed
on time and to quality standards after delays in mobilisation, this Council
calls for a full internal audit investigation into the effects of the delayed
handover, work delivery, management, and costings relating to this contract.” Councillor Smart proposed and Councillor Blackhurst
seconded the following amendment: Delete all and replace
with: “This Council notes that: -
The Planned Maintenance contract
started in July 2011 and at the end of February £2.5 million of the scheduled
£5.3 million was due for payment -
Apollo have increased the
team on site, mobilized their supply chain and given assurances that the rest
of the first year's work will be speeded up and will be completed by July 2012 -
Orders have also been
placed with Kier Services, the secondary contractor, including the important
fire safety work in the Ekin Road flats. The Council further notes
that: -
the level of satisfaction
by tenants is 95% -
the quality of work
inspections records a level of 95.4% -
that a double inspection
regime operates for electrical work in view of the concerns expressed during
the previous contract. The Council further notes
that: -
an Internal Audit on the contract
and how it was managed, was completed in November 2011 and gave a “significant”
level of assurance. -
Council urges any tenant
who is unhappy about work that is being done, to let the Council know, either directly
or through their councillor or tenant representative so that steps can be taken
to improve things. -
Council also requests that
a full report covering quality standards, tenant satisfaction, costings and the
amount of work completed come to the Housing Management Board after the
completion of the first year of the contract.” On a show of hands the amendment was carried by 22
votes to 14 Resolved (by 24 votes to 1)
that: This Council notes that: -
The Planned Maintenance
contract started in July 2011 and at the end of February £2.5 million of the
scheduled £5.3 million was due for payment -
Apollo have increased the
team on site, mobilized their supply chain and given assurances that the rest
of the first year's work will be speeded up and will be completed by July 2012 -
Orders have also been
placed with Kier Services, the secondary contractor, including the important
fire safety work in the Ekin Road flats. The Council further notes
that: -
the level of satisfaction
by tenants is 95% -
the quality of work
inspections records a level of 95.4% -
that a double inspection
regime operates for electrical work in view of the concerns expressed during
the previous contract. The Council further notes
that: -
an Internal Audit on the
contract and how it was managed, was completed in November 2011 and gave a
“significant” level of assurance. -
Council urges any tenant
who is unhappy about work that is being done, to let the Council know, either
directly or through their councillor or tenant representative so that steps can
be taken to improve things. -
Council also requests that
a full report covering quality standards, tenant satisfaction, costings and the
amount of work completed come to the Housing Management Board after the
completion of the first year of the contract. |
||||||||||||||||
Councillor Marchant-Daisley and Todd-Jones The Council
recognises the vital contribution that well-run Houses in Multiple Occupation
(HMOs) make in providing housing for families, students, professionals and
migrant workers. However, given
problems from some HMOs failing to deliver quality, safe housing, or creating serious
problems for neighbours, the Council requests the Executive Councillor for
Housing to bring forward a report to assess options to improve the operation
and regulation of HMOs in Cambridge, including: 1) extending the
current HMO definition to include all properties with 3 or more people in two
or more unrelated households, regardless of the building layout 2) improved
enforcement of breaches of licences granted to HMOs, and 3) wider adoption
of best practice on HMOs by comparable cities including Oxford, and that the Head of Planning Services also report to the Executive
Councillor for Planning and Sustainable Transport and the Development Plan
Scrutiny Sub-Committee on the future option of denying permission for
additional HMOs in any street or 200 metre stretch of any street where HMO
numbers reach 25% of residential properties, to enable inclusion of this
proposal in the summer ‘issues and options’ consultation on the Cambridge Local
Plan 2014 to 2031. Minutes: Councillor Marchant-Daisley proposed and Councillor Todd-Jones seconded
the following motion: “The Council recognises the vital contribution that well-run
Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) make in providing housing for families,
students, professionals and migrant workers. However, given problems from some HMOs failing to
deliver quality, safe housing, or creating serious problems for neighbours, the
Council requests the Executive Councillor for Housing to bring forward a report
to assess options to improve the operation and regulation of HMOs in Cambridge,
including: 1) extending the current HMO definition to include all
properties with 3 or more people in two or more unrelated households,
regardless of the building layout 2) improved enforcement of breaches of licences
granted to HMOs, and 3) wider adoption of best practice on HMOs by
comparable cities including Oxford, and that the Head of Planning Services also report to
the Executive Councillor for Planning and Sustainable Transport and the
Development Plan Scrutiny Sub-Committee on the future option of denying
permission for additional HMOs in any street or 200 metre stretch of any street
where HMO numbers reach 25% of residential properties, to enable inclusion of
this proposal in the summer ‘issues and options’ consultation on the Cambridge
Local Plan 2014 to 2031.” Councillor Smart proposed and Councillor Ward seconded
the following amendment: Delete all and replace
with: “The Council recognises the
vital contribution that shared rented housing makes in providing homes for
students, professionals, migrant workers and many people on low incomes. It
acknowledges that housing is expensive in Cambridge and that this is the only
way many people can afford to live in the city. Council therefore rejects
the idea of limiting the number of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) in the
city or part of the city. If restrictions are put in place, rents would rise
and people would quickly be priced out of the city. Making it difficult for
people to access shared housing in the city, could have a disastrous effect on
the economy of the area. Council notes the desire of
some to “extend the current HMO definition to include all properties with 3 or
more people in two or more unrelated households, regardless of the building
layout” but also notes that the conditions required in the legislation are not
present in Cambridge to extend the licensing system in this way and agrees that
it should be kept under review. However, Council also recognises that the
implementation of the licensing of smaller properties can be deeply intrusive
and lead to complex enquiries about details of people's relationships and
domestic arrangements which are no business of the council. Any extension of
the licensing system would need to be framed to avoid this. The Council also notes
that, while the majority of landlords are responsible and manage their houses
in a satisfactory way, a minority are not, causing severe problems both to
their tenants and to the neighbours.
It further notes that while the majority of residents are responsible
people, some are not and are inconsiderate, irresponsible and cause
considerable problems to their neighbours The Council therefore
endorses the actions of the Environmental Health Officers in responding to
complaints and working towards changing the behaviour of the irresponsible
minority in all types of tenure whether landlords, tenants or home-owners. It
notes that advice, warnings, enforcement letters, injunctions, confiscations
and full prosecution are all used to this end.
However, Council requests
that an annual report is brought to Community Services Scrutiny Committee
detailing the number and type of complaints received by the Environmental
Health Department and how they have been dealt with, including the number of
prosecutions.” On a show of hands the amendment was carried by 22 votes to 14 Councillor Pogonowski proposed and Councillor Ward seconded the
following amendment: To add at the end: “The Council
further recognises that the massive shortage of secure and affordable tenancies
in the city is forcing many to live in inappropriate accommodation or in many
cases housing poverty. In order to help
the Council implement housing and planning policy effectively, the Council
requests the Executive Councillor for Housing conduct a comprehensive survey
into city residents living in private rented accommodation, which looks at
rents, agents fees, quality and safety, housing security and the location of
housing. The Council
requests that the results from this survey go to Community Services Scrutiny
Committee and the Development Plan Scrutiny Sub Committee to look at the
findings and to help inform debate around the Local Plan Review with regards to
HMOs.” On a show of hands the amendment was carried unanimously. Resolved (by 22 votes to 0) that: The Council recognises the
vital contribution that shared rented housing makes in providing homes for
students, professionals, migrant workers and many people on low incomes. It
acknowledges that housing is expensive in Cambridge and that this is the only
way many people can afford to live in the city. Council therefore rejects
the idea of limiting the number of Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) in the
city or part of the city. If restrictions are put in place, rents would rise
and people would quickly be priced out of the city. Making it difficult for
people to access shared housing in the city, could have a disastrous effect on
the economy of the area. Council notes the desire of
some to “extend the current HMO definition to include all properties with 3 or
more people in two or more unrelated households, regardless of the building
layout” but also notes that the conditions required in the legislation are not
present in Cambridge to extend the licensing system in this way and agrees that
it should be kept under review. However, Council also recognises that the
implementation of the licensing of smaller properties can be deeply intrusive
and lead to complex enquiries about details of people's relationships and
domestic arrangements which are no business of the council. Any extension of
the licensing system would need to be framed to avoid this. The Council also notes
that, while the majority of landlords are responsible and manage their houses
in a satisfactory way, a minority are not, causing severe problems both to
their tenants and to the neighbours.
It further notes that while the majority of residents are responsible
people, some are not and are inconsiderate, irresponsible and cause
considerable problems to their neighbours The Council therefore
endorses the actions of the Environmental Health Officers in responding to
complaints and working towards changing the behaviour of the irresponsible
minority in all types of tenure whether landlords, tenants or home-owners. It
notes that advice, warnings, enforcement letters, injunctions, confiscations
and full prosecution are all used to this end.
However, Council requests
that an annual report is brought to Community Services Scrutiny Committee
detailing the number and type of complaints received by the Environmental
Health Department and how they have been dealt with, including the number of
prosecutions. The Council further
recognises that the massive shortage of secure and affordable tenancies in the
city is forcing many to live in inappropriate accommodation or in many cases
housing poverty. In order to help
the Council implement housing and planning policy effectively, the Council
requests the Executive Councillor for Housing conduct a comprehensive survey
into city residents living in private rented accommodation, which looks at
rents, agents fees, quality and safety, housing security and the location of
housing. The Council
requests that the results from this survey go to Community Services Scrutiny
Committee and the Development Plan Scrutiny Sub Committee to look at the
findings and to help inform debate around the Local Plan Review with regards to
HMOs. |
||||||||||||||||
Councillor Ashton The Council extends
its wholehearted congratulations to Marshall of Cambridge for its outstanding
contribution to the city, and most recently for persuading the European Office
of ExecuJet to relocate from Switzerland to Cambridge, at a time when other
firms are leaving the UK. The Council is
committed to supporting the continued success of all major Cambridge employers
and welcomes the Marshall decision to retain its main base in Cambridge, thus
helping to protect 2000 direct jobs plus an estimated 4000 further local jobs
that currently service this great Cambridge company. Minutes: Councillor Ashton proposed and Councillor Dryden seconded the following
motion: “The Council extends its wholehearted congratulations
to Marshall of Cambridge for its outstanding contribution to the city, and most
recently for persuading the European Office of ExecuJet to relocate from
Switzerland to Cambridge, at a time when other firms are leaving the UK. The Council is committed to supporting the continued
success of all major Cambridge employers and welcomes the Marshall decision to
retain its main base in Cambridge, thus helping to protect 2000 direct jobs
plus an estimated 4000 further local jobs that currently service this great
Cambridge company.” Councillor Reid proposed and Councillor Taylor
seconded the following amendment: After: “The Council extends its wholehearted
congratulations to Marshall of Cambridge for its outstanding contribution to
the city, and most recently for persuading the European Office of ExecuJet to
relocate from Switzerland to Cambridge, at a time when other firms are leaving
the UK.” Delete the rest
and replace with: “The Council is
committed to supporting the continued success of employers in the Cambridge
area and notes and welcomes Marshall’s longstanding commitment to retaining its
operating bases here, thus helping to protect over 2000 direct jobs plus an
estimated 4000 further local jobs that currently service this great Cambridge
company. It further welcomes Marshall’s apprenticeship programme and the
company’s strong contribution both to the community and to the wider interests
of the Cambridge economy. The Council is committed to supporting
growth in the Cambridge economy, and notes that the combined South Cambridgeshire
and Cambridge jobs have grown from 157,200 in 2000 to 180,300 in 2011 and that
those in Cambridge itself have grown from 91,600 to 97,400 in the same period. The Council
further recognises the Centre for Cities report showing how well Cambridge has
fared in the downturn compared to 64 other UK cities and how well it is placed
for economic growth. The Council further welcomes measures to improve employment
opportunities in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire, particularly for young
people. These include our partnership’s new Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire
grant fund, the Council’s Economic Inclusion grants and Cambridge Regional
College’s ‘100 Apprentice’ campaign. “ On a show of hands the amendment was carried by 18
votes to 13 Councillor Blencowe proposed and Councillor Owers
seconded the following amendment: After: “The Council is
committed to supporting the continued success of employers in the Cambridge
area and notes and welcomes Marshall’s longstanding commitment to retaining its
operating bases here,” Add the wording: “on its present
site,” The amendment was lost by
12 votes to 17 Resolved (by 17 votes to 0)
that: The Council extends its wholehearted
congratulations to Marshall of Cambridge for its outstanding contribution to
the city, and most recently for persuading the European Office of ExecuJet to
relocate from Switzerland to Cambridge, at a time when other firms are leaving
the UK. The Council is committed
to supporting the continued success of employers in the Cambridge area and
notes and welcomes Marshall’s longstanding commitment to retaining its
operating bases here, thus helping to protect over 2000 direct jobs plus an
estimated 4000 further local jobs that currently service this great Cambridge
company. It further welcomes Marshall’s apprenticeship programme and the
company’s strong contribution both to the community and to the wider interests
of the Cambridge economy. The Council is committed to supporting
growth in the Cambridge economy, and notes that the combined South
Cambridgeshire and Cambridge jobs have grown from 157,200 in 2000 to 180,300 in
2011 and that those in Cambridge itself have grown from 91,600 to 97,400 in the
same period. The Council
further recognises the Centre for Cities report showing how well Cambridge has
fared in the downturn compared to 64 other UK cities and how well it is placed
for economic growth. The Council further welcomes measures to improve employment
opportunities in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire, particularly for young
people. These include our partnership’s new Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire
grant fund, the Council’s Economic Inclusion grants and Cambridge Regional
College’s ‘100 Apprentice’ campaign. |
||||||||||||||||
Councillor McGovern This Council: - welcomes news that there will be no programme of post office closures under the Coalition Government. - recognises that the Post Office is more than a commercial entity and serves a distinct social purpose. - notes that the Coalition Government will support greater involvement of local authorities in planning and delivering local post office provision. - asks officers to investigate opening post office branches in locations where Cambridge residents access council services Minutes: Councillor McGovern proposed and Councillor Reid seconded the following motion: “This Council: -
welcomes news that there
will be no programme of post office closures under the Coalition Government. -
recognises that the Post
Office is more than a commercial entity and serves a distinct social purpose. -
notes that the Coalition
Government will support greater involvement of local authorities in planning
and delivering local post office provision. - asks officers to investigate opening post office branches in locations where Cambridge residents access council services” Councillor Blencowe proposed and Councillor Price seconded
the following amendment: Add an additional bullet point that reads as follows between original bullet point 3 and 4: - “Notes that the Liberal Democrats running the City Council have had 12 years in which to investigate opening post office branches in locations where Cambridge residents access council services and only now Add new bullet point at the end - Does not welcome the fact that the coalition government is allowing the privatisation of Royal Mail.” The amendment was lost by 13 votes to 19 Resolved (by 19 votes to 0) that: This Council: -
welcomes news that there will
be no programme of post office closures under the Coalition Government. -
recognises that the Post
Office is more than a commercial entity and serves a distinct social purpose. -
notes that the Coalition
Government will support greater involvement of local authorities in planning
and delivering local post office provision. - asks officers to investigate opening post office branches in locations where Cambridge residents access council services. |
||||||||||||||||
No discussion will take place on this
item. Members will be asked to note the written questions and answers document as
circulated around the Chamber.
Minutes: Members noted the written questions and answers circulated around the Chamber. |