Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Hipkin and Richards

No declarations of interest were made.

 

The minutes of the meeting held on 20^th June 2019 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

The Action sheet was noted and an updated copy can be viewed at the following link under ‘Committee Action Sheet’.

 

https://democracy.cambridge.gov.uk/documents/b12667/Post%20Meting%20Action%20Sheet%20update%2012th-Sep-2019%2019.00%20West%20Central%20Area%20Committee.pdf?T=9

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

 

1.   Members of the public and Councillors discussed their concerns regarding a proposed anti-terrorist vehicle barrier for King’s Parade as follows:

 

·        Little or no consultation with either public or Ward Councillors.

·        Previous reports from Cambridge City Joint Area Committee (CJAC) had reported that the project was paused.

·        Narrowing a busy cycle junction would result in unsafe cyclist behavior.

·        Had a chicane been considered?

·        Previous statements had suggested a trial barrier which, if successful, would be replaced with something more visually attractive at a later date.

·        Would any barriers take account of the needs of mobility scooters?

·        Why adopt an approach that would require the work to be completed twice?

·        Questioned how the decision process and funding had been agreed?

·        Could this Committee write to the Chair of CJAC and the Chief Executive of the City Council requesting a detailed update/report.

 

Action Point: Councillor Martinelli

 

2.   A member of the public asked how people should report pot holes in unadopted roads?

 

Unadopted Road were regarded as private roads and any problems with them should be reported to the landowner of building contractor.

 

3.   A member of the public asked what action was being undertakenb regarding cycle thefts from the station?

 

Councillor Porrer suggested that CCTV was not available to the public and was therefore not a deterrent. This could be raised with the Police at the next meeting.

Councillor Harrison suggested that there could be something in the original planning consent regarding CCTV that might be useful.

Councillor Cantrill suggested that there could be a link to the on-going Devonshire Quarter planning application.

 

Action Point: Councillor Martinelli to discuss the matter with Cambridge Cycling Campaign, Greater Anglia and the Police

The Committee received a presentation from Emma Thornton regarding Visit Cambridge and Beyond.

 

The presentation covered the following issues:

·        Updated on current tourism trends.

·        Outlined plans to work with stakeholders in future.

·        Updated on the plans to develop a clear strategy to manage tourism sustainably  for  the future.

·        Outlined the steps needed to develop a Destination Management Plan (DMP).

 

The Chief Executive of Visit Cambridge and Beyond (VCB) , responded to questions as follows:

 

1.   Councillor Nethsingha

The public found the timing of visitors frustrating. Most tour groups tended to visit at the same time of day causing congestion. Early morning and late afternoon / early evening were often quiet. Were other nearby local attractions on board with spreading visitor number more widely?

 

Newmarket had its own Destination Management Organisation (DMO) but was keen to work with  Visit Cambridge Ely also worked closely with  visit Cambridge East Cambs  has recently  developed  it’s own strategy.

 

2.   Councillor Bick

There appeared to be a lack of clarity around what is wanted and what the vehicle would be that was funded to deliver that.

 

VCB cannot deliver a strategic tourism function unless it is paid by city stakeholders to do so.  Visit Cambridge has developed a proposal for VCB to develop, maintain and support the delivery of a DMP for Cambridge. This would not be VCB’s plan but a plan shared, owned and delivered by the city collectively. VCB’s role would be to lead on its development and to co-ordinate its delivery.  The proposal requires a 4 year funding commitment from Cambridge City Council, South Cambs District Council, Cambridge University and Cambridge BID. Confirmation of this funding would be received by mid-September and is looking promising. The initial phase was expected to take around 6 to 9 months and will be focussed on  developing a better understanding of who are current visitors are and their needs and why the majority are not staying longer than a day. From this, a plan would be developed with local partners who would include evidence based interventions to encourage higher value visitors. The aim would be to manage visitors better and to better showcase what the Cambridge area has to offer to increase dwell time.

 

3.   Councillor Bick

Was a tourist tax a possibility?

 

Not currently but possibly in the future. Ideally this would be a national policy so that Cambridge is not isolated and perceived as unwelcoming.

 

4.   Councillor Matthews

What could be done to improve the evening tourist offer?

 

This is a difficult area, bridging the gap between the day time and evening economy. Cambridge BID had run some events such as the Outdoor Cinema, but feedback has been that these had not benefited local traders.

 

5.   Councillor Cantrill

How could Cambridge break into the Chinese tourist trade. The typical Chinese package tour visited Cambridge for just a few hours and added little to the local economy.

 

Work was on-going to develop this market better through working closely with the Cambridge China Centre. Affect and Chinese tour operators.

 

6.   Councillor Harrison

Could the University be encouraged to offer a purpose build visitor centre?

 

The University are a key partner with the DMP project and recognised that the current visitor offer was fragmented. Most visitors, and many locals, were not aware of the wide range of museums available for visitors.

 

Councillors thanked Emma for her interesting presentation.

The Committee received a report from the Enforcement Team Leader. The report provided an overview of the Council’s Streets and Open Spaces, Environmental Health and Shared Waste service activity in the West Central Committee area over the past six months. 

 

The report provided open data on service performance, so that City and County Councillors and their constituents are informed of what service activity is happening in their area; and had the opportunity to engage in and help to shape this activity, including identifying specific local service requests / issues.

 

The Enforcement Team Leader responded to questions as follows:

 

1.   Councillor Bick

Needle finds had increased across the area. Market Ward figures were almost double the previous half yearly figure. Why?

 

A single find, such as a large number of needles recovered from one property, would result is a spike in recorded finds.

 

2.   Councillor Chadwick

Where the report states that action had taken place, are there any details on what that action was and how satisfied the complainant was with the outcome?

 

The Environmental Health records were limited regarding the level of detail and how much it was appropriate to share in the report. The Officer undertook to investigate satisfaction levels if possible.

Action Point: Nick Kester

 

3.   Councillor Bick

Fitzroy Street suffers from high levels of litter by late afternoon and early evening. Was it possible for a second sweep of the area to be undertaken in the afternoon?

 

The area was cleaned mechanically in the early mornings. A second clean would need to be completed manually as the machinery could not access the area when street trader’s furniture was in place. The Officer undertook to look into this matter.

Action Point: Nick Kester

 

4.   Councillor Bick

More enforcement was needed to tackle A Boards.

 

A report regarding the policy on ‘A Boards’ when to Community Services Scrutiny Committee 18 months ago and it might be timely to review that policy. Action was taken and enforcement notices were served. The Enforcement team have the power to seize offending ‘A Boards’.

 

5.   Member of the Public

Would the Rangers assist someone whose cycle had been locked to another cycle, as an anchor point, without permission of the owner?

 

This was a service that the Rangers used provide subject to the Police checking the identity of the cycle owner. The Police are no longer able to do this so the service is no longer available.

 

6.   Councillor Harrison

Could a slightly more inclusive term the ‘street life’ be found for report referring to homeless people?

 

Noted.

 

7.   Councillor Harrison

What is the current position regarding unattended bedding and belonging left in the street?

 

The current position was to leave a three hour notice on the goods. After 3 hours the goods could be removed to storage. The Police would prefer immediate removal as such goods could present a security threat. A change to the three hour policy would require an Executive Councillor decision.

 

8.   Councillor Harrison

The public enjoyed the additional pavement space available when Stazioni Restaurant temporarily ceased trading. She urged members of this committee respond to the consultation on the pavement trading licence in order to permanently free up the space.