Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from County Councillor Whitebread.

Councillor Reid did not attend the planning section of this meeting.

Name	Item	Interest
Councillor Reid	12/3/WAC 3a	Personal and prejudicial. Councillor Reid was not present while this item was considered

The committee received an application for a residential development consisting of the erection of four detached houses.

 

Clive Haines addressed the committee and made the following points in objection to the application:

        i.            As a resident of number one Spens Avenue, his home is only 40 yards from the development.

      ii.            The proposal is out of proportion to the general area.

    iii.            The design is out of context.

   iv.            Other three storey applications had been rejected.

     v.            The original sale of the land included a covenant restricting the height and density of 1, 3 and 5 Spens Avenue.

   vi.            The design is bland and institutional.

 vii.            Requests for a footpath had been ignored.

 

The applicant’s agent, Mr Brown, addressed the committee in support of the application.

 

Members discussed the application and made the following points:

        i.            The existing covenant is not a material consideration for this application.

      ii.            The Local Plan had identified this as a suitable site.

    iii.            There is a demand for larger, high end properties.

   iv.            The design is acceptable.

     v.            The area had an intimate, village feel which may be lost. However, there are other three storey buildings within site of the development.

 

RESOLVED (by 7 votes to 1) to approve the application in accordance with the officer recommendation.

 

Reason for Approval

1. This development has been approved subject to conditions and the prior completion of a section 106 planning obligation (/a unilateral undertaking), because subject to those requirements it is considered to conform to the Development Plan as a whole, particularly the following policies:

East of England plan 2008: SS1, H1, ENV7, T1, T9, T14 and

WM6 Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003: P6/1 and P9/8 Cambridge Local Plan (2006): 3/1, 3/4, 3/7, 3/11, 3/12, 4/4, 4/7, 5/1, 8/2, 8/6, 8/10

 

2. The decision has been made having had regard to all other material planning considerations, none of which was considered to have been of such significance as to justify doing other than grant planning permission.

 

These reasons for approval can be a summary of the reasons for grant of planning permission only. For further details on the decision please see the officer report online at www.cambridge.gov.uk/planningpublicaccess or visit our Customer Service Centre, Mandela House, 4 Regent Street, Cambridge, CB2 1BY between 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday.

 

Unless prior agreement has been obtained from the Head of Planning, and the Chair and Spokesperson of this Committee to extend the period for completion of the Planning Obligation required in connection with this development, if the Obligation has not been completed by 5 March 2012 it is recommended that the application be refused for the following reason(s).

 

The proposed development does not make appropriate provision for open space/sports facilities, community development facilities, education and life-long learning facilities, waste facilities and monitoring in accordance with Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policies 3/7, 3/8, 3/12, 5/14 and 10/1 Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Structure Plan 2003 policies P6/1 and P9/8 and as detailed in the Planning Obligation Strategy 2010 and the Open Space Standards Guidance for Interpretation and Implementation 2010.

No declarations were made.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on the 3^rd November 2011.

The minutes of the meeting of the 3^rd November 2011 were agreed as a correct record. 

11/61/WAC – Publication of the minutes of the Neighbourhood Action Meetings. Councillor Bick had investigated this matter. The meetings conform with their terms of reference. They are not City Council meetings and are attended by a number of other agencies, some regularly and others one off attendance when relevant to the issues under discussion. The meetings focus on how to achieve goals set elsewhere, such as the Area Committees. There is little to be gained by publication of the minutes. This would also require considerable officer time to redact personal and confidential information. Progress is reported back to the area committees at regular intervals and additional reports can be requested when the need arises, such as the recent report on Punt Touts.

Refer to the ‘Information for the Public’ section for rules on speaking 

(Q1) Edward Cearns

Can the committee give an update on the progress of the planned improvements to the Market Square? Recent events and activities around the Market Square have had an adverse affect on the regular traders. Examples include, a craft fair held in the Guildhall on a cold winter day taking trade away for similar stalls on the open air Market Square and the Christmas Light switch on which encouraged noisy crowds rather than shoppers.

 

Members agreed that the traders should be encouraged and supported by the City Council. Communication with traders needed to be improved. It was suggested that Councillor McGovern, the Executive Councillor for Customer Services and Resources and Emma Thornton, the Head of Tourism and City Centre Management be invited to attend the next meeting of this committee in order to fully address the issues raised.

Action: Committee Manager

 

(Q2) Richard Taylor

The Cambridge News recently reported that Love Cambridge had met with the County Council to discuss cycle signage in the City. These decision should be made in open meetings where the public can contribute.

 

Councillor Reid responded. She agreed that these decisions should be made in an open arena. Signage is a County Council issue and officers from the County could be invited to this meeting to respond to the point raised. Councillor Bick suggested that the meeting with Love Cambridge had not been a decision making meeting, but rather an investigation of the  options and opinions. Councillor Smith will write to Brian Stinton to formally request that cycle signage be painted onto the road surface. This would need to be followed up with enforcement action.

Action: Councillor Smith

 

(Q3) Barry Higgs

The process of declaring an ‘area of interest’ in order to receive notifications of planning applications is not working. The Friends of Midsummer Common have not been informed of recent applications adjacent to Midsummer Common.

 

Councillor Reid expressed regret that the system did not appear to be working as it should. She undertook to investigate this.

Action: Councillor Reid

 

(Q4) John Lawton

Could the members give a progress update on the enforcement of parking restrictions on Midsummer Common?

 

Councillor Cantrill invited Alistair Wilson, the Green Spaces Manager, to respond to this question. The officer confirmed that a self-closing gate had now been installed and following initial problems, was now fully operational.

 

Members discussed the complicated legal position for taking further enforcement action. Parking on Midsummer Common has been an on-going problem for many years. The position regarding wheel clamping is still unclear.

 

In response to public questions, Councillor Cantrill stated that there had been a range of opinions on how best to resolve the problems. The gate is now generally regarded as a positive step towards a permanent solution. He stated that the Council had a duty of care to protect the ascetic appearance of the area. The gate is now fully operational and further enforcement action would follow. Councillor Smith stated that previous responses had not been robust enough and agreed to contact the Council’s legal department for a response on enforcement options, including the use of clamping.

Action: Councillor Smith

 

There was general agreement that progress had been made. However, Councillor Cantrill suggested a permanent solution could take some time to be fully realised.

 

Cambridge Half Marathon Display

Councillor Cantrill directed members of the public to the display at the rear of the room regarding the Cambridge Half Marathon. Adam Moffat, Director of One Step Beyond, was in attendance to answer any questions. This was expected to be a very popular event and 200 volunteers would be needed on the day (11^th March 2012). Anyone interested should contact Adam Moffat direct on 01427718888 or via www.onestepbeyond.org.uk.

The Neighbourhood Policing Sergeants Mike Barnshaw (Central Neighbourhood, covering Market Ward) and Jayne Drury (West Neighbourhood, covering Newnham and Castle) and Lynda Kilkelly, Safer Communities Manager, presented a report on crime and policing for the three wards and made recommendations for the forthcoming period.

City Central: Speeding Enforcement – 20 MPH limit

Sergeant Mike Barnshaw gave an update on the progress of this priority as per the report.

(Q1)Edward Cearns

Speeding violation in the City Centre continue to be problem. Buses, coaches and taxis appear to be the worst offenders. Can enforcement be addressed?

 

The County Council have raised the problem of buses with the Bus Partnerships.

 

Councillor Reid suggested that comparable cities in other parts of the Country had a more stringent policy with bus providers. The public want more enforcement action.

 

(Q2) Mr Bowen

Enforcement action has limited impact as Officers wear high visibility clothing that warns drivers of their presence.

 

Sergeant Barnshaw confirmed that Officers and Speedwatch volunteers were required to wear such clothing for Health and Safety reasons.

 

(Q3) Mr Lawton

Automatic Number Plate Recognition vehicles had been deployed in Maids Causeway and had been successful in stopping a number of speeding vehicles. However, this priority had received only 12 hours of Police time over a two-month period.

 

Members suggested that the 20 mph limit would take time to embed and the current approach at least raised awareness. Councillor Bick stated that enforcement was part of a package to change behaviour. Reporting speeding Taxi Drivers to the Licensing Department, giving their plate number, was suggested. Speeding buses should be reported to the bus companies.

 

Members raised the following issues:

              i.      Taxi drivers sometime assume speeding limits do no apply to them.

            ii.      A points system for Taxi Drivers is under consideration.

          iii.      There is widespread public support for the 20 PMH limit and enforcement must be improved.

         iv.      Requesting a higher time input for this priority was suggested. One day per month was suggested.

 

John Fuller, Police Community Engagement Manager, suggested a joint meeting, with representatives of the East Area Committee also invited, to agree the best way to achieve results with this objective.

Action: Safer Communities Manager

 

RESOLVED to:

 

Retain the priority with the addition of evening activity:

Speed enforcement activity to support the implementation of 20mph speed limit, including evening activity.

 

City Central: Alcohol and group related ASB in Grafton Centre area.

 

The Safer Communities Manager gave an update on the progress with this objective as per the report.

 

The following points were raised:

              i.      Problems in the area are not restricted to street life.

            ii.      A recent Street Surgery had been successful and the public welcomed information on how to report problems.

          iii.      Members had found the Street Surgery had been useful.

         iv.      If the police feel there is a need for a S30 order an evidenced based request for such an order should be presented to the City Council for consideration.

 

RESOLVED to:

 

Consider the Grafton Centre area as part of the wider problem currently under review.

 

City West: ASB associated with sex workers in Histon Road.

Sergeant Jayne Drury gave an update on the progress of this priority as per the report.

Members made the following comments:

              i.      Police action had been welcomed and the action taken had been successful.

            ii.      Residents understood that action alone would not resolve the problem. The street workers also needed other assistance.

          iii.      Discharging this a priority while continuing to monitor for any reoccurrence was discussed. Members agreed that the residents in the area would report any increase in problems in the future.

 

RESOLVED (by 9 votes to 1) to:

 

Discharge this as a priority.

Officers will continue to carry out patrols to maintain low levels of ASB in relation to the prostitution.

 

City West: Cycle Theft

 

Sergeant Jayne Drury gave an update on the progress of this priority as per the report.

 

Members made the following comments:

 

              i.      Cycle theft continues to be a big issue.

            ii.      Increasing secure cycle parking was seen as the long-term solution.

          iii.      Converting car parking bays to cycle parking could be an option.

 

(Q4) Richard Taylor

The police hold stolen cycles but do not record or advertise the serial numbers on line making it difficult for owners to recover their property.

 

The Police responded by confirming that they do endeavour to reunite owners with recovered cycles when possible. A large number of cycle thefts are not reported.

 

(Q5) Richard Henning

Cambridge is no longer a pleasant place for pedestrians due to the inconsiderate and illegal actions of cyclists. Only 46 fixed penalty notices had been issues since April of this year. The Police take little enforcement action against cyclists.

 

Councillor Smith suggested that this had been a priority in the past.

 

Sergeant Jayne Drury confirmed that freshers are all given talks on cycle safety talks. It was suggested that the problem is not confined to students.

 

Councillor Bick suggested this be added to the existing cycle theft priority. Councillor Kightley suggested action on this matter was needed in Nothampton Street and the Castle Ward as a whole.

 

RESOLVED to:

 

Retain the priority to reduce incidence of cycle theft across the area.

Add Antisocial Cycling as a priority.

Apply the above to both City West and City Central.

 

 

(Q6) Richard Taylor

Could Councillor Bick give an update on the position regarding Restorative Justice?

 

Councillor Bick responded and stated that he had requested a presentation from the Police on the subject at the December meeting of the Community Safety Partnership. This has occurred and had been attended by Mr Taylor. 

 

(Q7) Richard Taylor

Cambac had requested shop theft as a priority at the August meeting. Has this been considered?

 

It was agreed that there was little to be gained by adding this as a priority. However, Cambac were welcome to return to the Area Committee at a later date and to present their case.

 

SUMMARY OF AGREED PRIORITIES

 

              i.      City Central: Speed enforcement activity to support the implementation of 20mph speed limit, including evening activity.

            ii.      City Central: Alcohol and group related ASB in Grafton Centre area. Consider the Grafton Centre area as part of the wider problem currently under review.

          iii.      City West and Central: To address anti-social cycling and to reduce the incidence of cycle thefts across the area.