Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes
Venue: Wilkinson Room - St John the Evangelist Church Hills Road Cambridge CB2 8RN. View directions
Contact: James Goddard Committee Manager
No. | Item | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Welcome, Introduction and Apologies for Absence Minutes: Apologies were received from County
Councillors Ashwood and Crawford. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Declarations of Interest Members of the committee are asked to declare any interests in the items
on the agenda. In the case of any doubt, the advice of the Monitoring
Officer should
be sought before the meeting. Minutes: In relation to agenda items 10 and 11
(S106 Priority-Setting Round, and Community Centres Strategy), Councillors
Avery and O’Connell declared an interest as members of the Trumpington
Residents’ Association. Councillor Avery
additionally declared, in relation to agenda item 10, that he was a resident of
the Accordia estate, and Councillor O’Connell
declared, in relation to agenda item 12 (Area Committee Grants), that her
partner was a volunteer at the Citizens’ Advice Bureau (CAB). In relation to agenda item 12,
Councillor Dryden declared an interest as a member of the Friends of Cherry
Hinton Hall, and a volunteer with the Cherry Hinton Festival Society;
Councillor McPherson declared in interest as safety adviser for that festival. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 16 January 2017. Minutes: The minutes of the meeting held on 16 January 2017 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Matters and Actions Arising from the Minutes PDF 141 KB Committee Action Sheet from last meeting attached. Minutes:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Open Forum Refer to the ‘Information for the Public’ section for rules on speaking. Minutes: Antony Carpen requested that smart
traffic lights be installed, at least for the rush hour, at the Budgen’s /
Perne Road / Mowbray Road roundabout, where congestion was causing air
pollution and delays to bus services; illegally-modified engines were also very
noisy. Councillor Taylor said that she would
be happy to take the matter up if she were elected, as the roundabout would be
in Queen Edith’s ward. Other members suggested that a linked
series of traffic lights at the Perne Road roundabouts would be required,
though there would still be queuing at the end of the series. The City Deal would need to look at this
larger question as part of its work on congestion in Cambridge. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Update on Transport Projects in the South Area PDF 251 KB Minutes: The Area Committee received a verbal
report from the County Council’s Cycling Projects Team Leader on various
transport projects in the South Area. 1)
Fulbourn Road a. a City Deal funded scheme b. detailed design was being finalised c. work was planned to start in September d. the scheme consisted of raised/hybrid cycle lanes on both
sides from the Robin Hood to ARM and a wide, shared use path from ARM to Yarrow
Road e. officers had recently met Cllrs Ashton and Dryden on site
to discuss f. contact officer Grant.Weller@cambridgeshire.gov.uk 2)
Queen Edith’s Way and Fendon Road roundabout a. a County Council S106 funded scheme b. County Council’s Environment and Economy Committee had
resolved on 10th November 2016 to approve:
i. the implementation of a Dutch style roundabout at Queen
Edith’s Way/Mowbray Road/Fendon Road junction; and
ii. further public engagement with residents and stakeholders
on improvements for walking and cycling in Queen Edith’s Way c. a detailed design for the roundabout was being developed d. workshops were planned for Queen Edith’s Way e. the matter would go back to the Economy & Environment
Committee once a design had been developed for Queen Edith’s Way itself f. contact officer Grant Weller The County Councillor for Queen Edith’s
welcomed the design work being carried out, and asked when the scheme would be
completed. The Cycling Projects Team
Leader said that this was the UK’s first Dutch-style roundabout, and it was
being developed with a Dutch consultancy firm.
It would be ideal if the Queen Edith’s Way scheme could be approved, so
that the roundabout and the road feeding into and out of it could be of the
same high standard. 3)
Trumpington Road outside the Botanic Gardens a. funded through Department for Transport (DfT) Cycle City
Ambition b. works were progressing well c. the local stakeholder group had met regularly throughout
the scheme d. upcoming tasks included relocating street lights,
completion of new floating bus stop, and the surfacing and installation of new
raised/hybrid cycle lane. e. contact officer Stuart.Rushby@cambridgeshire.gov.uk One of the Councillors for Trumpington
congratulated all responsible for this scheme, which had not suffered from the
same difficulties and lack of information as the Hills Road scheme. He asked why there seemed currently to be a
pause in the work. The Team Leader said that it had been
possible to keep traffic flowing by removing parking. He thanked the Botanic Gardens for their help
and understanding throughout the work, and for accommodating stakeholder meetings. It would not be possible to lay the final
surface and finish the scheme until work to move street lights had been
completed. 4)
Robin Hood junction a. an S106 funded scheme b. being managed by the Traffic Signals Team c. discussions and design deliberations ongoing around the
exit from Cherry Hinton High Street to ascertain whether this would be a two-lane or a one-lane exit. Cycle lanes
and pedestrian facilities to be incorporated, but would require additional land d.
Contact officer Richard.Ling@cambridgeshire.gov.uk One of the Cherry Hinton Councillors
said that he had thought that agreement had already been reached on the
junction, following a site visit in 2016.
The Cycling Projects Team Leader replied that he believed this had been
for a single-lane exit with cycle and pedestrian crossing, which had given rise
to concern at the possible impact on bus journey times. The Traffic Signals team were talking to the
City Open Spaces team to see whether a strip of land could be obtained on the
corner. The member pointed out that this
land was on a green where trees had already been planted; he had thought the
problem could be resolved without the loss of valuable green space. The Team Leader referred members to the link
officer for further information. 5)
Two-way cycling in one-way streets a. scheme was funded through DfT Cycle City Ambition and
affected Trumpington b. Cambridge City Joint Area Committee (CJAC) on 24th
January 2017 had resolved:
i. to support the advertising of Traffic Regulation Orders
(TROs) in order to allow two-way cycling on the following streets: - Coronation
Street (west of junction with Panton Street) - Norwich
Street - Union
Road - Brookside
ii. to agree not to progress any changes to the following
streets: - Panton
Street - St
Eligius Street c. the next step would be to advertise the TROs and take any
objections back to CJAC d. contact officer Clare.Rankin@cambridgeshire.gov.uk 6)
Hills Road/Addenbrooke's a. a City Deal funded scheme b. work had started in January; four-way lights were
currently in place c. reply sent to Chair’s letter following last SAC,
acknowledging that the County Council should have told Cherry Hinton and
Trumpington Councillors about the road closure in advance; Queen Edith’s
Councillors had been informed six days before the SAC d. proposal for next stage of traffic management was being
finalised, with the objective of developing a solution that minimised impacts
on traffic and residents
i. duration would be less than five months, starting in
early June
ii. engagement had been taking place with bus operators, the
ambulance service, and other stakeholders, including a stakeholder group which
had met recently and would continue to meet through the works
iii. all SAC Councillors would be contacted shortly, once the
plans had been finalised e. contact officer Grant Weller Members drew attention to problems
which had been experiences with the reliability of the lights on this
scheme. The Cycling Projects Team Leader
said that, because the lights were radio controlled, the cause was believed to
be connected with Addenbrooke's. The
problem was occurring in the evenings, and a hard-wired solution was being
sought. Members welcomed the reduction of time
to complete the work, and sought assurance that it would not last 24/7, and
would not affect both directions at once.
The Team Leader said that a solution was being sought in consultation
with the traffic signals team and the bus companies, and would be announced
once plans had been finalised. Wendy Blythe said that the planting at
bus stops on Hills Road had been very well received, and asked whether
something similar might be possible on Trumpington Road. The Team Leader said that contact had been
made with the guerrilla groundsman who had planted up some of the area near the
Botanic Gardens with a view to developing green ends to the bus stops. 7)
Cherry Hinton Road a. an S106 funded scheme b. seeking to improve the length from Hills Road to Perne
Road for walking and cycling. There was some funding for the Perne Road/Cherry
Hinton Road roundabout c. initial surveys of traffic and parking had been
undertaken d. stakeholder workshops would be taking place e. public consultation was planned for September f. contact officer Stuart Rushby. 8)
Greenways a. City Deal funded, though also potential for S106 funding b. 12 new or improved direct, attractive routes linking
South Cambridgeshire to the city, to encourage more people to commute by bike c. four of the routes run through South Area d. funding has been allocated initially to develop the
schemes e. ‘Planning for Real’ events were being planned f. currently prioritising which routes to take forward first g. contact officer Simon.Manville@cambridgeshire.gov.uk h. see plan attached as Appendix A for details In reply to comments on the scheme,
members noted that parking had been lost by putting the building compound on
the road rather than on green space.
There was an approved scheme for the west side of Trumpington Road; the
widening would be into the road, not the common, and there was further scope to
look again at cycling improvements. One
member drew attention to the difficulty experienced by pedestrians in dodging
cyclists on pavements; anything that could be done to improve this would be
much appreciated. The Chair thanked the Cycling Projects
Team Leader for attending the meeting and for his excellent reporting. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Addenbrooke's Station Minutes: The Chair advised that there was no
further update on plans for a railway station at Addenbrooke's Hospital beyond
what had been reported at the last Area Committee. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Oral Report - PCC Jason Ablewhite Oral Report from Jason Ablewhite, the Police and Crime Commissioner. Minutes: Andy Coles, the Deputy Police and Crime
Commissioner (PCC), introduced himself and his work. He was accompanied by
Charles Kitchin, Director of Public Engagement and Communication, and apologised
that Jason Ablewhite, the PCC, had been called away at short notice and so was
unable to attend the meeting. The Deputy PCC said that he had been
appointed Deputy PCC in July 2016. He
was himself a Peterborough City Councillor, and had been a police officer for
30 years, working in a variety of roles, from core policing to highly
specialised areas. He explained that the Police and Crime Commissioner was required to hold
the Chief Constable to account; the PCC was able to take locally-raised issues
to the Chief Constable at a more strategic level, and did not get involved in
local police matters. The PCC was
responsible for hiring and – if necessary – dismissing the Chief Constable, and
for preparing the Police and Crime Plan, which was renewed each year. In renewing the Police and
Crime Plan, the PCC was looking at four fundamental themes: a. victims and witnesses: Cambridgeshire and
Peterborough was one of the few areas where the Police, rather than volunteers,
ran the victims and witnesses service, which meant that it could be provided
throughout the process, including court proceedings. The service would take an
allegation without directing that it must be reported as an offence b.
offenders: the offenders’
hub aimed to keep people out of prison and look at restorative justice, so
encouraging offenders actively to apologise and try to make good c.
communities: Charles Kitchin was the communities lead d. transformation: like many public services, the
Police were trying to reform and become more effective on reduced funding. The force was collaborating with neighbouring
forces on back office and specialised services, aiming to increase resources to
deal with serious crime. The intention
was to maintain the number of officers and PCSOs on frontline duty. The estate was also being looked at; it was
not necessary to have huge central premises, but good buildings were required, with equipment, detention cells
fit for purpose, and adequate public access.
The Police were also collaborating with other emergency services across
the county, for example, sharing accommodation with the Fire Service in Ely.
The Deputy PCC went on to say that the
Police and Crime Survey had shown that people were concerned about burglary,
road safety and the low level disruption caused by anti-social behaviour
(ASB). Although people liked to see a
police officer on the streets, this was not an effective use of resources, as
victims and offenders were not to be found there. Discussing the Deputy PCC’s report,
members a.
commented that magistrates only sent people
to prison as a last resort, usually because other options had failed b. suggested that people needed to see familiar police faces
on the street so that they would feel confident about supplying information on
local lawbreaking to officers; reducing the police network would potentially
reduce intelligence network. The Deputy
PCC agreed with the need to have officers to gather intelligence, but said that
it was more effective to have them in areas where there were problems; work was
being done to see how to deploy people
where they would be more visible c. stressed the importance of not cutting behind-the-scenes
staff who contributed to prevention work d. drew attention to the problems of homeless people being
disturbed by Police during the night, meaning that they were too tired to
access the services that would help them the next day. It was important that all services worked
together to help people break the poverty cycle. The Deputy PCC reported that
Peterborough had established a
Prevention and Enforcement Service, which combined all the local prevention
services with the Police; people welcomed them working together visibly in a
single service e. expressed disappointment on behalf of residents at the
lack of enforcement of the 20mph speed limit.
The Deputy PCC said that it was difficult to seek enforcement on a
four-lane road that people had driven down for many years at 30 or 40mph; a physical
solution was needed, with roads redesigned.
If the Police were to devote more resources to enforcing the 20mph
limit, they would have to reduce some other aspect of their work. Wendy Blythe (Chair of the Federation of
Cambridge Residents’ Associations) commented that the residents’ associations
had various ideas for deploying Scandinavian-style solutions, without road
signs, but Mr Coles said that this would not be appropriate in all areas. Antony Carpen submitted a question to
the Police and Crime Commissioner: Please
investigate and report back: ·
Costs of equipping officers with sound
measuring equipment ·
Feasibility of public using social media to
report cars with illegally modified engines. The Director of Public Engagement and Communication undertook to look into the matter. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SAC Policing & Safer Neighbourhoods PDF 161 KB Minutes: The Committee received a report
regarding the policing and safer neighbourhoods trends from Maureen Tsentides, lead officer for the CB1
development in the Safer
Communities Team, on behalf of Lynda Kilkelly, Safer Communities Manager, and
from Nick Skipworth, Safer Neighbourhoods Inspector and Police Sargeant Ian
Wood. The report outlined actions taken
since the Committee’s meeting on 2 October 2016, identified on-going and
emerging crime and disorder issues, and provided recommendations for future
priorities and activity. The report
listed previous priorities and the actions taken in response: ·
Combatting ASB in the CB1/Brookgate
development; ·
Promotion of road safety with specific
reference to prioritising schools parking; and ·
Drug dealing/use in the south of the city. Sargeant Wood explained that the role
of PCSOs was to be highly visible gatherers of community intelligence. The aim was to map issues and to do anything
possible to persuade individuals to reconsider their behaviour and lifestyle
choices. He drew attention to the
Community Speedwatch scheme, and invited anybody interested in signing up to
the scheme to let his team know. Inspector Skipworth asked the Area
Committee to choose three policing priorities from the six proposed in the
report and outlined the background to each of the suggested priorities. He extended an invitation to Councillors to
attend the weekly meetings at which Police discussed their priorities; any
Councillor wishing to attend should contact him. In discussion, members a.
welcomed the re-inclusion of Cambridge
Leisure Park and the Cambridge Lakes.
Inspector Skipworth confirmed that all the areas of policing listed
would still be policed; what was being offered was additional work, for example
putting highly visible patrols into areas affected by burglary, but this would
be at the expense of some other area of work b. noted that additional work proposed to combat drug
dealing would involve contacting directly individuals whose premises were
believed to have been taken over for drug dealing against their will c.
expressed concern about possible unintended
consequences of work to reduce sexual exploitation, and reported having spoken
at national level to people who had been told that they had been safeguarded,
but had then found that they were unable to follow their safer working
practices. Inspector Skipworth said that
Operation Mantis across Cambridgeshire and Peterborough was looking at sex
workers behind closed doors; there was an online community offering sex for
sale to a large number of mainly men, and involving a large number of young
non-English-speaking women. For the
Police it was a matter of safeguarding; they gave out packs with rape crisis
cards and condoms. In the South Area,
the additional work proposed would involve tracking down and educating
landlords. Antony Carpen suggested asking 16 to
19-year-olds what their priorities would be, given that there were two large
further education colleges in the area.
Inspector Skipworth replied that they did actively engage with young
people around policing issues, and would welcome this input. The Area Committee went on to consider
its choice of priorities. Each member
voted for their preferred three schemes; those finding most support were
combatting drug dealing and burglary, with youth ASB, road safety and sexual
exploitation attracting an equality of votes.
The Chair exercised his casting vote and selected sexual exploitation as
the third priority. It was resolved (unanimously?) to nominate the following three priorities
for focus over the coming months: 1)
Combatting ‘county lines’ drug dealing 2)
Burglary (in response to the recent crime
spike) 3)
Sexual exploitation (specifically of women
coerced or controlled as sex workers). |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2016/17 S106 Priority-Setting Round SAC PDF 428 KB Report to follow Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee received a report from the Urban Growth Project Manager
setting out thirteen proposals for making use of devolved Section 106
contributions to improve open spaces and play areas in the South Area. The report set out the background to the proposals,
described recent S106-funded projects completed in the area, and asked the SAC
to select which of the eligible project proposals to prioritise for each of the
three SAC wards from the S106 funding available. Sam Davies, Chair of Queen Edith’s Community Forum, pointed out that the
largest project proposals for Trumpington ward were
for Mill Park at CB1, part of the Brookgate
development. She posed three questions
to Councillors: a)
was it reasonable
for Brookgate to assert that the use of this space in
this location by this range of people could not have been envisaged from the
outset b)
was it reasonable
for Brookgate to expect around 1,000 young people
visiting the city, often on a temporary basis, to walk nearly a mile to
Coleridge recreation ground c)
was it reasonable
to use funds levied to mitigate the impact of new development to offset
problems which some said had been designed into the development from the start
by a developer who was making a substantial profit from the development. She said that if the use of the space and the need for recreational
facilities should reasonably have been envisaged, and the problems which Brookgate wished to see addressed were of its own making,
then in each case, there were no grounds for paying S106 money to Brookgate, and the funding should be spent instead on other
deserving projects around Trumpington. Andrew Roberts, speaking for Trumpington
Residents’ Association, drew attention to two of the proposals submitted by the
association, the Trumpington notice boards (proposal
K in report table 2) and trim trail and outdoor fitness equipment (proposal
L). The notice boards had not been
recommended to proceed at present, and it had been suggested that the trim trail
could be funded from the available, devolved ‘informal open space’ S106
contributions. The Association was grateful
for the support for the proposals so far, and hoped that it would be possible
to realise them in due course. Antony Carpen asked to put on record his
strong opposition to any application by Brookgate for
S106 funding; the application was an insult to the taxpayer, who was being
asked for an additional £150k. Crime had
been designed in to the development, and the community was being expected to
deal with the problems. Members noted that S106 funding was money paid by developers to mitigate
the impact of developments, not taxpayers’ money as such, though the same
careful stewardship was needed for this as for any other funding; spending S106
funding on one project meant that it was not available for spending on another
eligible project. In discussion of the proposals for Trumpington,
members made various comments a)
Expressing strong
agreement with the speakers’ sentiments.
Some considered that Brookgate was failing to
do what should have been done at the outset of the project, and that the available,
devolved S106 funding would be better deployed in
other areas of the community b)
Pointing out that
something needed to be done to resolve anti-social behaviour issues which had
arisen at Mill Park, which had been built following the grant of planning
permission c)
Acknowledging that
the developer was undertaking some remedial works in Mill Park, and suggesting
that time should be allowed to assess the impact of those remedial works d)
Suggesting that it
would be better to concentrate on the merits of the other proposals for the
present, and disregard the CB1 Mill Park improvement works e)
Pointing out that the
available funding did not have to be spent immediately. The Area Committee noted that officers
continued to work hard to ensure that S106 expiry dates were observed, and that
S106 funding was used on time. Speaking
from memory, the Urban Growth Project Manager said that the last instalment of
S106 funding from the CB1 development had been received in 2013 and had to be
spent within ten years* f)
Saying that it was
important to select projects for prioritisation on sound grounds, and to bear
residents’ interests in mind. Turning to proposals for Cherry Hinton and Queen Edith’s, ward members
said that a)
the two proposals
for Cherry Hinton were of equal merit, and both were wanted; the seating on Fulbourn Road should be sited nearer to the road, rather
than too close to residents’ gardens b)
a great deal of work had gone into putting forward proposals for
improving the Gunhild Close play area, and these
should be prioritised. Councillor Taylor pointed out that she was not voting because, as a
County Councillor, she was not eligible to do so, not because she was not
interested in the matter. It was resolved unanimously
to select (from the list of eligible proposals set out in Table 3 of the
report) the following local projects for the use of devolved S106 funding
(subject to business case approval):
Members noted that the cost of the three Trumpington
proposals would be £110k, leaving £90k for future consideration; there was no
requirement to spend the money within the ward if using it over a ward boundary
would benefit both the ward from which the money came and other parts of the
area. Councillor McPherson said that, in the view of the Cherry Hinton
Councillors, the CB1 Mill Park improvements should not be funded from S106
monies, but be undertaken by the developers at their own expense, because the works
were proposed to remedy a design fault. * The Urban Growth Project Manager has subsequently
clarified that the ‘informal open space’ and ‘provision for children
and teenagers’ S106 contributions from the CB1 development do not expire until
May 2024. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SAC Building Stronger Communities – Community Centres Strategy PDF 728 KB Minutes: The Committee received a report from
the Community Funding & Development Manager providing an overview of the
recommendations in the draft Community Centres Strategy and of the consultation
plan. The public – and Councillors –
were invited to respond to the consultation, which would remain open until noon
on 5 May 2017. The Community Funding and Development
Manager thanked the Committee for enabling the drop-in session before the
meeting; it had provided a helpful opportunity for discussion with local
people. Members noted that the strategy
would be considered by the Community Services Scrutiny Committee at its meeting
on 29 June. It was resolved unanimously to: 1)
Note the emerging proposals in the draft
Community Centres Strategy detailed in section 3 of the report 2)
Note the consultation plan and opportunities
for people to feedback their comments on the draft strategy detailed in
section 5. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
SAC Area Committee Grants 2017-18 PDF 358 KB Minutes: The Committee received a report from the Community
Funding & Development Manager. The
report outlined applications received to date for 2017-18 funding for projects
in the South Area, made recommendations for awards, and provided information on
the eligibility and funding criteria. It was resolved unanimously: 1)
To note the grant applications received,
officer comments and proposed awards detailed in report Appendix 1, in line
with the Area Committee Community Grants criteria detailed in
paragraph 3.5 2)
To approve the awards detailed in report
Appendix 1 and summarised in the table at paragraph 2.1. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Environmental Reports - SAC PDF 19 KB Additional documents: Minutes: The Committee received a report from
the Operations Manager – Community Engagement and Enforcement. It outlined an
overview of City Council Refuse and Environment and Streets and Open Spaces
service activity relating to the geographical area served by the South Area
Committee. The report identified the reactive and proactive service actions
undertaken in the previous quarter, including the requested priority targets,
and reported back on the recommended issues and associated actions to be
targeted in the upcoming period. It also included key officer contacts for the
reporting of waste and refuse and public realm issues. In the absence of the Operations
Manager, members noted the briefing note supplied, in which she said that
officers had undertaken work on the priorities previously set, and in light of
the evidence found over the last three months had recommended that the
priorities stay the same to allow further work to be undertaken for the
upcoming period. In discussion, members a)
recalled that, at the last meeting, a problem had been identified
with bins being left out on pavements in Anstey Way, and suggested that,
despite the present report proposing to drop this as a priority, the Anstey way
issues should continue to be a priority b)
expressed the belief that,
although the leaving of bins on streets had been decriminalised, social housing
tenants were required not to leave bins on pavements, but in designated bin
areas. The Chair undertook to write to
the Operations Manager to ask her to check what the relevant rules for social
housing tenants were. Action:
Cllr Pippas It was resolved unanimously to adopt the following priorities:
|