Agenda and minutes

Under paragraph 4.2.1 of the Council Procedure Rules, the Chair used her discretion to alter the order of the agenda items. However, for ease of the reader, these minutes will follow the order of the agenda.

 

Apologies were received from Councillor Dryden and County Councillors Jones and Taylor.

 

Name	Item	Interest
Councillor Avery	18/8/SAC	Personal – left the room for the debate and vote after making a brief statement in support of the proposal. He had given personal/informal support to the Bridge Group on implementation issues at a stage when everyone believed all necessary decisions had been made.

 

The Committee noted a correction to the minutes as tabled and published to the website. The minutes were then agreed and signed as a correct record.

The Committee noted the progress with matters detailed in the action sheet from the meeting of the 2nd October 2017.

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

 

1.   Councillor Ashton on behalf of a resident of Queen Edith’s Ward. What action can be taken regarding continuing verge damage done by parked cars?

Councillor Pippas supported action on this matter.

John Richards, Project Manager, outlined the legal position regarding enforcement action.

A.  City bye laws were in place in some locations but had proven difficult for the Council to enforce effectively.

B.  Road Traffic Regulation Orders were another possibility; whereby enforcement would be undertaken by the County Council Civil Enforcement team.

The Chair requested a briefing note on possible options for enforcement.

Action: John Richards

 

1.   Sam Davies

Building contractors working on Hills Road had caused considerable damage. Building consent had required them to be considerate contractors.

Nick Kester: Acting Enforcement Team Manager undertook to pass on the information but suggested that follow up action was limited.

Action: Nick Kester

 

The Officers and Members made the following comments in response to the above:

 

Nick Kester: Acting Enforcement Team Manager.

If a vehicle is parked on a grass verge the enforcement team would write to the registered keeper. However, it was often difficult to establish who was driving a vehicle at the time. Members of the public can report vehicles but are often reluctant to pursue the matter as a formal statement and an appearance in court as a witness might also be needed.

 

Councillor McPherson suggested that photographic evidence should be enough to trigger an official letter if not a prosecution.

 

Councillor Pippas stated that some problems occur when dropped kerbs fail to align with driveways.

 

Councillor Ashton suggested that working with contractors to encourage them to reinstate verges on completion of building works had achieved results.

 

2.   Chris Rand

Installation of resident parking in the Morley Road area had produced a knock on effect in the neighbouring areas. Can lessons learnt here be applied to future scheme?

The Committee agreed that this was a County Council issue and outside the remit of this meeting. County Councillor present noted the comment.

 

3.   Kerry Galloway

A new ramped access to the Cambridge Assessment Centre will bring cyclists into conflict with Trumpington Road (access to station) cycle path.

Councillor Avery agreed that the cycle path was not wide enough. Overhanging trees presented an additional hazard.

Councillor Adey undertook to visit the site.

Action Councillor Adey

 

4.   Resident on behalf of Rev Karin Voth Harman of St Andrew's

Is there any update on the provision of new schools for the growth areas?

Councillor Ashton reported that current provision was adequate and the proposed new school would not be needed for some years. The allocated land would be held until such time as there was a demonstrated need. No decisions had been made regarding who would be managing the school.

 

5.   Question on behalf of residents

Councillor Page-Croft stated that volunteers working in Nightingale Recreation Ground had reported the footpaths as being in a poor condition. Hey were becoming unsafe and needed resurfacing.

Joel Carré: Head of Environmental Services undertook to investigate this matter.

Action: Joel Carré

 

The Committee received a report from the Acting Enforcement Team Manager.

 

The report 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. It also included key officer contacts for the reporting of waste and refuse and public realm issues.

 

Acting Enforcement Team Manager responded to members of the public and Councillors as follows:

 

1.   Hilary Lawson

Brooklands Avenue was suffering from a high level of litter. There was no bin near the bus stop and litter was being stuffed into hedges or over fences.

A.  Officers would look into installing a bin at the bus stop.

Action Nick Kester

 

2.   Sam Davies

Questioned the details in the Officer’s report and suggested that the location of the needle find was not in the South Area.

A.  Officers would investigate the location of the needle find.

Action Nick Kester

 

3.   Pamela Douglas

Thanked the team for their work in dealing with a litter and anti-social behaviour in her area.

A.          Aware of the issues and pleased that some success had been achieved. Stated that it was difficult to deal with bins left on the street as this was a Civic Offence. Placing stickers on offending bins had achieved good results.

 

4.   Kerry Galloway

Litter in Trumpington was on the increase in line with the population growth in the area.

A.          It was suggested that members of the public informed their local councillor of any issues and these would then be passed on to the relevant department for action.

 

The Committee discussed the following issues:

 

Councillor Pippas

Are Estate Agents permitted to install for sale boards on the footpaths?

A. Yes, if they were directing the public to new developments.

 

Councillor Pippas

Can additional litter bins be installed at Atkins Corner?

A. Officers would investigate this matter.

Action Nick Kester

 

Councillor McPherson

Why can’t under 18 year olds be issues with a fixed penalty notice for litter dropping?

A. Council policy does not allow Enforcement Officers to do this.

 

Councillor O’Connell thanked the Officer for the detailed report. She questioned the number of litter bins that South Area had available following the removal of a bin from Shelford Road and requested a dog waste bin for the area around Byron’s Pool.

 

Members of the public were invited to submit their suggestions for the location of litter and dog waste bins.

 

The Committee

Resolved unanimously to approve the following priorities for action.

 

Number	Priority details
1	Early morning, daytime and weekend patrols for dog fouling on Cherry Hinton Recreation Ground, Trumpington Recreation Ground and Cherry Hinton Hall.
2	Enforcement targeted approach to areas where Addenbrookes site joins residential areas such as Hills Road and Red Cross Lane and to work with Addenbrookes to work towards the bus station area being cleaned up.
3	Enforcement to work with the County Council, against utilities and companies that damage the verge on Mowbray and Fendon Road.
4	Enforcement joint working and patrols to deal with littering from students of Long Road Sixth Form in the areas of Long Road and Sedley Taylor Road.
5	Enforcement patrols to deal with litter, abandoned vehicles and fly tipping in and around Teversham Drift
6	Enforcement action to deal with bins left on pavements in Anstey Way.
7	Enforcement patrols to tackle fly tipping at the Anstey Way recycling centre

 

 

The Committee received a report from the Senior Engineer and Project Leader regarding the Environmental Improvement Programme (EIP) for South area. The report outlined progress of existing schemes and new suggested schemes for 2017/18.

 

The officer was pleased to report that there was sufficient funding available within South area to cover all of the potential new EIP Schemes. This was aided by the fact that projects S1, S2 and S3 as listed in the report were under consideration by the County Council as Local Highways Improvements and therefore did not require any allocation of EIP funds.

 

The following questions were asked regarding the report:

 

1.   Sam Davies

Spending money on verge repairs is not a good use of limited funding unless the verges could be protected after the repair.

The officer agreed that this was a valid point. Most recent work to improve verges had achieved limited results. Newer, and more robust, products were likely to be needed in locations experiencing regular and heavy parking. Traffic Regulation Orders had proven successful in some locations. In addition, pressures on parking spaces resulted in local residents having very mixed views on the value of highway verges.

 

2.   Councillor Crawford

Asked for more information regarding EIP Scheme S3.

Local Highway Improvement funding had been requested from the County Council for this scheme. If successful, it is anticipated that the City Council would need to meet the financial contribution required through the Minor Highways Improvement budget, to compliment County Council funding.

 

3.   Councillor McPherson

Granta Park staff would benefit from the provision of additional cycle parking as requested in (S1), could they be approach to request they part fund the project?

Officers agreed this was a good idea and would suggest it to the County Council.

Action John Richards

 

The Committee suggested that key dates in the diary needed to be considered when arranging for works to be undertaken. The Hills Road War Memorial needed to be looking its best for the Centenary events.

 

The Committee

Resolved (unanimously) to:

     i.        Note progress, and delays where experienced, in delivering the identified programme of projects since 2011-12

    ii.        Support the allocation of £4,500 in 2017-18 towards the provision of 26 summer hanging baskets along Cherry Hinton High Street

   iii.        Note the allocation of remaining EIP funding available in 2017-18 to further project applications

  iv.        Approve the EIP schemes S4 to S6 set out in Appendix A of the Officer’s report for implementation, subject to them being viable, obtaining consents as necessary, positive consultation and final approval by Capital Programme Board and Ward Councillors where required.

   v.        Support a further application invitation round early in 2018.

 

The Committee received a report from John Richards, Senior Engineer and James Ogle, Project Officer regarding the Footbridge across Hobson’s Brook. This report outlined recommendations that required Committee determination in relation to the potential introduction of a pedestrian footbridge across Hobson’s Brook near Kingfisher Way. 

 

It outlined a range of benefits for the City Council in delivering the project rather than the grant applicant, Accordia Bridge Group. It then sought a decision from the Area Committee on whether to proceed with the project and support the additional funding required.

 

The Officers reminded the Committee that the planning consent had already been approved and the report was focussed on the decisions to be made in relation to the use of s106 funding.

 

A number of written comments both in support (6) and objection (1) to the proposal had been received prior to the Committee. 

 

The Committee noted a slight amendment to recommendation 2.2 as follows (additional wording in bold):

 

Support the prioritisation of up to an additional £25,000 s106 funding contribution needed to deliver the project (see 4.4 and 5.1).

      

Officers responded to the following questions and comments regarding the report:

 

1.   Kerry Galloway

Had protection of wildlife on the Accordia side of the

Brook been considered?

Officers considered the improved through route and better access to Empty common would be an overall improvement with little impact on wildlife.

 

2.   Ian Cray

The City Ecologist had made no comment on this matter and better access should encourage increased walking.

 

3.   Professor Raymond Goldstein

                     i.        Dr Pesci and I have been leading the opposition to this bridge for the past seven years and we ask you to reject this proposal and stop the bridge project. City Council planners appear to not understand the basic legal issues surrounding the land on which the bridge would sit, from the validity of the Trinity Covenant which forbids any bridges in the area to the issue of who even owns the land itself.

                   ii.        Errors and omissions in the original planning applications were offences punishable by fines of up to £5,000 this was ignored by planners.

                  iii.        The Hobson’s Brook Corridor 10 year vision that was sent out for consultation, details the unique ecological character of the corridor, calling it a resource of national importance and uniqueness, particularly for the wildlife found there.

                  iv.        One of the original stated reasons for the bridge was to give greater access to the area by Accordia residents. Chief among those areas was Clare Wood. Clare Wood is no longer accessible. Clare College was forced to close off the wood to protect itself from liability arising explicitly from the bridge.

                   v.        Raised concerns about the use of the Hobsons Brook Corridor by people walking their dogs, which can despoil the area and drive away wildlife. There are nearly 1000 residents in Accordia, and a very large number of them have dogs.

                  vi.        A member of the Hobson’s Conduit Trust has stated that he was very concerned about this bridge and was in complete sympathy with my objections. 

                vii.        The draft 10 year vision document discusses the fact that with climate change there will be more frequent flooding of the very area that the bridge would sit, and yet in order to allow the bridge to fit in the extremely tight area now envisaged, the city planners waived national rules about the clearance under such bridges to allow it to fit.

              viii.        A fourth point about ecology is the fact, pointed out in objections raised by BENERA residents, that there is already a serious problem with parking congestion on their side of the brook, and the likelihood is that the bridge would simply become a thoroughfare for people parking in the BENERA area. Cambridge Assessment Centre will soon open, with something like 3,000 employees and fewer than 200 parking spaces.

                 ix.        The bridge was designed to be accessible to wheelchairs, but the path on the other side often floods in the winter and is likely to do so more in the future due to climate change (as stated in the consultation document).

                   x.        Regarding the need to move the bridge location in light of Clare’s refusal to grant permission page 13, Q8, Appendix C document within the report says, “This can be overcome by moving the bridge a few metres north onto land wholly owned by City Council.” This was a false statement. The City and the University of Cambridge are joint leaseholders of the land under a deed dating to 1610.

                 xi.        The author of the report, told me that there were certain legal issues and “risks” that the City Council was investigating regarding the bridge. What are the legal issues that are still outstanding? What risks were being considered?

                xii.        A simple study using Google maps would show that the presence of the bridge in its proposed location would save perhaps 80 meters of walking for the typical person traversing from the BENERA area up to Brooklands Avenue at the edge of Accordia. So, does the council plan to spend more than £50,000 of public money and risk the fragile ecology of the corridor simply to save less than one minute’s walking time?

 

Project Officer stated that the report was accurate and the risks associated with the project low. The Council either owns the land to both sides of the proposed bridge site or in the case of the 6ft strip are joint leaseholders. Two legal agreements are required to enable build of the bridge to commence.

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

 

Councillor Moore: Planning applications could be granted regardless of who owned the land. Agreeing funding and planning would not necessarily ensure that the bridge would be build.

 

Councillor Adey: Welcomed the opportunity to hear public views and to discuss the ‘value for money’ of the project.

 

Councillor Ashton: Other well used paths support sensitive wildlife without any noticeable impact he cited the example of Snakey Path (pathway connecting Romsey to Cherry Hinton)

 

Councillor Pippas: The majority of residents would benefit from the proposal.

 

Officers confirmed that the decision on the current bridge proposals is not expected to have any impact on the Hobson’s Conduit Trust Vision Document and therefore is not relevant to the decision before the Committee. The decision before the Committee was the approval of additional funding. The spend to-date had been around £5,500 on legal fees.

 

The Committee

Resolved (unanimously) to:

 

     i.        Note and support the delivery arrangements now proposed as outlined in the report.

 

    ii.        Support the prioritisation of up to an additional £25,000 s106 funding contribution needed to deliver the project

 

   iii.        Note that progress was also subject to obtaining necessary consents.

Proposed South Area Committee Dates for the municipal year 2018-19:

 

4^th June 2018

10^th September 2018

14^th January 2019

8^th April 2019

 

Venues will be agreed later.

 

 

 

The following dates were agreed unanimously:

 

4^th June 2018

10^th September 2018

14^th January 2019

8^th April 2019

 

 

 

The Committee noted the Cumulative Impact Area Briefing Note