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
Link: Video promoting the meeting
No. | Item |
---|---|
Welcome, Introduction and Apologies for Absence Minutes: Apologies were received from Councillors Adey, Jones, Page-Croft and Taylor. |
|
Declarations of Interest Minutes: No interests were declared. |
|
Minutes: Councillor Thornburrow advised in relation to minute 18/24/SAC question
8 (iii) the number of inspections should be corrected to 1 in 10 rather than 1
in 30 therefore the minute should read. ‘There might be insufficient inspection
of properties before they were handed over from developer(s), possibly only 1
in 10’. The minutes of the meeting held on 4 June 2018 were approved as a
correct record and signed by the Chair. |
|
Matters and Actions Arising from the Minutes PDF 150 KB Minutes: Pedestrian and Cycling conflict around entrance to Cambridge Assessment
Centre Councillor Thornburrow advised she had attended a site visit on the 21
June with Sonia Hansen, plus three others from
the highways and cycling team. They also met with County Councillor Kavanagh. Three
items had been agreed by the County Council but had not yet been done: 1) Slow markings would be placed either side of the Cambridge assessment
and University press entrances to ask cyclists to respect these entrances and
to be aware they exist. 2) Look both way markings would also be placed on these exits to attempt
to make those coming out of these exits that they should check each way before
doing so. 3) Solid white line would run along the maintenance track with “Beware
of buses” every 100 metres to make all users aware that there is a live busway
running alongside them. One agreed item had been done to reduce the height of the timber fencing
either side of the rear access to Cambridge Assessment. Action: Councillor
Thornburrow to follow up. Clearer signage on Coldhams Lane Councillor Crawford had reported this issue to the Highways Team who
were investigating. Request to ARM to use an electric bus rather than diesel bus Councillor McPherson confirmed that the Committee Manager had drafted a
letter but he needed to sign and send it. Action: Cllr
McPherson to sign and send letter to ARM. Tree branches near Robin Hood pub on Cherry Hinton Road Councillor Crawford confirmed County Officers
will look into this when the nesting season was over . Councillor Thornburrow to help publicise SAC
meetings by re-tweeting messages. Councillor Thornburrow confirmed that a promotional video had been produced and published. She would continue to develop improvements to publicise SAC meetings. |
|
Policing and Safer Neighbourhoods PDF 570 KB Start time 19:15 Minutes: The Committee
received a written report from the Maureen Tsentides, from the Safer
Communities Team. Sgt Jim Stevenson gave a verbal outline regarding policing
and safer neighbourhood work trends. The report
outlined actions taken since the last reporting period. The current emerging
issues/neighbourhood trends for each ward were also highlighted (see report for
full details). Previous priorities and engagement activity noted in the report
were:
i.
ASB on
Guided Bus Way.
ii.
Street
begging – Hills Road.
iii.
Mill
Park – Open Space.
iv.
Cherry
Hinton Lakes – Trespass and dangerous behaviour in hot weather. The Committee discussed the
following policing issues:
i.
The
lakes adjacent to Cherry Hinton suffered from intrusion of members of the
public who did not worry about litter or parking. Commented that Andersons were
under a lot of pressure and asked the Police if they could speak with
Peterhouse College to erect adequate fencing around the lakes adjacent to
Cherry Hinton.
ii.
Asked
the Police whether they thought lighting on the guided busway would help to
reduce crime. iii.
Asked for
an update on the Police’s ICT issues. iv.
Graffiti
removal.
v.
Robberies
occurring on the guided busway. vi.
The dispersal of street beggars in the city centre
seemed to have moved street beggars to Cherry Hinton. Asked if there was a
solution to break the begging cycle. vii.
Resident witnessed attack on A1301 and guided
busway. Members of the public asked a number of
questions, as set out below. 1. A member of the public commented that he
cycled the guided busway in the evening and that this had very low lighting. He
also cycled from Addenbrooks to Trumpington Park and Ride. He had an exit
strategy on Hills Road if he needed one and encountered any trouble but he had
no exit strategy if he was on the guided busway. The Police Representative commented that the guided busway was a big
piece of Cambridge infrastructure, it was no less safe than any other major
piece of travel infrastructure however appreciated that it could be improved. 2. Commented that it was unsettling to see
street begging outside the Tesco store in Cherry Hinton. The Police Representative commented that this was a new issue to South
Area because of the pro-active approach being taken in the city centre. The
City Council had secured Injunctions against some individuals for street
begging on Hills Road. Maureen Tsentides added that Injunctions could be
varied; a Judge would only consider an Injunction Application to vary an
Injunction Order if there was strong evidence in support of such an
application. There would need to be evidence to establish whether the
individuals begging outside Tesco’s were the same Individuals that were
involved in the injunctions on Hills Road. The City Council would need to work
with members of the public, businesses and the police to gain this evidence.
The Council’s Legal Department would advise what further evidence would be
required to pursue further action. 3. There had been thefts in the Queen Edith’s
ward in the last 6 -10 months. There was a new trend that criminals would steal
car keys to be able to steal cars. He had taken this issue up with the Police
and Crime Commissioner. The Police Representative confirmed that due to improvements in
technology, it was impossible to steal a car without the car key. Criminals
would either try and clone car keys or steal the car key. There was a Crime Prevention Officer who
could provide advice on how to improve personal safety. 4. A member of the public
referred to the issue of trespassing at the lakes at Cherry Hinton and the
impact on residents of St Bedes Crescent. He commented that people parked
inconsiderately which meant that he was unable to get in and out of his
driveway. A Housing Officer had advised him to build a barricade but the
barricade he built had been taken and used as a bridge for people to access to
the lakes at Cherry Hinton. He had telephoned the Police who had come round and
moved some vehicles. He had emailed his local councillors but nothing seemed to
happen. The Police Representative commented that the long term solution would be
to do something with the space. He appreciated that people parked
anti-socially, left litter and used
resident’s wheelie bins to build bridges to access the lakes at Cherry Hinton.
If a vehicle was parked to block a resident’s driveway then the police could
assist to move the vehicle.
Unfortunately trespassing was a civil matter. The long term solution was
not within police control. Action: Councillor McPherson to invite landowners
around the lakes adjacent to Cherry Hinton to come to the next South Area
Committee meeting so that members of the public can ask them questions. The
Police confirmed that they will assist where they are able to do so. The following priorities were unanimously agreed: i.
ASB on
Guided Bus Way and public areas in Trumpington village ii.
Street
begging – Cherry Hinton iii.
Cherry
Hinton high street – pavement cycling |
|
Open Forum Start time 19:45 Minutes: Due to public interest in other items on the agenda no questions were asked during the Open Forum. |
|
Transport Vision for Cambridge, Focusing on South Area Issues and Opportunities Start time 20:00 James Palmer, Mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough to outline the Combined Authority’s vision for transport in the south of Cambridge City, including bus services. Councillor Lewis Herbert, Leader of Cambridge City Council will attend to represent the City’s transport vision. Questions and answers (30 minutes). Minutes: The Committee received presentations from James Palmer (Mayor for
Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority) and Lewis Herbert (Leader
of Cambridge City Council) regarding transport vision for Cambridge focusing on
South Area issues and opportunities. Mayor Palmer outlined: i.
There was pressure on housing in the south of the
County. ii.
It was important that the next generation were able
to afford to live in Cambridge. iii.
An Independent Economic Review due to be published on
Friday set out the need for a Metro system in Cambridge. A high quality bus
service would be required to move people around and get people to the Metro
system. He wanted to move people from cars to use the Metro system. iv.
He believed in a congestion charge for Cambridge
but not before the Metro system was in place. v.
The Metro system for South Cambridgeshire (and not
just Cambridge) was estimated to cost £2.5 - 3 billion. To raise the finance to
build the Metro system it was proposed to buy agricultural land and develop
garden villages. Finance from these developments would be used to fund the
Metro. vi.
He commented that there needed to be links in areas
of potential growth. vii.
Most of the growth had been in the south of
Cambridge. And problems arose when you tried to get around the city. viii.
The timescale for delivering the Metro system was
2023-2029. ix.
He was working with the GCP to accelerate bus ways. x.
His view of park and rides was that this moved
travel issues to particular areas. The Leader for Cambridge City Council outlined:
i.
Cambridge was a transport destination.
ii.
In the future the City Council and South
Cambridgeshire District Council would approve their Local Plans with some
changes, one of which was more jobs at the Biomedical Campus.
iii.
There were some imbalances in transport but the
City Council was working with the GCP to address this.
iv.
Expect will need transformational public transport
offer.
v.
The work on the Metro
tunnelling was due in December and would clarify technical detail. He
questioned how the project would be funded and where the Metro stations would
be situated.
vi.
He was a defender of bus services and cycling.
vii.
The public report on the South East Cambridge route
may make a major difference for people getting into and out of Cambridge.
viii.
Commented that Stagecoach was not offering good bus
services and people needed to be dissuaded from driving into Cambridge.
ix.
He did not share Mayor Palmer’s view about park and
rides. He also commented that there needed to be a shuttle bus between Babraham and Trumpington park and
ride sites. The Committee
discussed the following issues:
i.
Asked
Mayor Palmer whether it was within his powers to encourage competition for bus
operators.
ii.
Had
written to Mayor Palmer on behalf of South Area Committee to plea for local bus
services.However when pushed for one route to be
saved, this was to the detriment of another route.
iii.
Wanted
Stagecoach to stop deleting bus services without consultation.
iv.
Commented
that it was often the less privileged, elderly and women who were disadvantaged
when bus services were cut.
v.
Asked
when the start time was for A1307 Cambridge South East Approach Mayor Palmer made the following comments in
response to Members’ questions:
i.
A bus
review was being undertaken, he had the power to franchise but he wanted to see
the outcome of the bus review before making any decisions. A meeting with the
Chairman of Stagecoach had been arranged.
ii.
Commented
that it wasn’t just Cambridge that suffered from poor bus service provision the
rest of the county were also affected.
iii.
The bus
service review would look at all options, if voluntary charges were introduced
this could make a substantial difference.
iv.
If buses
were more comfortable then more people may be likely to use them. People could
not rely on buses to get them to and from work therefore a better system needed
to be created. Councillor Herbert made the following
comments: i.
Asked
why bus tickets were not transferable and also commented that there needed to
be a solution to raise significantly more money to improve bus services, air
quality and reduce car journeys. ii.
The main
public transport into Cambridge was buses other than the train through Ely. iii.
Confirmed
that dates would be provided to South Area Committee for the quick wins under
Phase 1 of the A1307 Cambridge South East Approach. Following
the meeting in response to the question regarding dates for quick win projects,
the Project Manager at the GCP confirmed the following: ·
Safety
improvements at Dalehead Foods were anticipated to be
completed by the end of November. ·
Eastbound
bus lane at Linton, completion by the end of January 2019. ·
Additional
cycle storage and lockers at Babraham Park and Ride
by the end of January 2019. ·
Upgraded
signal controller at Linton Village College by the end of February 2019. ·
The
remainder of Phase 1 will be completed by the end of the 2020/21 financial
year. Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below. 1. Asked if there were any firm quantifications of the cost of
sinking per mile for the Metro system and asked where would stations be sited, for
example every mile? Mayor Palmer confirmed that stations would be sited around 5 miles, £50
million for light rail, £120 million for stations and
£10 million for stations outside of Cambridge. 2.
Lived in Cherry Hinton was generally supportive of
the Metro but expressed concerns around the financing of the system. He would
like to see bus services delivered by communities. He believed that low cost
fares were a strong encouragement for people to use buses. 3.
Believed in park and rides and saw the practical
benefit. He had sent a letter to Mayor Palmer on 29 July but hadn’t received a
response. Expressed disappointment regarding the Biomedical Campus. Mayor Palmer commented that he opposed park and rides as they seemed to
transfer vehicle movement issues to outside of the city. The road network could
not cope with the number of vehicles; this was why he was proposing a Metro
system. Councillor Herbert commented that the Biomedical Campus had had faster
growth than projected, the whole site needed to be looked at. The Addenbrooks site could be reconfigured. He believed in park
and rides or else there would be no travel solutions for a decade. The Access
Study was due to report in November 2018. He commented that people outside
Cambridge needed to be encouraged to use bus services. 4.
Asked whether a review of bus services would make
sure that less polluting buses were provided. Mayor Palmer commented that he was in favour of low emission options and
would do everything that he was able to do in the franchising option. 5.
Commented that discussions had focused on putting
in housing and transport but there had been no discussions about providing
facilities close to homes so that people could walk and cycle to them. The local plan was due to allocate housing on
Worts Causeway but no community facilities were being provided, these types of
facilities could help bring people together to reinvigorate local communities. Councillor Herbert commented that once the Local Plan was approved this would provide clarity. Commented that this issue needed to be considered for the land north of Cherry Hinton. |
|
Updates on Cambridge Biomedical Campus Transport Study and Related Projects Start time 21:00 ·
Peter
Blake, Transport Director, Greater Cambridge Partnership · Jeremy Smith, Group
Manager: Transport Strategy and Funding, Cambridgeshire County Council · Representative from
Cambridge Biomedical Campus This
will be followed by an opportunity for questions from members of the public and
South Area Committee. Meeting ends: 10:00pm Minutes: The Committee received an update on the Cambridge Biomedical Campus
Transport Study and related projects from officers of the Greater Cambridge
Partnership (GCP), Cambridge University Hospitals and Astrazeneca Jeremy Smith (GCP) outlined: i.
The Biomedical Campus did a comprehensive travel
survey every year. ii.
30% of staff travelled by car, 70% used other modes
of transport (of the 70% who used other modes of transport, 33% of staff
cycled), patients tended to travel by car. iii.
GCP looked to feed into the work that the Mayor was
doing on the Cambridge South rail station. iv.
He was aware of car parking issues and people
parking on streets around the campus. v.
Cycle parking was in high demand. Peter Blake (GCP) outlined: i.
Cambridge South East Transport Study, the project
will be considered by the GCP Board in the near future to consider if an
off-road solution was required. ii.
Looking at city access and traffic signal movements
to make it easier to move around the city. iii.
Planning to bring a report in December on how bus
services could be improved to make them more reliable and regular. iv.
Residents parking issues, working with the County
Council so can manage traffic and work with residents. Katharine Smith (Cambridge University Hospitals) outlined: i.
There were significant restrictions on staff
parking to encourage staff to travel more sustainably. ii.
There were over 3000 cycle parking spaces on site
and a further 239 were going to be provided during September. iii.
In the process of drafting a transport strategy. iv.
They were reviewing opportunities for a shuttle
service. v.
They were mapping where staff lived to see where
gaps in transport provision existed. vi.
Discounted cycle purchase and season ticket loans
were offered to employees. Stephen Boni (AstraZeneca) outlined:
i.
Had launched an employee travel policy called ‘My
travel’ to reduce reliance on single occupancy cars and the demand for car
parking.
ii.
Wanted employees to be within 5 miles of a ‘travel
hub’. The Committee
discussed the following issues: i.
In relation to Cambridge
South Station, expressed frustration that there was a lot of discussion about
the big picture but not a lot about the small stuff. Also commented that Ward
Councillors were not being kept informed about the project and asked how a dialogue
could be developed so issues can be addressed early for example with the guided
busway and lighting it would have been easier to have had discussions before
the development was undertaken as its harder to get lighting put in after
construction. ii.
Commented that people
can travel by more than one form of transport and also commented that in
providing good routes into Addenbrooks it would be
useful if there could be more stops before buses get into the Biomedical
Campus. In response to members’ questions Jeremy Smith confirmed: i.
Agreed it was better to
get things (like lighting) designed in than trying to retrofit. ii.
Agreed that more stops
needed to be considered. Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below. i. Asked whether
the transport strategy was the same as the travel plan and if so when would it
be adopted. ii. Commented that Cambridge South Station was a
long walk from many of the buildings. iii. Commented that a lot of people who park in
the park and ride, cycle to Addenbrooks and asked
whether this had been captured in the statistics. iv. Commented that the route between Astrazeneca and Papworth was
closed and asked when this would be open. v.
Commented that big transport schemes took a long
time to deliver but there were some quick wins which could be delivered which
would get an extra 5-10% walking and cycling vi.
Asked whether there would be enough room for the
elderly and sick to park vii.
Commented that the Addenbrooks
roundabout had been redesigned and one of the pavements always flooded which
meant that cyclists and pedestrians were unable to use it which rendered the
roundabout useless. In response to the public’s questions Katharine Smith said
the following: i.
The transport strategy was the same as the
travel plan and there was a meeting the week after the Area Committee meeting
to consider it. The plan contained
ambitious targets and there was a 5 year implementation plan. ii.
There was an existing courtesy bus however
Cambridge University Hospital was looking to see whether this service needed to
be extended as there could be a link to provide a timely service to drop off
patients and staff. iii.
The travel survey would ask whether people
walked and cycled and whether that was their main mode of transportation. iv.
The pedestrian link would be open in October as
there was further development needed; it was likely to be fully open in Spring 2019. v.
Funds were being collated to deliver quick win
transport solutions. vi.
There would always be spaces available for
patients and visitors who have greatest need. vii.
Would look into the flooding issue at the
roundabout. |