Agenda and minutes

The Chair gave permission for Mr Taylor to film the Open Forum section of the meeting. It was confirmed that filming would cease if members of the public or speakers expressed a desire not to be filmed.

 

Apologies were received from City Councillors Marchant-Daisley and Owers, and County Councillors Bourke and Walsh.

Councillor	Item	Interest
Brown	13/81c/EAC	Personal: Had met with the owners of 21 Glisson Road
Brown	13/81d/EAC	Personal: Member of the Campaign for Real Ale (CAMRA)
Saunders	13/81d/EAC	Personal: Member of Cambridge Past Present and Future
Saunders	13/78/EAC	Personal: Member of the Cambridge Cycling Campaign
Johnson	13/80/EAC	Personal: Council Representative on East Barnwell Community Centre Board
Whitehead	13/80/EAC	Personal: Council Representative on East Barnwell Community Centre Board

 

 

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 17 October 2013.

The minutes of the meeting of the 17 October 2013 were approved and signed as a correct record.

 

An updated Action Sheet from the meeting held on 17 October was circulated.  

1.    Hester Wells, speaking on behalf of the Cambridge Cycling Campaign, welcomed the proposed cycle parking on Kingston Street and Mawson Road. The committee were asked if they were in support of the proposed cycle parking on Thoday Street.

 

Councillor Kavanagh, as the County Council’s Cycling Champion, expressed his support and confirmed that he was working closely with Council’s Cycling Team to facilitate this.

 

Members expressed support for increased cycle parking provision across the whole City, but highlighted the need for further resident consultation with regard to Thoday Street.

 

2.    George Fernando and Jan Taylor expressed safety concerns related to parking near Bury Court in Stone Street and requested double yellow lines.

 

Councillor Whitehead highlighted a County Council fund for projects of up to £10,000 that could be applied for by local residents. Residents would however be asked to pay a 10% contribution.

 

Action: Councillor Whitehead to forward details to Mr Fernando outside of the meeting.

 

3.    Alistair Storer welcomed the Perne Road/Radegund Road roundabout scheme but expressed reservations about the mixing of cyclists and pedestrians. Councillors were asked if they would support a more radical scheme in the future.

 

Councillor Herbert confirmed that public support, in the form of 200 consultation responses, had been received for the current scheme. He noted that many roundabouts in Cambridge needed further investigation and that Ward Councillors would be happy to meet with the Cambridge Cycling Campaign to discuss the issue in more detail.

 

4.    Antony Carpen asked the following questions, as previously circulated by email:

 

-        How many Councillors have used the 'Shape Your Place' (SYP) Website?

 

-        Which social media tools does each Councillor use (e.g Facebook, Twitter) and how often?

 

-        What do Councillors think are the barriers stopping them and residents using social media?

 

-        Would it be useful for Councillors to have a refresh introduction to social media workshop that I ran in 2012? Again, I would be willing to do this for free as I did in 2012 and would want to open it up to Councillors of all tiers in and around Cambridge.

 

Councillor Brown confirmed that she regularly used Twitter, SYP and Facebook. To date she had posted over 63,000 tweets.

 

Councillor Johnson confirmed that he also regularly used SYP and had posted over 27,000 tweets.

 

Councillor Smart confirmed that she did not use social media and communicated mostly via email. It was noted that County Councillor Amanda Taylor had recently conducted a Councillor Surgery on the SYP website that had been well received.

 

The Chair suggested that other Councillors may wish to respond individually to Mr Carpen outside of the meeting.

 

5.    Antony Carpen asked the following questions, as previously circulated by email:

 

-        Please could Councillors update everyone on what youth outreach they have done – in particular engaging young people in democracy

-        Please could Councillors comment on whether they would be willing to invite interested students from local secondary schools (Esp Coleridge, Parkside & St Bedes) to visit the Guildhall and perhaps take part in a workshop where they engage with Officers, Councillors and each other. Cambridgeshire County Council, at my prompting is already making such arrangements for such visits for students at Long Road and Hills Road Sixth Form Colleges.

 

Councillor Kavanagh confirmed that he regularly visited local schools to talk about the political process. He had also recently attended Hills Road Sixth Form College to assist them with a petition.

 

Councillor Moghadas responded that, as education is a County Council responsibility, most of the engagement would be undertaken by them. However she had been involved with a Ward Councillor project at Manor Community College and had worked with foreign students visiting the Guildhall.

 

Councillor Saunders highlighted the importance of engaging young people in democracy and said he would be happy to meet with Mr Carpen outside of the meeting to discuss this in more detail.

 

Councillor Brown responded that she had recently given a lecture to students in Oxford and would be happy to replicate this in Cambridge.

 

Councillor Johnson highlighted the recent Motion to Council regarding engaging with local students and confirmed that he had recently visited Parkside Sixth Form. It was also noted that the Equalities Panel had recently agreed to look at young people and the democratic deficit.

 

Councillor Smart confirmed that she had regularly visited local schools in her capacity as a Councillor.

 

6.    Mr Carpen highlighted the following upcoming community events:

 

-        Training for young people at Coleridge School:               5 December 2013.

-        Morley School Bazaar: 14 December 2013.

-        National Citizens Service Graduation Event: 2 December 2013.

 

These were noted.

 

 

7.    Maureen Symons raised safety and parking concerns about the Stourbridge Common end of Riverside.

 

Councillor Whitehead confirmed that she had met this week with County Council Highway Officers to discuss the issue. It was hoped that a consultation on a new parking scheme would be issued shortly.

 

Councillor Roberts confirmed that an update on the issue would be included in the next Labour Party Ward Leaflet.

 

8.    Mr Carpen highlighted the following upcoming community events:

 

-        Training for young people at Coleridge School:               5 December 2013.

-        Moreley School Bazaar: 14 December 2013.

-        National Citizens Service Graduation Event: 2 December 2013.

 

These were noted.

 

9.    Stuart Fawkes, speaking on behalf of the Cambridge Bike Polo Club, asked for information on possible funding sources for the renovation of their current Council owned facilities, or a new permanent practice facility.

 

The Chair suggested contacting the dedicated Grants Officer, Elaine Shorrt (elaine.shortt@cambridge.gov.uk or 01223 457968) to discuss the issue in detail. 

 

Councillor Brown, as Executive Councillor for Community Wellbeing, confirmed that sports and leisure grants were available for this type of project and that the funding would be delegated to Area Committees next year.

 

Councillor Kavanagh confirmed that a facility was available in Alconbury and that he would be happy to discuss the issue with Mr Fawkes outside of the meeting.

 

 

The Committee received a report from Police Sergeant Norden regarding the policing and safer neighbourhoods trends.

 

The report outlined actions taken since the Committee on 25 July 2013. The current emerging issues/neighbourhood trends for each ward were also highlighted (see report for full details).

 

Public Question: James Roman (Deputy Coordinator: Abbey Ward Residents Neighbourhood Watch) expressed concern about prolonged drug trafficking and drug dealing in Whitehill Road, Galfrid Road, Rayson Way and Thorleye Road. Concern was also expressed that their regular PCSO had been moved over to Mill Road.  

 

The Police Sergeant acknowledged the concerns and arranged to meet Mr Roman outside of the meeting to discuss the issue in detail. It was noted that officers had arrested two males in Whitehall Road with ¼ kg of cocaine and both were currently on bail. It was also noted that, whilst the regular PCSO had now been moved, a replacement had been arranged. The new PCSO (Sam Palmer) would be attending Neighbourhood Watch meetings and would be taken around to meet local residents.

 

In response to members’ questions Sergeant Norden and the Fire Safety Officer confirmed the following:

 

(i)             Work was on-going between the Police and the Fire Service to monitor empty properties in the City to reduce the threat of arson.

(ii)            The Police and Fire Services actively supported community action days to address fly tipping issues. Work was also undertaken with the City Council to address this.

(iii)          ‘Other Crimes’ as listed in the report normally referred to drug crime and public order offences.

(iv)         Acknowledged the effect that dwelling burglary can have on the victims and highlighted the support available:

-        Follow up visits and advice given by PCSO’s.

-        Advice pack provided.

-        ‘Bobby Scheme’ to give security advice.

-        Referrals to GP’s and Councillors.

-        Local rate victim support line.

 

With regard to dwelling burglaries, the Chief Inspector for Cambridge confirmed the following:

 

-        The issue is discussed weekly and was classified as a City wide priority.

-        Dedicated burglary patrols were in place.

-        A dedicated Detectives Team worked solely on burglary across the City.

-        Monitoring visits were undertaken with those released from prison on burglary charges.

 

The following priorities were unanimously agreed:

 

(i)             Tackle the supply of drugs in the East area.

(ii)            Policing issues associated with Mill Road.

(iii)          Reduce shoplifting in the East area.

Report attached separately

The Committee received a report from the Urban Growth Project Manager regarding second round priority-setting for devolved developer contributions.

 

It was noted that, in Table 1 on page 2 of the report, the figure for devolved community facilities contributions should read £325k (rounded down to the nearest £25k), rather than £275k.

 

It was also noted that paragraph 4.2a of the report outlined the reasons for the Officers’ view as to why the proposal for the East Barnwell Community Centre was not yet ready for consideration. That said, it was pointed out that if the Area Committee did wish to consider this proposal at this stage, the Area Committee would be entitled to identify four priorities plus one grant-funded priority.

 

Individual Members spoke in support of their preferred projects.

 

Due to differing views regarding the level of funding to allocate to the Ross Street Community Centre extension the Chair proposed that a separate vote be taken: 

 

-        £150,000 allocated to the Ross Street Community Centre extension (proposal lost by 6 votes to 4)

 

-        £70,000 allocated to the Ross Street Community Centre extension with £255,000 community facilities contributions  allocated to develop phase 1 of the East Barnwell Community Centre Project (resolved unanimously)

 

Resolved to identify the following short-listed options to prioritise from devolved developer contributions funding in the second round, subject to project appraisal:

 

-        Create Romsey ‘town square’ by Mill Road Co-op/St Phillip’s Church (resolved unanimously)

 

-        Improve Bath House play area and landscaping at the front - with improvements to Ditton Fields play area for toddlers/pre-schoolers as a reserve (resolved by 9 votes to 1)

 

-        £70,000 allocated to the Ross Street Community Centre extension with £255,000 community facilities contributions allocated to develop phase 1 of the East Barnwell Community Centre Project (resolved unanimously)

 

-        That a further report be brought back to the East Area Committee in in due course giving more information on informal open space projects at Coldhams Lane and Howard Road/Dudley Road.

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought permission for the construction of a two storey studio unit.

 

Resolved (unanimously) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officer.

 

 

 

 

The Committee received a Section 73 application to vary conditions.

 

The Section 73 application sought approval to vary condition 2 of permission 08/1581/FUL to extend opening hours to allow opening until 03:00 hours on Saturdays and Sundays.

 

Roger Crabtree addressed the Committee and made the following points in objection to the application:

 

       i.          Extended hours would result in additional noise and disturbance for local residents.

     ii.          The leisure park was originally set up as a daytime and evening entertainment area, with later licenses only being granted to the cinema and The Junction.

   iii.          Late licenses had already been refused for a Wetherspoons pub and Subway as they would affect residential amenity.

   iv.          Whilst two separate Inspectors had given their views on previous applications the Case Officer seems to have only taken into account one set of views.

    v.          The number of residents in the area is increasing and they will be affected by the increased noise and disturbance. 

   vi.          3am was too late and urged the Committee to reject.

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 2) to grant the application for varied conditions in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officer.

 

 

 

 

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought permission for the redevelopment of land adjacent to 40-42 Cambridge Place, Cambridge for the erection of a block of 3No. 1 bed apartments and 3No. 1 bed studios.

 

Jenny Zinovieff, Jennifer Josselyn and Barbara Bell addressed the Committee and made the following points in objection to the application.

 

       i.          The development would cause overshadowing of neighbouring gardens and a sense of enclosure.

     ii.          Development would be bulky and overbearing.

   iii.          Loss of privacy for neighbouring properties.

   iv.          Concerned that the Case Officer did not visit all affected neighbours.

    v.          The appearance would not be in-keeping with a conservation area and would be built right on the boundary line.

   vi.          Concern about possible noise during construction.

 vii.          Concern about parking and congestion.

viii.          Concern over the lack of provision for disabled people.

 

Resolved (by 9 votes to 1) to reject the Officer recommendation to approve the application.

 

Resolved (by 9 votes to 0) to refuse the application contrary to the Officer recommendations for the following reasons:

 

Due to its height, bulk, and proximity to the common boundaries, the proposed development would dominate and enclose the rear gardens of 21 and 23 Glisson Road to a significant and unacceptable degree. The proposal is therefore contrary to policies 3/4 and 3/12 of the Cambridge Local Plan 2006.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Committee received an application for full planning permission.

 

The application sought permission for the conversion of shop (Use Class A1) to Public House (A4) and enabling residential development (conversion and extension to provide student let accommodation and erection of five terraced houses) at the former Royal Standard.

 

Sheila Jeffrey and Ms Walker addressed the Committee and made the following points in objection to the application.

 

       i.          A small pub garden would not suit the needs of the local community and would simply be used by smokers.

     ii.          The large garden area is an attractive space and a focal point of the pub.

   iii.          The large garden and car park area could be used for community events.

   iv.          5 houses would be overdevelopment of the space.

    v.          Concerned about student accommodation above a pub.

   vi.          The Inspector identified a large garden as a key element to the long term success of a pub. 

 vii.          Concern over possible parking and noise issues.

viii.          Proposal contradicts the Local Plan and IPPG guidance.

 

Alistair Cook (Campaign for Real Ale) addressed the Committee regarding the application and made the following points:

 

       i.          Welcomed proposals to retain the pub.

     ii.          Whilst concerned about the lack of open space, the business would be viable with a large or small garden.  

 

Philip Kratz (Applicants Agent) and Jethro Scotcher-Littlechild (Licensee) addressed the Committee in support of the application.

 

Councillor Smart read out a statement on behalf of Councillor Bourke.

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 2) to grant the application for planning permission in accordance with the officer recommendation, for the reasons set out in the officer report, and subject to the conditions recommended by the officer and the following additional condition:

 

 

New Condition 18

No development shall commence until details of facilities for the covered, secured parking of bicycles for use in connection with the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The approved facilities shall be provided in accordance with the approved details before use of the development commences.

 

Reason: To ensure appropriate provision for the secure storage of bicycles. (Cambridge Local Plan 2006 policy 8/6)

 

 

 

 

 

The Committee received a Planning Enforcement Control Order for breach of planning control at 91 and 93 Burnside Cambridge. 

 

The Committee were asked to consider the breach of planning control detailed in the Officer’s report and any representations made to them and, if appropriate, authorise Officers to pursue action.

 

The Planning Investigations Officer highlighted the following minor amendments to recommendation 8.1 (iii) and 8.2 in the Officers report:

 

8.1    (iii)  to delegate authority to the Head of Planning and the Head of Legal Services jointly to exercise the Council’s powers to take further action in the event of non-compliance with the enforcement notice.

 

8.2 Steps to Comply

 

i) Demolish the building which was been erected at the rear of 91 and 93 Burnside.

 

Mr Waite, the owner of 93 Burnside, addressed the committee.

 

The Committee:

 

Resolved (unanimously) to accept the Officer recommendations (subject to the changes above), for the reasons set out in the Officer report.