Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Copley,  Councillor Smith, and Councillor Thornburrow.

Item	Name	Reason:
22/07/EAC	Councillor Moore	Personal: Applied for funding on behalf of Coleridge community forum. Discretion unfettered but did not take part in the discussion.

 

The notes of the meetings held on 2 December 2021 were noted.

 

The Action Sheet was noted and could be viewed at the following link under ‘Committee Action Sheet – updated post committee’.

 

Agenda for East Area Committee on Thursday, 17th March, 2022, 6.30 pm - Cambridge Council

 

To welcome Representatives from the Greater Cambridge Partnership who will provide an introduction to the consultation.

 

Presentations will follow from Mill Road for People, Camcycle and Mill Road Traders. Cambridge City Licensed Taxis Ltd will also be present to give their views on this consultation

 

This item will end with Question and Answer session.

 

Details on the consultation can be viewed at the following link:

Mill Road - Greater Cambridge Partnership

 

The Chair welcomed Peter Blake, Transport Director and Sarah Prentice, Communications Manager of the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP).

The Transport Director gave a brief introduction to the Mill Road Consultation before the following organisations presented their response.

Link to Mill Road Consultation 2022

 

Mill Road for People presented the following 8 goals for Mill Road:

millroad4people.org

1.    Create a low traffic, low pollution street

2.    Make Mill Road accessible to all

3.    Make Mill Road Safe

4.    Encourage active travel

5.    Support and encourage a wide range of independent businesses.

6.    Enhance the sense of community

7.    Provide reliable, affordable public transport

8.    Provide an attractive environment.

 

       i.         Camcycle presented the following points through their presentation:

camcycle.org.uk

1.    Arguing for a street that was easy to get to rather than through, a welcoming, safe, and inclusive street. A street for local people to spend more time and money.

2.    Thriving independent traders accessible to people of all budgets.

3.    Wider pavements, good disabled access, reliable buses, safe cycling, new parking, no pavement parking, clean air.

4.    A safe street with car / taxi access but no longer dominated by cars.

5.    Easier access for those coming from further afar.

6.    The following problems needed to be resolved:

6.1  Congestion

6.2  Vehicle parking/ loading

6.3  Illegal behaviour of cyclists.

6.4  The allocation of pavement parking, space of pavements and

  the need for repair

6.5  Road danger

6.6  Pollution.

 

      ii.         Mill Road Traders presented the following points:

Mill Road Traders

1.    Safety for all users of Mill Road.

2.    Air Quality and emissions permit free flow of transport and consider air quality Cambridge wide.

3.    Traffic and pedestrian safety (road and pavements).

4.    Possible improvements suggested were as follows

4.1. Mark off-loading spaces, remove restricted hours

4.2. Lockable bollards

4.3 Enforce pedestrian only pavements

4.4 Fix potholes and pavements

4.5 Improve Carter Bridge and link to the Chisholm Trail

4.5 Number plate recognition

4.6 Digital speed displays

4.7 Copenhagen crossings

4.8 Short term side street parking for shoppers.

 

All of the above presentations can be viewed at the following link:

East Area Committee 17.03.22  YouTube

 

The Vice Chair of Cambridge City Licensed Taxis presented a verbal response to the Consultation:

1.    To ensure that Mill Road was fully inclusive, taxis had to be included to allow the transport of those individuals who could not use other forms of public transport, walk, or cycle.

2.    Pavements were already wide. To make the pavements wider a one-way system had to be in place as a carriage way would be taken up to extend the pavements.

3.    The residential ironworks development would bring more private vehicles to the area.

4.    The issues of diesel trains that ran under the bridge needed to be investigated when discussing air pollution.

 

The following public questions were received and noted:

Q1: One of the unintended consequences of the Mill Road bridge closure during 20/21, was the creation of rat run return journeys between East Road, Mill Road, Station Road, and eastwards via Hills Road. This is because some of the traffic which previously used Mill Road as a through route, diverted through Tenison Road and adjacent side streets in order to avoid the traffic lights at the Hills Road / Lensfield Road junction.

If, following the current Mill Road consultation, the same bridge bus filter was applied, it is evident that when road and rail traffic returns to pre-pandemic levels, the combined rat run return journeys between Mill Road and Hills Road  and Mill Road to the station would create an unacceptable level of traffic and pollution in the high density narrow residential roads of South Petersfield.

“What changes to the original bus filter scheme would you consider appropriate to mitigate any increase in traffic and associated pollution in the South Petersfield residential area if the bus filter is reinstated?”

Q2:   After hearing a few of the presentations I’ve heard a lot of evidence from the mill road traders association presenting traffic data. I’ve not found any of this data on the public record.

 

Could the Mill Road Traders Association provide sources for their data because it seems clear from public records that there is a traffic problem.

 

Additionally, it seems clear that pedestrianisation measures when implemented in many other locations even in Cambridge have been universally successful in increasing trade for local traders. The assertion that closing the bridge is bad for business seems unfounded. I would like a clearer explanation.

 

Additionally, on an anecdotal level the bridge being closed made myself use the road for shopping more frequently, as apparently many others did.

 

It seems to me the closure of the bridge was overwhelmingly positive for the local community. It was a pleasure to see the local community take to cycling more than car use as new housing estates mandate. It seems fairer for cycle use to be prioritised.

        

The Mill Road Traders Association advised that the data sources were on each slide. Bikedata, Crashmap used government sources and nitrogen levels during lockdown were provided by a Cambridge City Council member.

 

The Committee held a discussion on highway safety, lower volume of traffic, better public transport, more active transport solutions and how the technical barriers needed to adapt smart filters for blue badge holders. It was agreed that better consultation was needed. It was noted that during the pandemic entire families were out cycling but now the road is open people are back to using cars as they do not feel safe.

 

The GCP Transport Director noted the different traffic management arrangements suggested. In terms of blue badge access this would be a theme that could be taken forward and ways to make this work could be looked at.

 

After the closing statement the Chair thanked all those who had taken part.

The Community Engagement and Enforcement Manager introduced the report and highlighted the following:

        i.         Community Pay Back teams were back working across the city undertaking a back log of work.

      ii.         Hot spot maps for fly tipping in each ward had been included in the report.

     iii.         Bookings for hedgehog holes to be cut into resident’s fencing was being taken, this was a free service. 

    iv.         A full explanation for the number of needles found in Abbey ward could be found in the report.

 

Councillor Robertson asked if more could be said on the staffing issues that the Streets and Open Spaces Team faced and thanked all those involved for their hard work and dedication.

 

The Community Engagement and Enforcement Manager advised that the Enforcement Team were operating at 40% capacity, with three officers covering fourteen wards. She noted the request for additional community clean-up day in Abbey ward in areas where constant fly tipping took place.

 

The Chair of the Committee thanked the Community Engagement and Enforcement Manager for their report and for the hard work of all the officers that had been undertaken since the last report.

 

The Committee received a report from the Community Funding & Development Manager regarding Community Grants.

 

Councillors were reminded that the Committee could not make decisions whilst the Area Committees were taking place virtually, but any discussion / debate would be taken into consideration by Officers when the delegated decisions were made.

 

The Community Funding & Development Manager agreed to consider additional funding of £500 for the Ainsworth Area Resident’s Association (E3).

 

The Committee were informed that the Mill Road Traders Associations (E13) application did not unfortunately fall under the remit of the grant funding. Officers would continue to signpost alternative funding opportunities.

 

Members expressed their appreciation to the Community Funding & Development Manager for her hard work and commitment to the communities of Cambridge who was retiring after 39 years services to Cambridge City Council.