Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors: O’Reilly, Sarris, Gawthrope, Tunnacliffe and Sales.  

                                                                                                    6:30PM

The minutes of the meeting of the 9^th June 2016 were agreed and signed as a correct record.

 

The following updates to the action sheet were noted:

 

15/17/NAC Cllr Manning: An update will be provided at the next meeting when the Police are present.

 

15/46/NAC Q7 Cllr Todd-Jones: Highways officers have proposed removal of overhanging trees and resurfacing of path. It is suggested that work be carried out in the Autumn Half Term.

 

16/30/NAC Q4 Cllr Scutt: This matter now rests with the City Deal Board.

 

16/3-/NAC Q8 Cllr Sargeant: Due to right of way issues the gates will now be installed in an alternative location.

 

 

The Officer delegated decision regarding the Rowan Centre community facilities improvements was noted

Steph Burwitz (Senior Project Worker)                                   6:50PM

The Committee received feedback from Steph Burwitz (Senior Support Worker with the Children & Young People's Participation Service) on a project that had taken place over the summer.

 

The project had engaged young people to find out what they liked and disliked about their local play equipment and open spaces. Five young people attended the meeting to give their feedback. They comments included the following:

 

·        New play equipment was needed.

·        Existing equipment was in a poor state of repair.

·        More facilities needed for older children.

·        They felt that babies and toddlers got priority.

·        Disliked adult abuse of play space (smoking, discarded needles, discarded alcohol bottles and cans, dog faeces and adults taking over play spaces).

 

The Committee thanked the young people for their comments and invited them, with the help of Steph Burwitz, to collate comments and to contact their local Ward Councillors if they had specific concerns.

 

Councillor Austin stated that the Community Services Scrutiny Committee was considering play equipment and that more consultation with young people was needed.

Chief Inspector Ormerod gave the Committee an update on the new structures for local policing.

a.   The force was now using a targetted approach to specific areas in Arbury, East Chesterton and King's Hedges which are seen as having high levels of crime and deprivation.

b.   Some plain clothes detectives are set to return to uniform to become part of a team targeting specific hotspots in Cambridge.

c.   A new team had been formed with 27 officers to focus on the new policing model.

d.   The new model would look at was what we actually needed to deliver policing more effectively and efficiently.

e.   The core neighbourhood policing teams had been bolstered with three additional sergeants, 18 constables and six PCSOs working in a new specific, high demand, area focused on prevention and the most persistent and high-risk criminals working with partner agencies.

 

Chief Inspector Ormerod invited questions as follows:

 

Q1 Councillor Price

The changes are welcomed and might help address the concerns of young people about the misuse of play spaces.

 

Q2. Councillor Sargeant

Do the changes mean that some services are no longer being delivered?

A. The new model allows existing resources to be used in a smarter way.

 

Q3. Michael Bond

Would the current specialist drug abuse teams remain in place?

A. This would be part of the prevention work and would be a holistic approach.

 

The Committee thanked the Chief Inspector for his time.

                                                                                                    7:15PM

Mike Davies (Cambridgeshire County Council Project Officer) and Noel Kavanagh (Chair Local Liaison Forum: Chisholm Trail / Abbey Chesterton Bridge) will give an update on the project and discussion at the Local Liaison Forum held on 5th September.

 

The Committee received an update from Mike Davies (Cambridgeshire County Council Project Officer) and Noel Kavanagh (Chair Local Liaison Forum regarding the Chisholm Trail / Abbey Chesterton Bridge.

 

Mike Davies presented the following:

 

a.   Gave an overview of the history of the project.

b.   Stated that the agreed bridge design was a hybrid of the most popular elements of the three original designs.

c.   The bridge would be as close to the existing railway bridge as Network Rail would allow.

d.   Construction was expected to begin in the Spring of 2017 with a completion target of Spring 2018.

e.   The planning application would be discussed at a Development Control Forum on the 10^th October and then at the Joint Development Control Forum in November.

f.     The bridge project linked to the Chisholm Trail project and the timeline for this was outlined.

g.   A phased approach was planned.

h.   Discussions were on-going with the City Deal Board.

i.     Issues needed careful consideration included: ecology, flood concerns, road closures required for the underpass, archaeological concerns and commons consent.

 

Noel Kavanagh stated the following:

 

a.   The Local Liaison Forum had met twice.

b.   Interest in the project was growing.

c.   Public were supportive of the project and could see the benefits.

d.   Procurement was underway with six possible contractors.

e.   The contractor would need experience at delivering projects on sensitive sites.

f.     Some stretches of the proposed route were dependant on future development and work would be phased to accommodate this.

 

Noel Kavanagh and Mike Davies invited questions for the Committee and members of the public.

 

Q1. Member of the Public: Where can further information be found?

A. Full detail can be found on the County Council website.

 

Q2. Councillor Onasanya: Was closing Newmarket Road for a weekend long enough to allow for the installation of an underpass?

A. The contractors had given an assurance that 24 hours was sufficient. However, a contingency plan would allowed slightly longer.

 

Q3. Richard Taylor: The public had been promised clear information on the project page regarding key meetings, however, information was still hard to find.

A. It was hoped that all dates would be on one calendar very soon.

 

Q3. Leila Dockerill: The Leper Chapel is a sensitive site. Would the project cause any damage?

A. Cambridge Past Present and Future had been fully engaged in the project. Trial holes would be bored soon. Sensitivity to this site would be part of the procurement brief.

 

Councillor Manning stated that Cambridge Past Present and Future had praised the County Council for the level of consultation on the project.

 

Q4. Michael Bond: The public had not been given sufficient notice regarding the Local Liaison Forum meeting and finding details on-line was difficult.

A. Posters were displayed and 45 people attended the meeting.

8:00 PM

Q1.   Barbara Taylor: Milton Road is in poor condition. There are pot holes in both the road and pavement surfaces.

 

A.      Councillor Bird agreed that action was needed in this area.

Councillor Scutt: The County Council has limited funds for resurfacing work. However, a request for funding was due to go to committee shortly.

 

Action: Ward Councillors to work together to resolve the issues.

 

Q2.   Richard Taylor: City Deal Board discussions promised workshops regarding the trees on Milton Road. Some people have been informed of dates, other have not. When will they be made public and advertised on the website?

 

A. Councillor Scutt: Dates for workshops to consider trees, landscape and verges, had now been agreed and would soon be publically available. There had been a delay in arranging the workshops as officers needed to ensure they had the correct expert guidance. The first workshop would be on the 20^th September. Results would be feedback to the next Local Liaison Forum.

 

Richard Taylor: The criterion for inviting attendees needs to be made public.

 

A. Councillor Manning: Workshops should be open to the public. County Council officers had been asked to publish a central calendar of meeting dates.

Councillor Scutt: Workshops were invitation only, as agreed by the Milton Road Local Liaison Forum.

 

Q3.   Traffic calming in Fen Road is not producing results. Vehicles continue to drive at speed and to use the pavements to avoid calming measures.

 

A. Councillor Todd-Jones: This has been a Police priority in the past.

 

A. Councillor Manning: Work was expected to start on improved traffic calming measures in the area in the next few weeks. Residents should expect disruption for the next eight weeks.

 

Q4.   How would Ward boundaries impact on the North Area?

 

A. Councillor Price: There had been some changes to County Council boundaries. For the moment, City Council boundaries remained unchanged. Full details can be found on the County Councils website.

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/4143

 

Q5.   Arbury Road pavements are in poor condition. Can they be repaired?

 

A. Councillor Scutt: Aware of the issues and would raise this as a priority. Footpaths across Cambridge are in need of repair but the County has limited funds. The City Deal Board is being encouraged to contribute.

Action

 

A. Councillor Onasanya: Will contact cycle teams about repairs to Arbury Road.

Action

 

Kay Harris suggested that the pot holes were the result of poor repairs to previous damage.

Wendy Young (Operations Manager – Community               8:30PM

Engagement and Enforcement)

The Committee received a report from the Community Engagement and Enforcement team.

 

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 North 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.

 

The following comments and suggestions were made regarding the report.

 

a)   A dog waste bin was needed near the Millennium footbridge.

b)   General waste bin near the Fort St George Bridge has been damaged and needs replacing.

c)   Recycling appears to be reducing. Can the next report include commentary?. Note (since the report the recycling figures have been reissued and no longer indicate a reduction).

d)   Rubbish has accumulated in hedges in East Chesterton and needs to be cleared.

e)   Students will shortly be moving into flats on Milton Road and a new shop will be opening. Can waste bins be added near these buildings? Cllr Scutt to liaise with Wendy regarding bins.

 

The Operations Manager responded to questions about Ward Walkabouts. She invited suggestions for future walks. Councillors suggested that the walks should be promoted and publicised by North Area Committee.

 

The Committee resolved unanimously to prioritise :

 

Continue the following existing priorities:

 

1.   Enforcement joint working and patrols to deal with littering from students of Cambridge Regional College in the areas of Campkin Road and Nuns Way Recreation Ground and to work with the local businesses to address litter from their premises.

 

2.   Enforcement patrols to tackle fly tipping on communal archways and green areas at Minerva Way area (including Augustus Close, Hercules Close, Neptune Close and Apollo Way), Campkin Road, Arbury Court, Nicholson Way area (including Albemarle Way, Hanson Court and Walker Court)  and Maitland Avenue/ Mortlock Road area.

 

3.   Patrols to address dog fouling on King’s Hedges “Pulley” Recreation Ground, Nuns Way Recreation Ground and the areas of Blackberry Way and Lawrence Way including early mornings, evenings and weekends.

 

4.   Enforcement patrols to tackle littering issues from shops at Carlton Terrace, and deal with waste management issues.

 

5.   Enforcement patrols to deal with illegal camping at Logans Meadow, Pye’s Pitch and the Vie.

8:50PM

Cambridge Live organises Cambridge’s City Events programme on behalf of Cambridge City Council. Come along and hear their future plans for future outdoor events and to share your ideas with them too.

The Committee received a presentation from Sara Garnham, Matt Deacon and Steve Bagnall of Cambridge Live. The presentation covered the history, funding streams, governance structures and the range of events offered by Cambridge Live.

 

Cambridge Live is a not-for-profit charity that runs the Cambridge Corn Exchange, Cambridge Folk Festival and also delivers a range of outdoor events on behalf of Cambridge City Council, including its annual Big Weekend, Bonfire Night and the Mayor’s Day Out.

 

Cambridge Live were currently seeking feedback from local residents were urged to respond to the questionnaire (link below).

 

https://www.cambridgelivetrust.co.uk/city-events/city-events-survey

 

The Cambridge Live representatives responded to questions and comments as follows:

 

Q1. Councillor Sargeant: Young people, particularly those in the North of Cambridge, feel that Cambridge Live events were not for them. How is this being addressed?

 

A.          The Team were aware of the challenges and were seeking to bring some events out to the wider community. Education and participation had grown over the last five years and was a priority for the future. 

 

Q2. Clare King: As an independent body Cambridge Live was now subject to less scrutiny of its governance. Board minutes appear to be very brief concerning the serious accident on Midsummer Common that occurred in November 2015. Subsequent actions were not reported. If this was discussed, where is the audit trail for the public to review?

 

A.          Sara Garnham: This would be included in the Annual Report to the City Council’s Community Service Scrutiny Committee. As a private company the Charity was under no obligation to publish it minutes. However, it chooses to publish a shortened form of its discussions. The matter was fully discussed.

 

Cambridge Live’s AGM was open to the public, and minutes and accounts are available for public scrutiny.

 

Michael Bond suggested that as a company limited by guarantee with charitable status, Cambridge Live was publically accountable.

 

Q3. Councillor Smart: Agreed with Ms King that their needed to be more transparency about the Trust’s response to a serious incident. Suggested that this should have been mentioned in the presentation.

 

A. The the matter could still be the subject of legal proceedings and no more could be said at present.

 

Q4. Councillor Bird: Would the disabled children’s session of the Midsummer Fair continue?

 

A. Yes. This is regarded as important.

 

Q5. Member of the Public: Acoustics in the Corn Exchange are poor. Can anything be done to improve this?

 

A. Steve Bagnall: Some people love the acoustics and some dislike it. Any improvement would require a significant investment.

 

Q6. Councillor Manning: Are there any plans to measure the non-financial success of the Trust such as health and wellbeing benefits?

 

A. Sara Garnham: The Trust would widen its partnership working and would be rolling out future programmes with wider social goals.

The community page was noted.