Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillors Carling and McQueen.

The notes of the meeting held on 1 September 2022 were noted subject to the following additional text being added to the Open Forum minute (ref 22/22NAC):

1) A member of the public raised the following points:

i.  There has been talk locally of the Busway from Cambridge North Station no longer stopping along Milton Road, but I decided to try to use it from the Ascham Road stop back to the station on 19th August.

ii. The MyBusTrip app no longer shows the B as stopping at Ascham Road, but the bus did stop that afternoon.  As I got on, I remarked to the driver that I was pleased that the bus had stopped.  He told me that this wouldn't be the case for much longer, as from September or October, the Busway B would be an express service, not stopping at Milton Road stops. The 9 (Cambridge to Ely) would continue to run. 

iii. As far as I can see, this means that the Milton Road stops would lose their connection to Cambridge North Station, and would only have one bus an hour, the 9, actually stopping along the road, while the Park and Ride and the Busway buses travel along the road, but without stopping.  Do members of the Committee or the representatives of the GCP have anything to say about this issue, please?

The GCP Project Officer (Histon Road and Milton Road) responded that bus operations were out of his hands as they were controlled by Stagecoach. He could follow up with Stagecoach to get a detailed response.

Action: Paul Van de Bulk to follow up with Stagecoach to get a detailed response about bus operations.

Representatives from the local police team and Council’s community safety team will present the latest report and answer questions.

The Committee received a report regarding policing and safer neighbourhoods 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 local areas of concern and engagement activity noted in the report were:

      i.         Street based drug dealing, including cuckooing.

    ii.         ASB and dangerous driving across the north of the city and NO2 canisters.

   iii.         Cycle crime.

  iv.         Youth and knife crime.

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

1.    Asked in relation to people who drove petrol mopeds with L plates if there was any evidence that the drivers were receiving instruction or were booked in for tests and whether they had insurance. Also asked if the Police had concerns about human trafficking and modern slavery given the high numbers of moped drivers visible over the past 12-18 months.

The Police advised that the only way to know if the drivers had taken a driving test or had insurance was to stop the drivers and ask them. There were automatic numberplate cameras around the city which alerted the Police about certain issues, but this only happened if the vehicle was driven passed the cameras. Members of the public had no legal powers to stop the drivers themselves and were advised not to do so. 

2.    Asked what the Police were doing to make the pavements safe for pedestrians, free of unauthorised cyclists.

The Police advised that road traffic laws required a Police Officer to witness cycling offences, this was difficult with current officer resources and if the Police were on their way to an incident with a more pressing risk. The Police liaised with ‘Voi’ when registration information was provided regarding the anti-social use of e-scooters. This could result in Voi issuing warnings to users or the person’s account being suspended.

Members welcomed and supported the work of the Police and Anti-Social Behaviour Team.  Members expressed concerns regarding:

        i.       Noisy motor bikes / noisy exhausts

      ii.        Bike thefts / burglaries

    iii.        Knife crime

    iv.       Effectiveness of cycle crime investigations reported online

      v.       ASB at Carlton Way shops / Carlton Terrace

    vi.       Parking issues near schools.

Representatives from the GCP will inform councillors of the current consultation which runs until 23 December 2022. www.greatercambridge.org.uk/mc-2022

The Committee received a presentation from the Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) Programme Director for City Access on the Making Connections consultation which runs until 23 December 2022 GCP Making Connections 2022 | Consult Cambridgeshire (engagementhq.com).

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

1.    The Guided Bus A on Histon Road B1049 service to the Station and Addenbrookes (which stopped at all bus stops) had been greatly appreciated since the GCP project finished late in 2021.  For a period in September, the busses drove by and did not stop because they were already full when they arrived at Histon Road in Cambridge . The A bus has been an essential improvement in the GCP Project.

Regarding the Making Connections consultation, and the information on the Interactive Map page 35, it was difficult to interpret where the various lines for Citi8 and the Busway service extension from Cottenham were stopping and if this included Histon Road.  The lines appeared to terminate in the middle of the city centre. However, the most important line for Busway A (via Orchard Park direct to Addenbrookes and Trumpington P&R) did not seem to stop on Histon Road anymore. This was not acceptable for an area where people would be affected by the congestion charge if they tried to use their car. The direct Busway A to Addenbrookes was needed by many residents both for appointments and working places.

Histon Road Area Residents’ Association requested clarification of the Busway A route; and that the bus would stop at the GCP Bus Stops along Histon Road in Cambridge. 

The GCP Programme Director for City Access responded that the proposals referred to were schematic. Buses would continue to stop on Histon Road as they did now, the maps did not show every bus stop and there were no plans to cut or stop services.

2.    Asked how the GCP proposed to run an improved bus service when Stagecoach didn’t have enough drivers to run the present service. Asked how the bus service would be funded, if the Making Connections scheme was such a success, this may mean few people paying the congestion charge. Asked if there were any plans to provide secure cycle parking (particularly in the city centre), so that it was possible to leave a bicycle and be sure of finding it later.

The GCP Programme Director for City Access responded that bus services nationally were fragile, passenger levels had not returned to pre-covid levels, which compromised the revenue model for those services. Acknowledged a shortage of bus drivers and noted the Mayor of Cambridgeshire and Peterborough had committed some budget to assist with recruitment / training of bus drivers.  Secure cycle parking was planned but welcomed further comments through the GCP’s Making Connections consultation.

3.    Asked the GCP Officer how they travelled to work. The speaker lived in the city and noted that under the current proposals they may be charged if they drove to a park and ride site and used that service to get to work. Noted that more frequent buses may not assist people if they were unable to get to the bus stops for example because of mobility issues.

The GCP Programme Director for City Access advised that they used the Trumpington park and ride service. It was proposed that charges were only brought in following a substantial improvement to bus services. Noted comments about mobility and distance to bus stops.

4.    Asked if bus travel counted as active travel.

The GCP Programme Director for City Access acknowledged that most public transport journeys would start or end with some element of active travel.

In response to comments made by the Committee, the GCP Programme Director City Access said the following:

      i.         Noted concerns raised regarding the proposed ‘exemptions’ to the charges proposed under the Making Connections scheme and commented that the exemptions could be refined following feedback received during the consultation. Would look to see if information about proposed exemptions could be made clearer within the consultation paperwork. 

    ii.         Noted concerns regarding the level of information provided about how the reimbursement process (for any charges levied) would work. Further detailed work would be done following the consultation.

   iii.         Confirmed that schools had been contacted as part of the consultation process and was aware of transport poverty issues for school transport journeys.

  iv.         Noted concerns regarding the impact of charges on people who were self-employed / local businesses. Welcomed the idea about ‘batch payments’ for charges. It was hoped some small businesses who did frequent small trips around the city may notice benefits in terms of reduced congestion.

    v.         Welcomed the ‘Ting shared taxi’ idea and would look at this further.

  vi.         Envisaged the Making Connections scheme would be delivered by quality bus partnerships; franchising of bus services was one option. 

 vii.         There was no cross subsidy of buses.Bus services across the country (except for London) were deregulated. This meant the bus services were run by the private sector as a commercial concern.

viii.         The Greater Cambridge Partnership (GCP) was a partnership between Cambridge City Council, South Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridgeshire County Council plus non-voting members including the University of Cambridge and the CPCA Business Board to deliver sustainable economic growth through central government grant funding. Would speak with the Web Team to see if information about what the GCP was and did could be made clearer. 

Councillors will review the projects received noting that the decisions will be taken by the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces in January 2023.

The Committee received a report from the Project Leader regarding the Environmental Improvement Programme (EIP). The report outlined new suggested schemes for 2022/23.

The Project Leader updated their report (paragraphs 3.1 and 3.3) to confirm that there was a total of £170,000 for EIP projects this was broken down into £100,000 allocated to Area Committees which would be split proportionately to each areas population and then £70,000 was set aside for strategic environmental improvement projects.

Current Project updates could be found at https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/media/11531/environmental-improvement-project-summary-2022-23.pdf.

It was noted that the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces, Food Justice and Community Development would ultimately make the decision on which environmental improvement projects would be taken forward.

In response to Members’ questions the Project Leader said the following:

      i.         Arbury Court projects were categorised as red (and were not proposed to be funded) as the focus for EIP funding was on areas managed by the Streets and Open Spaces Team. Project examples N9 and N10 may be better funded through Estates and Facilities Improvement funding. Officer would liaise with the Estates and Facilities Team to follow up.

    ii.         Project N16 was categorised as red as officers felt consent for works would be required from the Highways Authority. Improvements in response to parking issues was better suited to Local Highway Improvement funding (from the County Council).

   iii.         Confirmed that Project sN7 2023 was proposed to be funded through the strategic funding pot rather than the North Area Committee funding pot.

  iv.         Officers were not clear if project N15 would benefit the public realm generally as the proposal appeared to benefit a shared private communal space for specific residents. The project detail could be looked at further and the applicant advised on what may the project fit future EIP rounds.

    v.         With regards to project N21, the provision of play equipment was more suited to s106 funding rather than EIP funding.  Applications for s106 funding may be invited in due course.

  vi.         Officers would respond to all applicants whether the applications were successful or not.

The Chair noted that the EIP projects highlighted as ‘green’ within Appendix B, Table 1 (column ‘Cost Deliverability Eligible Rating’) would be presented to the Executive Councillor for Open Spaces, Food Justice and Community Development to take forward and also any ‘amber’ projects [in particular project N3 2023] which could be taken forward expediently, subject to local consultation within the North Area Committee funding allocation available.

Representatives from ‘Friends of Libraries’ were invited to attend North Area Committee to talk about their groups.

A representative from the Friends of Central Library said the following:

-       The group was set up in 2015.

-       Events with speakers had been run, including a representative from Cambridge Shakespeare festival and book readings by authors from Cambridge.

-       Had run craft stalls selling stationary, scarfs etc. 

-       The covid pandemic had impacted the running of the group.

A representative from Friends of Milton Road Library said the following:

-       The group had been in existence for at least the past 10 years.

-       There were 11 members on the Milton Road Library Committee, and the Committee met every 2 months. There were approximately 100 members of the group. 

-       They liaised closely with the Library staff and had purchased a couple of items for the library i.e. bean bags and a book trolley.

-       They ran story book sessions, organised book sales and events including musicians and singers to raise funds.

-       Welcomed new members and those who wanted to be kept up to date with information about Milton Road Library.

Friends of Arbury Court Library 

-       A statement provided by the Chair of Friends of Arbury Court Library was published on the meeting webpage as the Committee ran out of time for the statement to be read out.  Agenda for North Area Committee on Thursday, 17th November, 2022, 6.30 pm - Cambridge Council

The following statements / questions were read out by the Chair.

1.    The residents in the McManus Estate area had for many years undertaken walk-abouts with councillors and officers responsible for the area regarding tidying up, maintaining hedges, trees and other plants overgrowing the pavements.  Following the pandemic and the changes in ward boundaries the walkabouts stopped. Residents felt the walkabouts should continue.  

The carriageways had been resurfaced throughout the McManus Estate, but nothing had been done about the maintenance of the pavements, which had been dug up several times in the last few years for wiring and were now very uneven in some places. Obstruction by hedges and trees also needed to be attended to.

Histon Road Area Residents’ Association (HRARA) asked that the annual walkabouts with city, county councillors and officers be reinstated as soon as possible to identify pavements on the McManus Estate which needed upgrading to improve safety.

Action: Councillor Cox Condron and Councillor Todd-Jones to follow up with Officers from the County Council’s Highways Team and also the City Council’s Streets and Open Spaces Team and welcomed other Councillors to join them. Councillor Sheil advised that he would join the walkabout.

2.    HRARA’s question concerned the audit of the Histon Road project, which was understood to be complete. In a letter of 31 January 2022, to the County Council Highways and Transport Committee, a group of local residents outlined items out of the specification which were considered dangerous. These concerns were deferred because the audit was in progress. There had been no adequate reply to their original letter.

HRARA would like to know when the Audit would be published and whether their concerns were addressed in it.

The GCP Project Officer provided a response as follows:

-       The designers were currently putting together their response to the stage 3 road safety audit that was undertaken by County Council Road Safety Officers in the summer.

-       This followed standard procedure when completing a highways project such as Histon Road.    

-       The GCP would work with the designers to pull together a mitigation plan for any aspects where this was required.  The aim was for this plan to be agreed by the new year so that any outstanding works may be completed as soon as is possible.

-       The GCP would publicise the remedial actions that were agreed through this process in advance of any works taking place.

Action: A detailed response provided by the Greater Cambridge Partnership Project Officer to be provided to HRARA.

3.    Following the demise of the ‘Golden Riverbank’ art project in Newnham there is £50,000 of S106 funds remaining for public art projects in Cambridge.

Asked if Councillors would commit to lobby for this money to be spent in North Cambridge instead? 

Officers provided a response as follows:

-       S106 contributions were paid by developers to mitigate the impact of new homes and other buildings, which created extra demands on local facilities. Therefore some parts of the City had more funding than others, however every ward in Cambridge had benefitted from a range of S106-funded projects.  There was more detail on the Council website Developer contributions - Cambridge City Council.

Action: A detailed response from City Council Officers to be provided to the member of the public.

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

Agenda for North Area Committee on Thursday, 17th November, 2022, 6.30 pm - Cambridge Council