A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Farnsworth Hall Chesterton Community College, Gilbert Road Cambridge CB4 3NY. View directions

Contact: Toni Birkin  Committee Manager

No. Item


Apologies for Absence


Apologies were received from Councillors Perry, Onasanya and Sales


Welcome and Introduction (including Declarations of Interest)


Councillor Bird declared a personal interest in item 15/9//NAC as she is a Board Member of Rowan.


To Confirm What was Said (Minutes) at the Last Meeting and What we Have Done (Action List) pdf icon PDF 115 KB

Additional documents:


The minutes of the meeting of the 10th September 2015 were agreed as correct record and signed.


The following comments were made in relation to the minutes:


Councillor Bird: 11/34/NAC Q7

PCSO’s have visited the area.


Richard Taylor: Minutes

Requested more information on the policy regarding the inclusion of the names of those who ask a question at Area Committees.


Councillor Todd-Jones confirmed that, where appropriate, public speakers could choose to remain anonymous. In addition, during a busy round of public question, speakers often do not give their names and the standard wording in the minutes to reflect this would be ‘a member of the public’.


Members discussed the situation regarding filming at Committee Meetings. Whilst acknowledging that the law allows unrestricted filming during meeting, members expressed their hopes that those filming would not film anyone who was uncomfortable with this.


Action Sheet:

The following Action Sheet updates were noted:


Chestnut Grove Play Area Improvement: This was now completed and was removed from the action sheet.


14/65/NAC Parking Restrictions – Milton Road Library area

Some double yellow lines are due to be installed early next year.


14/74/NAC Chesterton Sports Pavilion

Ian Ross (Sport and Recreation Manager) reported that this matter is likely to be included in the Capital Programme next year. He stated that he was consulting with the Friends of Chesterton Recreation Ground group.


15/15/NAC Q1 Buchan Street improvements.

Issues have been rectified and this action is now completed.


15/25/NAC Buchan Street disabled parking bays.

Issues have be rectified and this action is now completed.



You Want to Know (Open Forum)


Q1. John Levett

Play equipment in Dundee Close was removed some time ago as it was old and tired. No replacement equipment has been installed and the local children have migrated to inappropriate area in search of play opportunities. 


Councillors agreed that his equipment was badly needed. It would be discussed further later in the meeting.


Q2. Richard Taylor

Requested a briefing on the Milton Road proposals.


Councillor Todd-Jones undertook to investigate this matter.



Q3. Richard Taylor

The Local Highways Improvement Programme should concentrate on the areas of highest traffic flow and greatest risk. In applications included in the agenda do not appear clear on whom the applicant was.  In addition, many of the  applications had been made my Councillors. Was the scheme advertised widely so that the public could take part?


Councillor Manning stated that this programme was intended to address minor, localised issues as identified by local residents. Larger projects were addressed elsewhere. The application process had been widely advertised and was open to all.


Councillor Scutt (supported by Councillors Austin and O’Reilly) added that the projects might be small but they were issues that concerned local people. For example, Garden Walk was a narrow street but was widely used by children going to school and needed attention to discourage motorists from rat running.


Councillor Pitt stated that the projects supported by this committee would then become City Council applications.


Q4. Freddy (aged 5)

Presented the committee with a picture of the play equipment he would like installed in his local park (the green on Bateson Road).



Members thanked Freddy for his artwork and agreed to consider this later in the meeting.


Q5. Member of the Public

Has any action been taken to address the parking issues around the shopping area of Mitcham’s Corner?


Councillor Todd-Jones stated that a site visit had been carried out with a Highways Officer. However, this officer had then left the post. Once a new person was in post, further action might be possible.


Councillor Scutt added that she would raise the issue with the parking department and would request more officer time to be spent on this matter.




Q6. Member of the Public

The double yellow lines in Herbert Street have been lost. Can they be replaced?


Councillor Austin stated that this would be addressed later in the agenda.


Q7. Member of the Public

The footpath running from Harvey Godwin Avenue to French’s Road is dark and dangerous due to overhanging trees. Who is responsible for this?


Councillor Todd-Jones undertook to look into this matter.



Q8. Michael Bond

Street lighting has been placed in the wrong locations. Light is lost in the tree canopy and there are pools of darkness due to lack of thought regarding the most efficient location for street lights.


Q9. Member of the Public

Are the trees on Milton Road important?


Councillor O’Reilly stated that was a City Deal issue and stated the consultation would be open from 14th December 2015.

Councillor Pitt urged the public to respond to the consultation.



Q9. Leila Dockerill

Spending cuts would result in a lack of Police on the beat which would lead in increased fear of crime.


Councillor Scutt agreed and urged people to contact their Member of Parliament about this matter.

Councillor O’Reilly agreed that the proposed cuts were likely to change policing in Cambridge.


County Council - Lighting Proposal pdf icon PDF 54 KB

Alan Hitch: Strategic Projects Manager, Cambridgeshire County Council

Additional documents:


The Committee received a report from the Safer Communities Manager regarding the County Council street lighting proposals.

Alan Hitch, the Strategic Projects Manager of Cambridgeshire County Council was present to answer questions.


Councillor Sinnott addressed the committee and made the following comments:

·  The consultation invited limited responses and was complicated.

·  Questioned how widely the consultation had been promoted.

·  Suggested it was based on limited evidence of potential increased risks to personal safety increased crime.

·  Stated that other local authorities had modified their plans due to adverse impacts.


The Strategic Projects Manager stated that the impact on crime would be closely monitored.


The Strategic Projects Manager responded to the following questions:


Q1. Leila Dockerill

The Cambridge News stated that, in some areas, the public had chosen to pay for additional lighting.


A. Parishes could make that decision.


Q2. Member of the Public

If the consultation demonstrates a lack of support for the proposals, would they be stopped?


A. The results of the consultation would be considered by the County Council and a decision would be made in January 2016.


Q3. Councillor Manning

Clarified that the decision regarding street lighting had not been considered in isolation. Budgetary savings were needed and if they did not come from reducing the cost of street lighting they would have to be found elsewhere.


Q4. Member of the Public

Is it the nature of young people to hang about in groups doing nothing in particular into the early hours of the morning. Loss of street lights between midnight and 2am would make those young people vulnerable.


Q5. Member of the Public

Could alternatives such as diming the lights or installing motion sensors to turn them on and off be considered?


A. The proposals included dimming lights. However, this alone would not produce the required savings.

Motion sensors were not an option as the technology was not available and lights going on and off would disturb nearby houses.



Q6. Member of the Public

Has an equalities impact assessment been carried out and the loss of street lights would have a greater impact on some than others? It could increase feelings of social isolation. In addition, pavements were in a poor state of repair in some areas and this could deter some people from leaving their homes after dark.


Q7. Member of the Public

Fluorescent lighting is inefficient and take a long time to warm up. Could more efficient LED lights be installed.


A. LED lighting might be a solution for the future. They were not an option at the present time as the contractor was delivering the solutions agreed in 2010.


Q8. Councillor Bird

Could every other light be turned off?


A. This was not an option as the 2009 contract restricts the distance between lights.


Q9. Councillor Sinnott

Savings achieved by reducing lighting would be transferred to other bodies and accidents and crime rates would rise. Balfour Beatty had left a number of hazards following recent works.


A. Specific problems and issues should always be reported. In addition, highways were regularly inspected to ensure they met the required standards.


Q10. Councillor Sinnott

A march was planned for 4th December in support of keeping the street lighting on.


Q11. Councillor Pitt

There were a number of on-going campaigns in support of retaining street lighting.


The Committee thanked Alan Hitch for attending the meeting.


County Council consultation commenced on 26th October 2015 and would end on the 11th December 2015.




The Committee noted Strategy and Resources Committee Report regarding the County Council lighting proposal and asked for their comments to be taken up with the County in the planned negotiations.



Mitcham's Corner Master Plan Project pdf icon PDF 168 KB

Glen Richardson: Urban Design & Conservation Manager

Polly Plouviez: Chesterton / Mitcham’s Corner Co-ordinator



The Committee received a presentation on the Mitcham’s Corner Master Plan Project from Glen Richardson, the Urban Design and Conservation Manager.


Polly Plouviez, the Mitcham’s Corner Co-ordinator, gave an update on recent community events and Christmas plans for the area.


The Urban Design and Conservation Manager answer questions from Councillors and members of the public as follows:


Q1. Member of the Public

The Master Plan appears to be about road networks and traders. Mitcham’s corner residents are ignored.


A. This was not the intention of the plan. To-date the focus had been on traders and local community groups. Going forward the more work with the wider community would be needed.


Q2. Member of the Public

The proposed station in Chesterton would impact on the area. New and improved bus routes would be needed and there would be an environment impact on the area, such as loss of trees.


A. Any scheme would need to consider both the current base line transport links and any future developments.


Q3. Member of the Public.

An existing, dangerous double roundabout was being replaced. Why do the plans include a similarly dangerous design? Shared spaces create hazards for those with sight issues and for children.


A. The proposals are not new ideas. There are mixed views on shared spaces. They can and do work successfully elsewhere. However, they require behavioural changes of users.


Q4. Councillor Smart

How does the proposal work for cyclist?


The officers demonstrated using the maps.


Q5. Councillor Scutt

How long would the unsightly large Staples sign be on display?


A. Officers were unable to answer this question.


Q6. Councillor Scutt

When was work on the project likely to begin?


A. The timeframes were dependent on the funding streams.


Q7. Councillor Manning

Improvements are welcomed but the plan should be more radical. The area should be pedestrianised.


Q8. Member of the Public

The proposed mixed use area would be confusing to non-locals.


A. Any scheme would be trialled and signage would be very clear.


Q9. Member of the Public

Could the area be closed to all traffic with the exception of buses?


A. A range of options would be considered. Car free options would be expensive.


Q10. Member of the Public

The Master Plan has been under consideration for a number of years. The City Deal funding offers an opportunity to make big improvements. Those improvements should be driven by the needs of the local population not by the needs of the City Deal. External experts should be employed to drive the project.


A. Any future plan needs to be realistic about what can be achieved.




S106 Priority-Setting: North Area Project Proposals pdf icon PDF 151 KB

Tim Wetherfield: Urban Growth Project Manager


The Committee received a report from Tim Wetherfield, the Urban Growth Project Manager regarding the local project proposals received during the S106 bidding round last summer and options for the use of surplus play equipment from the Vie development in East Chesterton. The Area Committee’s priority-setting decisions on the local project proposals were set in the context of new S106 income tapering off and S106 funding availability running down. Those projects that were prioritised by the Area Committee would undergo local consultation and project appraisal, as appropriate.


Members welcomed the fact that many of the proposals were community-driven.


In response to questions, the Urban Growth Manager confirmed that:


  1. the same S106 eligibility criteria had been applied consistently to project proposals across all parts of the city. Local project proposals in North Area were a matter for the North Area Committee to consider.
  2. the Chesterton Methodist Church proposal was not yet ready for consideration by the committee. S106 funding was reducing and there might not be sufficient available for this project when it was at a fully developed stage.


Q1. Paul Ashley

The Methodist Church appreciated the support received from officers and understands why the project was not being recommended at this stage. The church would welcome any help that might be available at a later date.


A. Councillor Manning suggested that there might be Community Infrastructure Funding, available from the Station development, in the future.


Q2. Councillor Pitt

What is the situation regarding community use agreements if a school/academy (which receives S106 funding) subsequently changes hands?


A. Ian Ross, Sports and Recreations Manager, confirmed that community use agreements were stringent and addressed the possibility of changes of ownership. In the event that agreed levels of community use ceased to be made available, the agreements included conditions enabling grant-funding to be reclaimed.


Q3. Member of the Public

Residents from the Bateson Green area are here and would appreciate support for their project.


Q4. Member of the Public

Additional play facilities in the Bateson Green area would bring a big improvement to the area.


The Committee received a selection of drawings from children who use the green on Bateson Road to demonstrate the sort of play equipment they would like to see.


Turning to the use of surplus play equipment from the Vie development, the Urban Growth Project Manager outlined three options for installing the equipment at nearby play areas.


Members expressed their support for Option B.


Resolved (unanimously):


  i.  (Recommendation 2.1) Prioritised the following local project proposals for the use of devolved S106 contributions from North Area, subject to project appraisal and community use agreement, as appropriate:


a. an outdoor sports grant of up to £100,000 for four tennis courts at North Cambridge Academy (subject to planning permission);


b. a community facilities grant of up to £71,000 for eligible community facility improvements at the Rowan centre on Humberstone Road; and


c. up to £52,500 for open space landscaping and play area improvements at Bateson Green.


  ii.  (Recommendation 2.2) Selected Option B for installing surplus play equipment (originally ordered for play area at the Vie development in East Chesterton) at nearby play areas, subject to further consultation with local ward councillors on the detailed arrangements.


Option B: Dundee Close play area (roughly half the play equipment) plus Discovery Way and Scotland Road play areas (roughly a quarter each).


  iii.  (Recommendation 2.3) Approved the allocation of devolved S106 funding (around £33,500) for the installation and associated safety surfacing needed to deliver Option B (Recommendation ii. above) from the play area and informal open space contribution types, as appropriate.




Local Highways Improvement Programme 2016-17 pdf icon PDF 80 KB

John Richards: Project Manager

Additional documents:


The Committee received a report from John Richards, the Senior Engineer, requesting that the Committee considered bids received by Cambridgeshire County Council for Local Highways Improvement (LHI) schemes in North area for 2016-17, and determined a priority list of up to 8 projects to be further considered by Cambridge Joint Area Committee and it’s nominated assessment panel (within the funding available across the City for 2016-17) from those listed in Appendix A of the Officer’s report.


Q1. Member of the Public

The situation in Mariner’s Way was dangerous. Car park on a blind bend making is impossible for large vehicles, including emergency vehicles, to gain access.


Q2. Ian Darrack

Agreed with the above speaker. Last month there was a head on collision and there had been many near misses. Construction traffic adds to the difficulties.


Q3. Member of the Public

Supports the proposal for action regarding Bateson Road and Garden Walk. Both are widely used by young people.


Q.4. Councillor Pitt

Welcomed the proposal for Herbert Street.Suggested that the committee should support proposals that had come from local residents.


Q5. Councillor Bird

Mariner’s Way proposal should be supported. Edinburgh Road and Kinross Road also need attention.

In addition, verge parking should be addressed.


Q6. Councillor Bird

Is there any funding available for dropped kerb work?


A.  Work was ongoing on previous proposals and a report would be coming back to North Area Committee in the future.


The Chair proposed the following:


001 Cockerell Road to be removed as it was likely to be prohibitively expensive.

006 Hurrell Road to be removed until further consultation had been undertaken.

008 High Street, Chesterton to be dropped as it was unlikely to be deliverable.


The Senior Engineer confirmed that once the Committee had agreed possible projects, detailed costing would be undertaken in readiness for the assessment panel.


Resolved (unanimously)


Selected the following 8 projects which it considered to be the highest priority, for further consideration and adoption by Cambridge Joint Area Committee and its nominated assessment panel.



Alex Wood Road, adjacent to Carlton Way junction

Combination of verge protection, and reinforcement, works to better manage parking in the area and the damage caused.


Alex Wood Road

Environmental improvement to Arbury Court end of road adjacent to car park, with combination of planting / fencing and resurfacing as necessary and appropriate.


Alex Wood Road

Verge protection works to localised area via low rail fencing and / or bollards to prevent parking and allow grass to recover.


Perse Way, adjacent to junction with Carlton Way

Low rail fencing to protect grass areas from parking in vicinity of local shops.


Edinburgh Road and Kinross Road

Verge protection measures to deter parking, with selective verge removal to provide for some parking displacement.


Mariners Way, Capstan Close and Cutter Ferry Close areas

Parking management changes to improve access, and safety, for all road users.


Herbert Street - junction with Chesterton Road

Streetscape improvements to pedestrian and cycle access in vicinity of local Co-op store.


Bateson Road – junction with Garden Walk

Modifications to the junction to reduce risk to all road users. Application seeking advice or appropriate options from professional officers.



Date of Next Meeting

The next North Area Committee will be held on the 20th January 2015 (please note that this is a Wednesday).


Venue: Shirley Community School, Nuffield Road.


The Committee noted the date of the next meeting.