A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Wesley Methodist Church, Christ's Pieces, Cambridge, CB1 1LG

Contact: Claire Tunnicliffe  Committee Manager

No. Item


Election of Chair and Vice Chair


The Lead Officer, Dave Prinsep, took the chair whilst the West Area Committee elected a Chair.


Councillor Bick proposed and Councillor Reid seconded the nomination of Councillor Cantrill as Chair.


Councillor Holt proposed and Councillor Gehring seconded the nomination of Councillor Reid as Vice Chair


Councillor Hipkin proposed and Councillor Gillespie seconded the nomination of Councillor Holland as Vice Chair.


The Committee:


Resolved (by 7 votes to 0) to elect Councillor Cantrill as Chair of the West / Central Committee for the ensuing year.


Resolved by (5 votes to 0) to appoint Councillor Reid as Vice Chair of the West / Central Committee for the ensuing year.






Apologies were received from Councillor Holland.


Minutes pdf icon PDF 151 KB

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 23 March 2015.


Councillor Reid requested that under 15/97/WCAC: Environmental Data Report, text deleted and additional included with her comments (deleted text struck through additional text underlined).


Councillor Reid: Local residents had expressed concern regarding the bins that have been placed on Newnham Queens Green and asked why they could have not have been placed on the perimeter of the Green.


The minutes of 23 April 2015 were then approved and signed by the Chair.


Re-ordering of the Agenda

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.


Declarations of Interest

Members of the committee are asked to declare any interests in the items on the agenda. In the case of any doubt, the advice of the Head of Legal should be sought before the meeting.



Minute Item




Councillor Gerhing

Personal: Has been offered an office in the building


Councillor Reid

Personal: Is a member of Cambridge Live who are adjacent to the development. Also a member of Cambridge Retrofit



Replacement Bin Programme

The Executive Councillor for Environment and Waste will be present to discuss and take questions on the Replacement Bin Programme in the West /Central Area. :


The Chair welcomed the Executive Councillor for Environment and Waste, Councillor Peter Roberts and The Asset Manager (Streets and Open Spaces), Alistair Wilson.


Asset Manager (S&OS) gave a verbal update on the bin priority programme and explained that this was a capital item first agreed in 2013/14. 


The 2014/15 programme had been delayed due to staff capacity which had allowed officers to look at adaptions to the bin programme, particularly for Parker’s Piece and at the collection methods of the waste to ensure that the process was as efficient and effective as possible.


The Committee were advised that the following order of works had been scheduled to take place over the summer period:

  i.  Parker’s Piece (18 bins to be installed)

  ii.  Jesus Green.

  iii.  Christ Pieces

  iv.  New Square

  v.  Queens Green (20 old style bins ordered for Queens Green to match the historical character of the site).


The intention was to replace the bins like for like (same location) but if there was a possibility for change there would be consultation with user groups.


The Executive Councillor for Environment and Waste explained that there were two programmes of works.  One project was being run by the Operations Manager (Community Engagement and Enforcement) who was working with Area Committees and would consider their suggestions of new bins and dog bin locations. Each ward in had 11 new bins and 5 dog bins to consider where they could be placed.  The Asset Manager (S&OS)  had been working on the ‘summer bins’ programme, previously these bins were temporary but it was planned to make these permanent which should long term reduce the amount of litter. 


A temporary steel bin would be placed on Jesus Green specifically for disposable barbecues during the summer months.


Comments from the Committee:


  i.  Shared the concerns of residents with regards to the bins installed on Parker’s Piece which were on a hard standing surface and asked why the bins had to be placed on concrete bases.

  ii.  Felt that there had been a heavy handed approach with regards to the bins on Parkers Piece and had expected Ward Councillors and Officers from Cambridgeshire County Council to be consulted.

  iii.  Queried if there were future plans to install further bins on Parker’s Piece. 

  iv.  Enquired if there could be future consultations with Councillors, Friends Groups, Residents Association and Conservation Officers to determine the best location where the bins should be installed as had been done with Queen Green.

  v.  Important to balance the need for litter clearance and the need to keep clear green open spaces. Needed to preserve the character of these spaces.

  vi.  Asked when would there be recycling facilities installed on Laundress Green and would there be public consultation on this matter.

 vii.  Queried what the rationale had been to make the summer bins permanent and stated that public consultation was required before the bins become permanent. A commitment was required from the Executive Councillor on this.

viii.  Enquired if the Executive Councillor was aware of the Parker’s Piece Conservation Plan which encouraged a landscape of uncluttered land. 

  ix.  Advised that a resident had stated that refuse collectors had rejected to take a blue bin away as it had been placed a meter away from the kerb and asked if this was the correct procedure.

  x.  Asked if the bins on Parker’s Piece be moved to a better location and the grass restored.

  xi.  Queried if litter picks still took place on Parker’s Piece.

 xii.  Suggested that the Council’s code of consultation should be read by the Executive Councillor as an invitation to one meeting for consultation was not sufficient.

xiii.  Advised that consultation on street bins had taken place by the previous administration.


The Asset Manager (S&OS) and the Executive Councillor for Environment and Waste responded with the following:



  i.  There must be a pragmatic approach; public spaces which are heavily used require extra bins as the bins filled up quickly.

  ii.  The cost of a litter pick was more expensive than emptying the bins.

  iii.  The location of bins had been mapped out to help improve proficiency of the litter collection as phase 1 of the improvement programme. 

  iv.  Technology was currently being investigated that would alert the Street Team when bins were full which could help reduce staff time and costs.

  v.  All Councillors had been invited to attend the original meeting to discuss the plans for both projects (new bins and replacement bins). The item had also been taken to the Environment Scrutiny Committee.

  vi.  Resident groups had been made aware of the bin maps for proposed locations around the City but there was no such group for Parker’s Piece.

 vii.  Additional bins had been requested by residents on New Square

viii.  The bins placed on Queens Green were not fixed and would be replaced permanently by the older style.

  ix.  A practical approach needed to be adopted when determining bin designs.

  x.  Agreed that adequate consultation had not been undertaken regarding the bins on Parker’s Piece and there would be a review on the location of some of the bins.

  i.  Future plans would be circulated to resident groups for their consideration and if there was no resident group’s advice would be taken from Ward Councillors. 

  ii.  If residents were unhappy with the location of the bins they could be changed or relocated such as those on Parker’s Piece if practically possible.

  iii.  Residents were welcome to contact their local Councillors if they would like to make any changes to location of bins in their area.

  iv.  Confirmed there was no Council rule to state that the blue bin could not be taken away if it was a meter away from the kerb.

  v.  Historically the Council had not consulted on location and type of bins in the City.


The Chair thanked both the Executive Councillor for Waste and Environment and the Asset Manager (S&OS) for their comments.


Open Forum

Refer to the ‘Information for the Public’ section for rules on speaking 


Martin Smart: On East Road there is a number of parked vehicles and delivery vehicles which encroach and sometimes block the cycle lane. This is becoming very dangerous for cyclists who come out of the cycle lane into oncoming traffic to avoid these vehicles. What could be done to reduce the number of vehicles that block the cycle lane?


Councillor Cearns responded that he would be happy to investigate the possibility of extending the double yellow lines in the area and would speak to the County Council’s Parking Enforcement Officer to increase the resource for patrolling in that area (ACTION).


Colin Rosenstiel: Would the Committee be able to give feedback on the Environmental Improvement Programme particularly with regards the bollard on New Square and the weight restriction enforcement on Kings Street.


Councillor Cearns stated that he had chased City Council Officers on an update on the bollard and had offered that County Council would take over the project.  He was advised that the project was on hold due to staff shortages (for a number of reasons) and recruitment was currently taking place. Councillor Cearns went on to express concern that the project could be on hold long term if further budgetary cuts had to be made and was waiting for a response to accept County’s offer.


Councillor Bick advised that the weight limit scheme on Kings Street was not part of the Environmental Improvement Programme but this could be looked at as part of future schemes. For the current year no new schemes would be adopted as funding had been stopped.


Jean Simpson: Residents of Eden Street have witnessed many long vehicles turning into the street as directed by their sat-navs which give the street as a through route. These vehicles then have to turn round when at the end of the road which is closed by a bollard. Signage would help to negate this issue. The missing sign at the entrance to the road saying NO TURNING FOR LONG VEHICLES has not been replaced. What the Committee do to stop these vehicles from entering the street? 


Councillor Bick advised that there had been public consultation on a scheme for Emanuel and Prospect Road, which had included Eden Street. Public feedback was mixed. Councillor Bick suggested that Ward Councillors should meet with residents to consider the responses and ideas for moving forward.  One such idea was to have signage which gave instructions for delivery vehicles to Fitzroy Street which was were many of these vehicles were going to.


Councillor Gillespie stated that the results from the Consultation had indicated that many people were not concerned with the ‘rat run’ element but the issues of the long vehicles entering into Eden Street. He suggested possible solutions such as signage and narrowing of the street. 


Anthony Bowen: Would like to see a wider consultation regarding traffic management issues, not just for Eden Street.


Councillor Cearns agreed that the consultation should be opened up to residents in the Kite area. Signage had been ordered to be installed around the Tram Depot at the start of East Street.


Bev Nicolson: Would Councillors look positively on local or ward hustings being organised before local elections?


Councillor Reid agreed that this would be welcome.


Councillor Nethsingha advised that all Councillors would be pleased to have any kind of local engagement with their communities at any time of the year. If residents were able to organise hustings Councillors would attend. The difficulty was engaging as much interest in local elections as general elections.


Councillor Gillespie stated that hustings would become even more important if and when further powers were dissolved to the City Council from Central Government.


Anthony Bowen: Would like to raise concerns about the plans for the replacement street lighting in Orchard Street and if there was any possibility that these could be replaced by heritage style lighting which is in keeping with the area.


Councillor Cearns agreed that Funding has been agreed by the City Council for replacement heritage style lighting outside of the main City Centre area. Funding is limited and it has not been confirmed what streets would be benefit from this. A meeting has been requested with the Head of Infrastructure and Assets at County Council to ask if the funding is still available and how it would be allocated.


Councillor Bick advised that the Committee were fighting for an agreement to have existing heritage style columns to be replaced with ‘like for like’ in the streets that already had them.  Unfortunately Orchard Street did not meet this brief but would be willing to take on the case for Orchard Street as this is a classic historical street.


Councillor Holland (statement read by the Chair):


 On 30 March this year, Cambridgeshire County Council’s Traffic Manager finally advised that,

… to mitigate nuisance, Cambridgeshire County Council made a Traffic Regulation Order to impose a 7.5 tonne (mgw) weight restriction along Huntingdon Road (A1307), Girton and Huntingdon Road (A1307) as Huntingdon Road to Castle Street lies between the Dual Carriageway from A14.”

The TRO was initially in force until 30 April. However, as the work continued along the A14, the period was extended in May and is now permanent. The Highways Agency erected signs which means that any vehicle exceeding 7.5 tonnes using Huntingdon Road is in contravention of a legal order and is subject to police enforcement.

Councillor Holland has received representations from Huntingdon Road residents over the past year and has been in touch with the police to press enforcement. On 8 May, the police officer of the West Neighbourhood Problem Solving Team advised that the police would not be carrying out any further enforcement action.

Councillor Holland made further representations as the situation had not improved and the County Traffic Engineer advised that the weight limit would remain in place and was enforceable.  In response to Councillor Holland’s suggestion that more prominent signage is required, the County advised that they are awaiting a response from Highways England. Nothing further has been reported since 25 June.

Councillor Holland has also contacted the Police and Crime Commissioner’s Outreach Worker about the lack of enforcement by the police and the impact of the lorry movements on Huntingdon Road residents and beyond (Victoria Road). The following response was received on 25 June,

“Unfortunately,…, Sir Graham Bright is unable to investigate or manage individual cases relating to operational police matters…”

This unsatisfactory situation has been carrying on for close to 18 months and Castle Independents share residents’ frustration and anger that so little has been done by the relevant public authorities to address the problem. Meanwhile Castle Independents are taking this opportunity to raise the matter again at West Central Area Committee in the hope that the problem of excessive and continuous lorry movements along the Huntingdon Road will be taken seriously.


In response Councillor Cantrill read out a statement from Sergeant Misik:


The issues around the HGV use on Huntingdon Road are part of the West/Central area committees priority around road safety.  As part of this priority we have been in contact with the Local Infrastructure and Street Management department at the County Council to confirm the details of the order.  The order was put in place to reduce the number of HGV’s being diverted thought the city as a result of the overnight road closes to the East Bound A14.  The original order was due to expire at a date that the road works has been due to complete but due to complications they needed to extend this for a short while, but I believe this was not needed.  As a result of the fluid nature of the road work’s the  County Council have extend the order for 6 months further in case there are any more unexpected overnight road closures.


The issue has been raised with the Road Policing Unit who have completed patrols of the area when they have been able but they have not at this time found any vehicles breaching the order.  Patrols have also been carried out by the West area team but again with a negative result.


The wider Cambridge City district Safer Neighbourhood 24/7 teams have been briefed about the nature of the situation.


The North area committee has a similar priority along Victoria Road, I have further reviewed there results and they have not found any HGVs breaching the order when the RPU and local teams have conducted targeted patrols in the area.


It is not within my remit to make comment about the signage for the closure order.


The patrols, which as mentioned form part of the road safety priority will continue.


Councillor Holt informed the Committee that she endorsed the comments made by Councillor Holland and advised that she had witnessed heavy goods vehicles in excess of 30mph on Huntingdon Road between 12.30am -2.30am over a six month period.


The Committee:


Councillor Hipkin proposed a letter should be sent to Cambridgeshire Constabulary supporting the need for action, highlighting the distress this issue has caused to residents and stressing the need of enforcement.


This was carried Nem Com.


Environmental Data Reports - WAC pdf icon PDF 6 MB

Additional documents:


 The Committee received a report from the Operations Manager (Community Engagement and Enforcement) regarding environmental data which provided an overview of City Council Refuse and Environment and Streets and Open Spaces service activity relating to the geographical area served by the West/Central Area Committee.


The Operations Manager (Community Engagement and Enforcement) asked the Committee to note the amendment sheet that had been circulated before the meeting regarding priority 6 (New Square) which had not been included in the report.


Comments from members of the public


  i.  Fitzroy Street and Burleigh Street suffered from a large amount of litter; what was the procedure for requesting additional bins.

  ii.  Requested that the ditch on Jesus Green be inspected on a regular basis.

 iii.  Advised that the ditch at Garrett Lane Hostel needed to be cleaned out consistently.

iv.  Reported that on Wilberforce Road, drivers of tanker lorries had been seen removing manholes covers and getting rid of waste. A picture of the most recent incident had been taken and reported, but was important that the Committee were made aware.


Comments from the Committee


  i.  Requested more information on the needles found referenced in the report.

  ii.  Stated that the litter on Jesus Green continued to be a problem and asked what engagement the Street Cleansing Team had with those people who were using barbecues on the Green.

  iii.  Specified that the ditch on Jesus Green needed to be cleaned out on a consistent basis.

  iv.  The cigarette bins attached to the normal bins on Jesus Green by the lock needed to be repaired and emptied.

  v.  Advised that there seemed to be a continuous problem with litter on Fitzroy and Burleigh Street and requested that this was looked at on a regular basis.

  vi.  Noted that the bins had been overflowing on Lammas Land during the hot weather and enquired what flexibility did the street teams have to increase collection during periods of hot weather.

 vii.  Advised of a recurrence of a problem with litter on the edge of Drummer Street and Emmanuel Street and asked if this could be included on the street cleansing team regular round.

viii.  Pleased to note the improvements on New Square.

  ix.  Requested if the Operations Manager could give a summary of priorities determined by the discussion in addition to the continuing priorities referenced in the report. 


The Operations Manager (Community Engagement and Enforcement) and Executive Councillor for Environment and Waste responded with the following:


  i.  Additional bins should be requested by the public through their Area Committees but could also contact the Operations Manager (whose contact details could be found at the front of the report).

  ii.  Believed that the two needles found were an isolated incident.

  iii.  Daily patrols took place on Jesus Green during the summer months from lunch to late evening. The team did not take a heavy handed approach with the public but encouraged people to use the heavy stones provided as bases and offered education, advice and encouragement to clear away litter and barbecues.

  iv.  Would give instructions to clean the ditch on Jesus Green and to repair and clean the cigarette bin.

  v.  Confirmed that the regular litter pick route from New Street would be expanded to include Fitzroy and Burleigh Street and would be targeted at weekends. 

  vi.  Would enquire what the cleansing schedule was for Lammas land to determine if this should be increased. 

 vii.  The cleansing team would be contacted to clarify the frequency of cleaning along Drummer Street and Emmanuel Street. If it was felt that taxi drivers significantly contributed to the litter this would be investigated with CCTV services to see if it was possible to verify if this claim was correct or not. 

viii.  With regards to Garrett Lane Hostel one side of the land was owned by Cambridge University and the other by the City Council. This matter would be looked at in detail.

  ix.  Agreed to speak with the Environment Health Team with regards to the dumping of waste on Wilberforce Road to see if any action was possible. An update would be given at the next WCAC meeting to advise on what could be done on this matter and who were the relevant agencies that this should be address with.

  x.  Apologised that comments regarding the request to increase the frequency of cleaning the ditch on Jesus Green had not been noted at the previous WCAC meeting. Enquires would be made to determine the cleaning scheduled and e-mail the information to the Committee.

  xi.  Confirmed that additional priorities which would run alongside the continuing properties were as follows:

·  Cleaning of the ditches at Garrett Lane Hostel.

·  Extending the litter pick Drummer Street, Fitzroy Street around Christ Pieces.

·  Investigate the Jesus Green ditch cleansing frequency.


The Committee:


Councillor Gillespie requested that the Ameycespa recycling centre be promoted and how Councillors and members of the public could visit the centres to learn more about recycling. Councillor Cantrill advised that this should be promoted by the Executive Councillor for Environment and Waste, Councillor Roberts, who agreed to do so.


Resolved (unanimously) to agree the following priorities, including the additional priorities (7 to 9).


1.  Enforcement and City Ranger patrols in the City Centre to address issues of illegally deposited trade waste and littering.


Justification: There has been a slight decrease in the number of trade waste being illegally deposited in the Market ward. A number of reports have highlighted that there has been an increase in the amount of littering in the city during the summer months, and so this priority has been expanded to include a continuation to balance the high standard of trade waste management already existing in the West/Central area and to undertake litter patrols to address the issues.


2.  Keep the Trumpington Street runnels to a standard of cleanliness and keep them switched  on during the summer months


3.  Early morning dog warden patrols for dog fouling on Grantchester Street and Lammas Land


Justification: Dog fouling continues to be identified by the Dog Warden and a number of individuals spoken to were not aware of dog control orders, this recommendation remains in order to balance education and enforcement


4.  Proactive small scale graffiti and flyposting removal by City Rangers across the West/Central area


Justification: Work already conducted by the City Rangers has been positive and enhanced the areas where cleared. This recommendation is to continue this work as a priority for the Rangers covering the West/Central areas.


5.  Enforcement patrols to address the issue of litter at Garrett Hostel Lane


Justification: Recent reports have been received by the Council for enforcement action to be taken against individuals who litter in this area, recent reports have highlighted that this issue continues to be a problem


6.  Regular litter picks and enforcement monitoring in New Square


7.  Cleaning of the ditch at Garrett Lane Hostel.


8.  Extending the litter pick Drummer Street, Fitzroy Street around Christ’s Pieces.


9.  Investigate the Jesus Green cleansing frequency and action additional cleaning if and when required. 


New Museum's Site Development Framework SPD pdf icon PDF 130 KB

Additional documents:


The Committee received a written report from the Urban Design and Conservation Manager and a verbal report from Paul Milner, University of Cambridge.


The report referred to the draft Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) which had been produced in order to set out the joint aspirations of the Council and the University of Cambridge regarding future changes to the site. These should improve the urban form with changes to the public realm, provide better access for all and adopt more sustainable forms of development while respecting the site’s heritage and surroundings. Future development on the site offered an opportunity to create an improved, more coherent development and especially to improve the public realm on the site.


Comments from the public


  i.  Hoped that the site becomes more accessible to the public.

  ii.  Queried what impact the re-development would have on the Art School building.

  iii.  Would like the Construction Management Plan to take into consideration cyclists and the impact that the construction traffic would have.

  iv.  Asked if the majority of public were not aware that site was accessible to them how they could comment on the improvements in the public consultation.


Comments from the Committee:


  i.  Noted that the Officer’s report stated the draft SPD would be adopted the same time as the Local Plan had been delayed for possibly up to year and asked how this would affect the time table for this redevelopment.

  ii.  Requested that the Committee be advised of the plans in place that would ensure minimal congestion and disruption in the City Centre during the process.

  iii.  Advised that the present site was deemed private by the public and was not accessible. Enquired what changes were being made to improve and encourage public access.

  iv.  Stated that the site had a very long frontage which had been brutalised over time. Enquired what scope there was to improve the surrounding street scenes.

  v.  Asked was the question that the public needed to answer with regards to the public consultation to ensure a positive difference.

  vi.  Welcomed the development but queried what key strategic open spaces at the West Site would be lost.

 vii.  Pleased to note that restricted vehicle access on site but advised that more discussion was needed on the construction traffic movement and traffic management plan.

viii.  Stated that a better understanding was required on vehicle movement in the City as did not want to see the same mistakes that had been made the current redevelopment of the University Arms Hotel in the City Centre.

  ix.  Advised that it would be good to see examples of visible sustainability outside of the building and not just inside as part of the design.

  x.  Specified that this as an opportunity to ask Cambridge University to reduce or stop animal testing.

  xi.  Difficult to understand the parking implications on the new open spaces highlighted on the master plan

 xii.  Would like to see retrofit of the existing buildings.

xiii.  Asked to what extend could public access be introduced to be used as a ‘through route’ from the site.


Councillor Reid encouraged the public to visit the website www.eastpaddock.com for more information regarding the campaign to save the last remaining large green space on the West Cambridge site.


The Urban Design and Conservation Manager and Paul  Milner (University of Cambridge responded with the following:


  i.  As the consultation has been approved by the Executive Councillor for Planning Policy and Transport this added weight to the decision making when the application would be considered by the Planning Committee, as would the completion of the public consultation.  However the SPD could only be adopted when the Local Plan had been adopted.

  ii.  Conditions would be placed on the planning application to negate any adverse traffic congestion.

  iii.  Construction vehicles would be instructed to enter the site away from Pembroke Street and Downing Street. The majority of demolition would be carried out by hand with the use of power tools, so the construction vehicles would be smaller than the standard vehicles used for demolition.

  iv.  Confirmed that the site was accessible to the public but the new design would make site more inviting with a series of larger inviting open spaces.

  v.  Three new court yards would be linked through the site, the largest of which would be seen from Pembroke Street with a new access point which that would add to the improved visibility through to the museum.

  vi.  There would be a key area of improvement seen to Downing Street.

 vii.  Improvements would also be made to Corn Exchange by the redevelopment of the Sir David Attenborough building, with new public access to the site. There was also a public art proposal aimed to enrich the street.

viii.  Parking on site would be reduced from fifty to eight spaces. Vehicle access would be limited. The Sir David Attenborough building would provide a new service delivery space.

  ix.  The Master Plan outlined various improvements for sustainability on the site. 

  x.  The purpose of the questionnaire was to determine if the public agreed with the SDP, improvements to the access and the proposals to re-using existing buildings. 

  xi.  West Cambridge Land is separate to this redevelopment.

 xii.  Confirmed that the safety of cyclists would be highlighted in the Construction Management Plan.

xiii.  In terms of the impact on the Cambridge Art School, currently a listed building consent application with a full application for the Student Services Centre was being scrutinised by Historic England Cambridge City Council Conservation Officers. The same architect had been working on both applications and was looking positive.


Decision taken regarding S106 projects

To note decisions taken by the previous Chair, Vice Chair and current Spokesperson since the last meeting of the West Area Committee.



S106: Histon Road Recreation Ground Play Area Improvements pdf icon PDF 65 KB

Additional documents:


The decision was noted.


Access improvements to entrances at Histon Road Recreation Ground pdf icon PDF 60 KB

Additional documents:


The decision was noted.


Public Notices from the Chair


There were currently two public consultations that the public should be aware of, these were:


·  Public Housing Strategy

·  City Deal West Bus Route (planned to start in September).

·  Redevelopment of the Cutter Ferry Path (planned to start mid-September).


Further information could be found on the City Council website, www.cambridge.gov.uk or Cambridgeshire County Council https://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/




Record of Attendance


  i.  8   members of the public

  ii.  12   Councillors

  iii.  5   City Officers

  iv.  1   University of Cambridge Representative