A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Meeting Room - Cherry Trees Day Centre

Contact: Sarah Steed  Committee Manager

No. Item

Change to published agenda order

Under paragraph 4.2.1 of the Council Procedure Rules, the Chair used her discretion to alter the order of the agenda items. However, for ease of the reader, these minutes will follow the order of the agenda.



Election of Chair and Vice Chair - EAC


The Committee Manager took the chair whilst the East Area Committee elected a Chair.


Councillor Johnson proposed, and Councillor Sinnott seconded, the nomination of Councillor Smith as Chair.


Resolved unanimously that Councillor Smith be Chair for the ensuing year.


Councillor Smith assumed the chair from the Committee Manager at this point.


Councillor Blencowe proposed, and Councillor R Moore seconded, the nomination of Councillor Roberts as Vice-Chair.


Resolved unanimously that Councillor Roberts be Vice-Chair for the ensuing year.  



Apologies For Absence


There were no apologies for absence.  Councillor Baigent provided apologies for lateness.



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.


No declarations were made.



Minutes pdf icon PDF 501 KB

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 7 April 2016.


The minutes of the meeting held on the 7 April 2016 were approved as a correct record.



Matters & Actions Arising From The Minutes pdf icon PDF 118 KB

Reference will be made to the Committee Action Sheet available under the ‘Matters & Actions Arising From The Minutes’ section of the previous meeting agenda.


General agenda information can be accessed using the following hyperlink:




Open Forum 28/01/16 Cllr Blencowe / Clare Rankin / Pedestrian and Cycle Steering Group to arrange for an audit of cycle provision at community facilities


Cllr Blencowe confirmed that officers were currently investigating how best to undertake a baseline review of existing provision.  Action removed from action sheet as being referred to Pedestrian and Cycling Steering Group.


Open Forum 28/01/16 Cllr Roberts to look into Coleridge Recreation Ground query regarding toilets being closed because of asbestos and issue regarding fence and overgrown entrance


Cllr Roberts confirmed that the issues would be covered in the toilet review.  Cllr Herbert added that limited insulation affected the water provision in the toilets, but there was a need to have them open in winter because of the level of usage.  This could also be covered in the toilet review.  Action removed from action sheet as the review was a matter for Environment Scrutiny Committee.


Open Forum 07/04/16 Cllr Blencowe to speak with the Planning Manager to request that representations were made by the Council that the planning appeal was conducted by way of a formal hearing.


Cllr Blencowe advised that there had been no change in position with Romsey Terrace application.

Open Forum 07/04/16 John Richards / Tim Wetherfield to undertake a review of the Romsey Town Square S106 project proposals following the March/April 2016 consultation exercise


Completed and response included in the action sheet prepared for 7 July. Action removed from action sheet.


Open Forum 07/04/16 Cllr Sinnott to follow up if a mobile CCTV camera could be sited on Devonshire Road with the Police


Covered under the EAC Policing and Safer Neighbourhoods item; Sergeant Norden to follow the matter up.  Action removed from action sheet.


Open Forum 07/04/16 Cllr Roberts to look into mooring conditions and air pollution issue raised


Cllr Roberts advised that this matter would be considered by the Environment Scrutiny Committee; for the purposes of EAC, the action could be regarded as completed.  Action removed from action sheet.


Open Forum 07/04/16 Cllr Roberts to check with Don Blair whether the Council was cleaning the Carter Bridge at the correct rate.


Cllr Roberts advised that the City Council was responsible for cleaning the inside of the Carter Bridge, and was doing so on a weekly basis.  The County Council was responsible for cleaning the outside of the bridge.  Cllr Roberts understood that it was difficult to find a window when the outside cleaning could be done without disrupting rail traffic; he and Cllr Moghadas continued to follow the matter up with the responsible officer at the County. 


Open Forum 07/04/16 Romsey Terrace signage

Cllr Moghadas reported that she was due to meet the County Council’s Head of Highways at the end of July.


Environmental Data Reports – EAC Wendy Young to arrange for dog poo bag dispenser at Ravensworth Gardens. Also to investigate whether Network Rail’s railing could be painted. 


Noted that dog poo bag dispenser had been installed in April.  No response yet received from Network Rail on the painting of the railing.



Open Forum

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


1.   Dr Tony Eva made a number of points in relation to car parking on Riverside.  At EAC on 28 January 2016 he had failed to get a resolution passed calling for all car parking to be banned adjacent to the river between the Riverside Bridge and Stourbridge Common. The issue remained.


Dr Eva urged Councillors to adopt the following motion:

‘The East Area Committee is aware of the upcoming consultation exercise due to be taken by Cambridgeshire County Council with respect to parking improvements on Riverside. It urges the County Council to ensure that a full range of viable options is presented for public comment and in particular that an option is presented for the removal of all car parking on Riverside northeast of Stanley Road’.


Cllr Johnson replied that he understood that John Richards would be continuing to talk to County officers about parking options; he would inform John Richards that residents still had concerns, and wanted the consultation approach to be revised and made more open.  Cllr Johnson was happy to support Dr Eva’s proposal in principle.


Cllr Blencowe said that the Cambridge City Joint Area Committee (CJAC) might well be asked to decide which scheme was to be approved.  Consultation on proposals would be taking place, and as a member of CJAC, he would not be expressing a view at the present time.


Dr Eva said that residents wished to have a range of options included in the consultation, rather than a ‘take it or leave it’ approach.  He was assured that the consultation would provide an opportunity for residents to suggest alternative solutions.


Discussing the matter further, Councillors largely expressed support for the motion, but pointed out that the final decision would not be for the EAC to make.  At the Chair’s suggestion, the motion was amended by adding the words ‘subject to viability’.


Resolved by a majority (8 votes in favour, 0 against, and 3 abstentions) that:


The East Area Committee is aware of the upcoming consultation exercise due to be taken by Cambridgeshire County Council with respect to parking improvements on Riverside. It urges the County Council to ensure that a full range of viable options is presented for public comment and in particular that an option is presented for the removal of all car parking on Riverside northeast of Stanley Road, subject to viability.


ACTION: Councillor Johnson to inform John Richards that residents still had concerns about the Riverside consultation process, and wanted the consultation approach to be revised and made more open.


2.   Georgie Deards and Janet Griffiths drew attention to various issues in relation to the council gardens and seating area in Budleigh Close and Burnside.  After they had raised the matter at an earlier EAC, work had been done to improve the area, but it was once again overgrown and attracting human and animal litter and waste.


Efforts to draw this to officers’ and Councillors’ attention had so far been unsuccessful.  Meanwhile, they were trying to keep the area tidy themselves, but the whole length of the brook from Burnside and Budleigh Close to Sainsbury’s needed attention.


Ms Deards and Ms Griffiths asked for answers to these difficulties.


Councillor Herbert said that the gardens were maintained by the Streets and Open Spaces teams.  He undertook to follow through the issues raised and meet on site with the gardening team.  The issue of the cost of maintaining the gardens had never been resolved with Housing, which fell under Councillor Roberts’s remit.


Councillor Roberts said that an action plan could be developed by ward residents and their Councillors on a ward walkabout.  A walkabout might be helpful in this case, and could be requested through the ward Councillors.


The questioners added that there were also difficulties with the placement of dustbins in the area, which was not suitable for bins.  If new residents put the bins in the wrong place, rubbish was blown about by the wind.  Photographs of the area were available.


The Chair assured the questioners that they would receive a full report.


ACTION: Councillor Herbert to follow Budleigh Close / Burnside issues through, and meet on site with the Open Spaces and Housing team.



3.   Richard Newman, a member of staff at Christ Church, provided an update on, and sought support for, plans for the development of Abbey Church.  The church was in a state of disrepair, and lacked modern amenities.  It was hoped to create space for community use there, as well as developing some residential accommodation to provide an income stream.  Mr Newman wished to consult his ward councillor and explore perhaps obtaining S106 funding.


Cllr Johnson said that he would be happy to take this forward, and to meet Mr Newman outside the meeting to talk about the church’s plans and how the City Council could assist in realising them.


ACTION: Councillor Johnson to meet with Richard Newman to explore Christ Church’s plans for the development of Abbey Church.


4.   In a separate question, Richard Newman, speaking as a resident of Tenison Road, welcomed the work being done to improve the carriageway, but asked whether there was any mechanism by which the present poor quality pavements could be brought up to the same high standard of finish.


Cllr Walsh explained that the pavement resurfacing would be carried out as a separate project, from a different budget than that for highways.  It was County Council policy to use tarmac on pavements rather than paving stones.  He offered to look, with the other ward Councillors, at the question of resurfacing, but Mr Newman assured him that he was happy with the use of tarmac.


5.   Richard Harvey said that in early April he had noticed 49 vehicles in the space of 45 minutes turning right into Devonshire Road from Mill Road; 9 of the 49 were taxis.  He had reported this to the Council but had received no reply; he would like to know why.


Cllr Roberts undertook to follow up the lack of reply with the Head of the Environment Team.  He would also look into the taxi licensing aspects of the matter.


Cllr Benstead recalled that he had advised Mr Harvey to submit photographs at the Area Committee’s last meeting.  He asked Mr Harvey to forward to him the email making the report, so that he could follow it up.


ACTION:  Cllr Roberts and Cllr Benstead to follow up lack of reply to Mr Harvey’s email with the Head of the Environment Team, and look into taxi licensing aspect.


6.   James Woodburn, speaking as a resident of Cherry Hinton Road, strongly welcomed the new 20mph speed limit in Cherry Hinton Road, but said that it was not being enforced.  Also, proposals to develop the former Constitutional Club site opposite the Swiss Laundry were likely to lead to increased late-night traffic and noise.


He asked the Area Committee to support two measures:

·        the replacement of the out-of-date speed cameras outside the Swiss Laundry with modern digital cameras

·        the installation of road humps, and of raised tables at junctions, similar to those in Chesterton High Street and in Green End Road.


In discussion, Councillors expressed some sympathy with Mr Woodburn’s request, drawing on their own experience of other 20mph roads.  However, there were legal considerations round the use of safety cameras which might mean replacement was not a simple issue.  It was also difficult to arrange the installation of humps and raised tables and could be expensive; Cherry Hinton Road was probably unsuited to such measures because it carried a high volume of traffic, including trucks and buses. 


One Councillor recalled that residents had asked for the humps in Green End Road between the Golden Hind and Nuffield Road to be removed, and Fen Road residents had requested removal of humps because of the noise caused by vehicles driving over them.  Traffic in Green End Road had probably slowed down, but this was more likely to be a result of the 20mph limit than of the traffic humps.


The planning application for the Constitutional Club site, for a mixed development of housing and a social club, had only been published recently.  Local residents’ views would be sought before the application was decided.


The point was made that it was necessary to rely on motorists being aware that they should abide by the 20mph speed limit.  Enforcement of the limit was likely to be easier once it covered the whole of Cambridge, rather than just the North and now the East areas. 


7.   Richard Taylor asked about plans for the Stourbridge Common end of Riverside.  It was not appropriate to consult only local residents on the plans; he had made a Freedom of Information request about the content of these discussions.  Part of the plans included changes to the gate to Stourbridge Common, and the dualling of the cycle way.  Mr Taylor asked what was going to happen next about the gate element of the plans, and whether it would form part of the same consultation as the parking.


Cllr Johnson replied that these were two different, complementary projects, paid for from two different funding sources.  The detail of the consultation was still being discussed, but it would seem logical to consult on the two schemes together, and expected that this would be the case.


Cllr Roberts explained, by way of background, that part of the original motivation for changes to the gate had been to improve disability access to Stourbridge Common, and it had been realised that this could go together with improving cycling access.  It would be desirable also, in the interests of pedestrians and cyclists, to reduce regular vehicle access onto the common at this point, as there was vehicle access elsewhere.  He would expect proposals for gate and parking to be consulted on together; one question would be which side of the entrance to the common the gate should be sited on in relation to any parking.


In answer to a supplementary question from Mr Taylor, Cllr Roberts said that he could see no reason why the proposals could not all form part of one consultation, if the four Abbey ward Councillors could chase this up together.


ACTION: Cllrs Hart, Johnson, Roberts and Whitehead to pursue question of conducting a single consultation on proposals at the Stourbridge Common end of Riverside, covering parking and access to the common.


8.   Frank Gawthrop spoke as Secretary of the South Petersfield Residents Association (SoPRA) about the City Deal traffic proposals.  SoPRA understood that the red dots on the map represented only suggested closure points, but needed to know a more precise location for the Hills Road point, and was concerned that the closure could result in Tenison Road becoming a rat run.


Mr Gawthrop sought Cllr Herbert’s assurance that he would examine the issue carefully; special consideration was needed for Tenison Road.


Cllr Herbert said that what was being proposed were peak time congestion control points, intended to achieve modal shift and reduce the number of cars on the road by 10-15%.  The public was being consulted on the location of these control points, which would use number plate recognition cameras rather than bollards.  In siting the Hills Road control point, there was no wish to reroute traffic down Tenison Road, and Mill Road should also be looked at as a specific issue, taking into account the need to ensure access, and examine how people got in and out of Romsey and Petersfield.  There was no intention of shifting traffic from Hills Road onto Mill Road.


Cllr Robertson added that congestion was holding people up and contributing to very poor air quality.  There would be a trial of peak time closures next year to see where the control points could best be placed.  There was a risk of diverting traffic onto side roads, but modelling had indicated that there would be reasonable results from the six control points, and the trial period should demonstrate whether the scheme would be workable.  Number plate recognition cameras would be used at the control points rather than bollards.


Cllr Baigent thanked Mr Gawthrop for bringing this to the Committee.  Measures were needed to calm traffic in the city and reduce pollution in for example Mill Road.  He was a member of the City Deal Assembly and would be willing to come and speak to SoPRA about the matter.


Mr Gawthrop replied that he accepted the point about pollution in Mill Road, but Tenison Road was a residential street, and it was important that this be taken into account in the deliberations.


9.   Roxanne De Beaux wished to raise a point of clarification about the minutes of the January meeting, in relation to how her comments had been reported.


The speaker was reminded that the minutes had already been agreed as a record of the meeting at the April EAC.


10.    Andrew Osborne, speaking as a representative of Unite, thanked Cllr Herbert and the City for obtaining £70m from the Government for housing, and asked Cllr Herbert when the Council was going to start to build council housing. 


Cllr Herbert replied that there was to be a consultation on the principle of devolution, and it would be necessary to seek confirmation of the deal that was actually being offered, which it appeared to be £70m.  This should allow for about 500 homes to be built over a period of five years, on a number of sites within the city, large and small.  He was determined to start building work, but it could not all be done at once, as for example, there was still a workforce based at the Mill Road depot, a possible site for housing. 


As a supplementary point, Mr Osborne thanked Cllr Herbert for his comments and urged that building start as soon as possible.  Unite was not protesting, but would be continuing to exert pressure until they saw bricks actually being laid.  He urged that as many homes as possible be built in the East Area.


Another questioner sought assurance that the housing to be built would be social housing, not affordable housing.


Cllr Herbert acknowledged that this was a challenge, and welcomed the support of Unite.  He assured the questioner that the intention was to build social rent council housing, which, unlike shared ownership, would on an ongoing basis be available for rent.


EAC Policing & Safer Neighbourhoods pdf icon PDF 152 KB


The Committee received a report from Sergeant Colin Norden and ASB Officer Louise Walbank regarding the policing and safer neighbourhoods trends.


The report outlined actions taken since the Committee on 28 January 2016. The current emerging issues/neighbourhood trends for each ward were also highlighted (see report for full details).


Previous priorities and engagement activity noted in the report were:

i.             Continue to target the supply of controlled drugs

ii.    Continue to target street based anti-social behaviour (ASB) in and around Mill Road

iii.           Retain speed checks.


In relation to James Woodburn’s question about Cherry Hinton Road, Sergeant Norden said that the Police would be enforcing the speed limit in areas such as Cherry Hinton Road, though attendance there would always have to be balanced against other demands on their time such as 999 calls.  He undertook to talk to the Safety Camera Partnership about the cameras on Cherry Hinton Road.


ACTION:  Sergeant Norden to talk to the Safety Camera Partnership about the cameras on Cherry Hinton Road.


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


1.   Roxanne De Beaux, referring to her remarks at the January EAC, welcomed the police action taken on Mill Road bridge, though she had been unaware of it before the present meeting.  She reported that she had made four 999 calls because of violent behaviour, all of which had been responded to very quickly.  However, she had almost been run over by a police vehicle the previous day. 


Ms De Beaux expressed her thanks for the action taken, asked that it be continued, and suggested that it be given greater publicity.  She also urged that central solid white lines be put in place on both sides of Mill Road bridge. 


Cllr Baigent replied that Councillors were already looking at the matter of white lining, and wished to see a double white line with central hatching, such that it would be impossible for a car to pass a bicycle.  Sergeant Norden acknowledged the request for greater publicity for the action, but expressed a preference for issuing a press release on a future occasion, rather than looking back to events which had taken place in March.


As a further point, Ms De Beaux recalled that there had been an undertaking at the January meeting to look again at the adequacy of the signage at the bridge.


Cllr Moghadas replied that the County Council’s Head of Highways had taken a note of the concern.  The feedback from the Head of Highways had however been that cyclists should use the Carter Bridge rather than Mill Road bridge; members greeted this statement with some concern.  Cllr Moghadas agreed that cars should not be able to overtake on Mill Road bridge, and undertook to follow the matter up with Highways.


ACTION: Cllr Moghadas to follow up matter of signage at Mill Road bridge with the Head of Highways.


2.   Richard Taylor asked whether there were any statistics relating to the enforcement of the Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) in Mill Road.  


Cllr Herbert replied that the decision to renew the PSPO had been based on whether the order had had the effect intended.  In Mill Road, drinkers had taken over the limited green spaces, and the PSPO did disperse the high concentration of drinkers.  It had not been necessary to issue any fixed notices; a couple of people had been moved on in the early days of the order.  Sergeant Norden had not suggested it as a priority for action.  The Council continued to work with the homeless and the Safer Communities Team.


Mr Taylor asked a further question, whether there would be any change to Police attendance at the Area Committee as a consequence of policing changes in the city.


Sergeant Norden said that his understanding was that there would be an increase in the local team, and that police attendance at EAC would continue.


The Chair thanked Sergeant Norden for his attendance at this, his final meeting.


3.   Frank Gawthrop said that about 70 people attending a SoPRA meeting had expressed unanimous support for the continuation of the PSPO in Mill Road, and its extension to the whole road, not just the green spaces.  Their impression was that the number of drunks in Mill Road had increased, and that considerable quantities of high-strength white cider continued to be sold.


Cllr Benstead said that in order to review licences, it was necessary to have actual hard evidence that the licensed premises were selling alcohol to people who were already inebriated.  He asked anybody who thought a licensed premises was offending to speak to the licensing officers for advice on how to gather evidence.


4.   Another questioner asked where abandoned bicycles were taken, and where they could be seen by their owners.


Sergeant Norden replied that all bikes were checked on the police crime system and the bike register.  Owners should contact the police to see if their bike has been recovered, and should always register their bike details on the national Immobilise bike register [www.immobilise.com].


The Committee discussed the following policing issues:


     i.        Use of a camera at the Elizabeth Way underpass to record graffiti

    ii.        Installation of a CCTV camera at the junction of Mill Road and Devonshire Road

   iii.        Reasons for the rise in violent crime; was is drugs-related or domestic violence related.  Reply was that every time  drugs were detected, other crime was found too, and that improved recording of crime produced an apparent increase

  iv.        Action to take if witnessing drug dealing.  The answer was that if a crime was actually taking place, ring 999.  If it had already occurred, ring 101.

   v.        Graffiti – catching taggers and cleaning the graffiti

  vi.        Level of cycle theft.  It was pointed out that the biggest problem was poor cycle locks or failure to use a lock at all.  Cyclists should know the make, model, colour and index number of their bike in case of theft.


ACTION: Sgt Norden to find out about possibilities for installing a camera at Elizabeth Way underpass


ACTION: Sgt Norden to find out about possibilities for installing a camera at junction of Mill Road and Devonshire Road


Following discussion, Members resolved (unanimously) to approve the continuation of the three priorities already identified:

i.             Continue to target the supply of controlled drugs

ii.             Continue to target street based anti-social behaviour (ASB) in and around Mill Road

iii.           Retain speed checks.



Environmental Reports - EAC pdf icon PDF 1 MB

Additional documents:


The Committee received a report from the Operations Manager – Community Engagement and Enforcement, presented in her absence by the Public Realm Enforcement Officers.


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 East 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 were suggestions for Members on what action could be considered for priority within the East Area for the period June to August 2016:


Continuing Priorities:


1.   Enforcement Patrols to tackle fly tipping at Riverside, Ashbury Close, Ditton Fields and St Matthews Street area.

2.   Early morning, daytime and weekend patrols for dog fouling at the following locations:

·        St Thomas’s Square and Road

·        Ravensworth Gardens play areas

·        Thorpe Way play area

·        St Bedes Crescent

·        Coleridge Recreation Ground

3.   Enforcement investigation and action to deal with littering problems Newmarket Road from Tesco and around the areas of Wickes and Staples, B&Q and Cambridge Retail Park.

4.   Illegal camping barbeque and green space patrols at Stourbridge Common.


New suggested priority:


5.   Enforcement patrols to tackle environmental crime at Thorpe Way estate.


The Committee discussed the following issues:


i.     Passed on reports of dog fouling on Barnabas Road, and asked whether a walkabout of the Whitehill Road area might be arranged to see the problems

ii.    Asked whether it might be possible to have a further allocation of litter bins and dog waste bins to wards which had used their quota, such as Abbey

iii.   Expressed thanks for the clearing of rubbish from the alleyway between Abbey Road and Elizabeth Way bridge

iv.  Suggested that, once resurfacing of the walls of the Elizabeth Way roundabout underpass had been completed, some sort of watch should be kept for further graffiti-writers.  The Public Realm Enforcement Officer said that covert observation could be difficult, as their powers were very limited 

v.   Raised the possibility of deterring fly-tippers by posting notices referring people to the Milton Recycling Centre, but acknowledged the problem of clutter from too many street signs.  Noted that the maximum fine for fly-tipping was now £400, the proceeds from which could be used for clearing fly-tipping sites

vi.  With reference to Newmarket Road, queried whether it was possible to hold businesses responsible for clearing up litter.  Noted that some authorities were making use of Community Protection Warnings, and that the possibility of using them in Cambridge was already being investigated

vii. With reference to a recent find of a large number of used needles at one location, noted that the person concerned in that incident had not appreciated the potential issues involved, and that drug users under medical care were usually supplied with sharps boxes

viii.   Received assurance that abandoned bicycles were now being donated to charities for refurbishment

ix.  Requested dog litter signs for Petersfield ward, at the two entrances to Mill Road cemetery on Mill Road and on Norfolk Street

x.   Asked that care be taken when using weed-killer not to spray a wider area than necessary, in order  to avoid unsightly grass die-back

xi.  Expressed thanks to the City Rovers for the work on the East Road estate, as illustrated in the committee report

xii. Suggested further places where the Community Payback Team could usefully be deployed, namely in the Budleigh Close and Burnside area, to deal with overgrown bushes, and at the Petersfield end of the Carter Bridge, where the bollards were still not white.


Action: Cllr Roberts to investigate possibility of additional litter and dog waste bins for wards which have exhausted their allocation.


Frank Gawthrop, Secretary of the South Petersfield Residents’ Association, requested a replacement for the standard waste bin outside the Bodywork Studio; the previous bin had disappeared, and a means of disposing of cigarette butts was required.


Following discussion, Members resolved (unanimously) to approve the continuation of the four previous priorities for action above, and the addition of the new priority of Enforcement patrols to tackle environmental crime at Thorpe Way estate.



Appointment to Outside Bodies

• Cambridge Airport Consultative Committee


• East Barnwell Community Centre



Resolved that Councillor Hart be the representative for the East Barnwell Community Centre for the ensuing year.


Resolved that Councillor Hart be the representative for the Cambridge Airport Consultative Committee for the ensuing year.