A Cambridge City Council website

Cambridge City Council

Council and democracy

Home > Council and Democracy > Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Meeting Room - CHVLC - Cherry Hinton Village Leisure Centre, Colville Road, Cherry Hinton, Cambridge, CB1 9EJ. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services  Committee Manager

Link: Video promoting the meeting

Items
No. Item

19/19/SAC

Election of Chair and Vice Chair - SAC

Minutes:

The Committee Manager took the Chair whilst the South Area Committee elected a Chair.

 

Councillor Thornburrow proposed, and Councillor Dryden seconded, the nomination of Councillor McPherson as Chair.

 

Councillor Pippas proposed, and Councillor Page-Croft seconded, the nomination of Councillor McGerty as Chair.

 

Resolved (by 6 votes to 5) that Councillor McGerty be Chair for the ensuing year.

 

Councillor McGerty proposed, and Councillor McPherson seconded, the nomination of Councillor Thornburrow as Vice Chair.

 

Resolved (unanimously) that Councillor Thornburrow be Vice Chair for the ensuing year.

19/20/SAC

Change to published agenda order

Minutes:

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.

19/21/SAC

Welcome, Introduction and Apologies for Absence

Minutes:

Apologies were received from County Councillor Ashwood.

 

The Chair thanked the outgoing Chair for his efforts over the last year and welcomed newly elected Councillors to the Committee.

19/22/SAC

Declarations of Interest

Minutes:

No interests were declared.

19/23/SAC

Minutes pdf icon PDF 342 KB

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting of the 8th April 2019 were agreed and signed as a correct record subject to the following correction.

 

19/14/SAC Q9

Delete Queen Edith’s School and insert Netherhall School.

 

 

19/24/SAC

Matters and Actions Arising from the Minutes pdf icon PDF 196 KB

Minutes:

The Action sheet was noted and an updated copy can be viewed at the following link under ‘Updates to Action Sheet’.

 

https://democracy.cambridge.gov.uk/documents/s46824/190408%20Committee%20Action%20Sheet%20SAC.pdf

19/25/SAC

Open Forum

Minutes:

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

 

1.  Church End suffers from parking issues and cars travelling at speed. A recent accident showed how dangerous the area had become. It was only a matter of time before a fatal accident occurs. Why has no traffic calming been undertaken?

 

Councillor Crawford said that she has spent a lot of time talking to the Highways Department regarding this matter. The concerns date back a number of years. A priority gate was promised but had yet to be delivered.

Councillor McPherson stated that work had been requested since 1996. The Highways Department had consistently rejected all ideas for improvements. Existing speed limits were not observed or enforced.

 

Action Point: Councillor Crawford would continue to pressure the Highways Department for action.

 

2.  A petition of 13,000 signatures had been raised in support of the Flying Pig. The venue has a long history of supporting and promoting local musicians and should be protected.

 

Councillor McGerty stated that the building should be retained.

Councillor Summerbell stated that the community wanted to retain local public houses and that this venue should be protected from accidental damage while construction work was carried out around it.

 

It was noted that a similar unit was demolished without notice or permission and action was needed to prevent this public house suffering a similar fate.

 

Action Point: Councillor Summerbell undertook to write to developer and remind them of the status of the building in order to protect it from unlawful demolition.

 

3.  When would the CCTV in Cherry Hinton High Street be back in operation?

 

Councillor Dryden confirmed that all CCTV equipment across the City was being upgraded. The CCTV provision for Cherry Hinton would be back in operation very soon.

 

4.  Could any future Local Plans include a simple summary to make them more accessible to members of the public?

 

Councillor Thornburrow stated that this was a good suggestion and that the Council was keen to hear what the public had to say.

 

5.  What progress has been made towards the promised 500 housing units? How many people from the Housing Register had been housed?

 

Councillor Thornburrow confirmed that many schemes had been identified and were being delivered. Further schemes were currently under construction.

 

6.  The realtime information supplied at bus stops was often inaccurate with expected buses not arriving or disappearing from the board. Reliable information was needed for bus users.

 

Councillor Taylor confirmed that the County Council controlled the realtime display boards. Bus reliability had improved. The bus users group had looked into the matter.

 

Action Point: Committee Manager to invite Stagecoach to send a representative to South Area Committee.

19/26/SAC

GCP Project Updates pdf icon PDF 3 MB

(i) City Access/Choices for Better Journeys
(ii) Cambridge South East Transport (A1307) - The following link goes to an overview and from there people can navigate through additional information as they wish

www.greatercambridge.org.uk/CambridgeSouthEast

Minutes:

The Committee received a presentation from Andrew Munro and Tom Bennett of Greater Cambridge Partnership updating on a number of projects. The presentation covered the consultation process, preferred routes, expected delivery dates and next steps.

 

Slides from the presentation can be viewed using the link below.

 

https://democracy.cambridge.gov.uk/documents/s46829/190717%20South%20Area%20Committee%20briefing.pdf

 

The Officers responded to question from Members of the Committee and the public as follows:

 

1.  The original Cam Network route took in the three outer city campuses but this appears to have changed and it now bypasses two of those sites.

 

Research suggests that people are willing to walk or cycle some distance to connect with good travel networks and while not directly visiting those campuses, the route would include them. The need for connectivity was a key driver of the project.

 

2.  Other cities had better bus connections that Cambridge currently lacked.

 

The guided bus demonstrates that people would embrace good bus services. Local bus service improvements were needed.

 

3.  What sort of vehicles would be used? Would they be capable of transporting cycles?

 

No final decisions had been made. The provision of cycle racks/trailers on public service vehicles can increase time stopped which they are loaded and unloaded.

 

4.  Would there be cycle parking at village stops?

 

Yes, there would be an integrated system including disabled parking.

 

5.  Trumpington Residents Association had concerns regarding the impact on 9 Wells Nature Reserve and access to the Bio Medical Campus and Rail Station.

 

Further information on access points and routes would be provided at future information events. GCP has formed a landscape and ecology working group to advise on major projects.  GCP is currently committed to enhancing and protecting the Ninewells Nature reserve.

 

6.  How would the initial consultation and decision process be undertaken?

 

A range of information and consultation events would be considering the options. This would be followed by full consultations.

 

7.  The Citizens Assembly would not be representative of the local communities most affected by the routes.

 

The Citizens Assembly would be a balanced group drawn from across the region. The local voice would be heard. The Assembly would be independent and would be supported by a range of experts.

 

8.  Would the Assembly be restricted in its scope, for example, being asked to choose between limited options?

 

The Assembly would be free to return any answer it wanted. Full details of the methodology would be published on the website.

 

The Committee thanked the officers for their attendance and suggested they return at a later date to update on progress.

19/27/SAC

Pedestrian and Cycle Safety Update From County Council

(i) Queen Edith’s Way
(ii) Fendon Road Roundabout

Minutes:

The Committee received presentations from Cambridgeshire County Council Officers regarding Cycle Safety projects.

 

Fendon Road / Queen Edith's Way / Mowbray Road improvement plans

 

Grant Weller (Project Manager) gave an update on the Fendon Road / Queen Edith's Way / Mowbray Road improvement plans and consultations to-date.

 

  i.  Work was due to begin on constructing the new layout for the Fendon Road / Queen Edith's Way / Mowbray Road roundabout on Monday 9 September 2019. 

  ii.  Work would involve the installation of a new Dutch-style roundabout to improve safety in the area, by giving priority to pedestrians and cyclists over motorists.

  iii.  One of the key elements is a change in carriageway width, designed to influence slower approach and departure speeds, thereby reducing the speed of drivers.

  iv.  Pedestrians would be provided with zebra crossings on each of the four roundabout entry / exit arms and on the crossing points over the cycle paths.

  v.  Cyclists would be given their own cycle path, in contrasting red tarmac, to give them priority over motor vehicles.

  vi.  Unfortunately, Stagecoach had been unable to send a representative to provide an update on bus services in the area.

 

 

Further consultations and information events were planned as follows:

·  Thursday 29 August 2019, 12.00pm to 2.00pm, Addenbrookes Concourse

·  Monday 2 September 2019, 5.30pm to 7.30pm, Netherhall School

·  Wednesday 4 September 2019, 3.30pm to 6.30pm, St James C of E Church, Wulfstan Way.

 

The Officers invited question from Members of the Committee and the public as follows:

 

1.  Would parking restrictions be introduced to Nightingale Avenue?

 

Parking would be restricted to allow diverted buses access.

2.  Local residents suggested that the consultation had been too little and too late. Where would traffic heading for Addenbrooke’s Hospital go? Where would the displaced vehicles park? Why would the work take 29 weeks? Had alternative, shorter road closures been considered?

Further information events and letter drops were planned and an information / publicity campaign would keep the public informed.

3.  How common were the planned roundabouts across Europe?

Currently around 4,000 roundabouts of this style were in use in Holland and more were planned.

4.  Had the team considered postponing the work until the start of next year’s school summer holidays?

The work was timed to allow completion next April when  evenings would be lighter. This would allow the public to get used to the new arrangement before the winter months.

5.  Many elderly people lived in the Queen Edith’s Way area. How would they get to the hospital for appointments?

There would be disruption and the Citi 2 bus route would not be going to the hospital while the work was being completed. Passengers would need to change buses to complete the journey.

6.  Could shuttle buses be provided?

That would be an operational issue for Stagecoach to consider.

7.  Mill Road has seen an improvement in air quality since the road had been closed to through traffic. Would air quality in this area be monitored to see if a similar improvement was noted?

There were plans to monitor the air quality during the works.

Action Point: Councillor Thornburrow undertook to investigate the use of air monitors during the road closures.

8.  The proposed left hand turn onto Hills Road would cause a conflict with the existing traffic lights.

This would be discussed with the Signals team.

9.  The proposals would result in the closure of Queen Edith’s Way as a though route. If this was not done the project delivery time would be extended by 8 weeks. Had consultations offered that as an option? Had the impact on the local economy been taken into account?

This option had been rejected as it would require 3 way signals and would add to predicted congestion.

10.Why had the first day of the new school year been selected as the start date for the project?

There was no convenient time for the project.

11.Why had such a complex roundabout been selected?

The design was considered the safest for cyclists. The haulage industry experts and public transport providers had been consulted.

12.There had been problems with contractors on previous projects. What measures would be in place for on-going consultation during the construction phase?

The Officer undertook to take this comment back to the Project team.

Mike Davies (County Council Cycling Projects: Team Leader) stated that the contractor was one of the best and considerable pre-construction work had been completed.

13.Where will cars that normally park in Nightingale Avenue find alternative parking?

Parking has been a problem in this area for some time and the only long term solution would be residents’ parking.

14.Drivers will be unfamiliar with Dutch style roundabouts. How will this be addressed?

Public information would be circulated.

15.How would a stranger to Cambridge know what to do when faced with an unfamiliar road layout?

This would be an on-going communication matter. Good design and clear signage is an important factor.

Queen Edith’s Way

Vanessa Kelly (Senior Project Officer) gave an update on the Queen Edith's Way improvement plans and consultations todate. 

  i.  Consultation had been undertaken in 2015 and 2016.

  ii.  Those consultations had highlighted the priorities for the area and had focused attention on the schools in the area.

  iii.  Work was on-going to map journeys.

  iv.  Aim was to reduce car trips and car speed.

  v.  There would be workshops for students and families in the near future.

  vi.  Once design option had been agreed, wider consultations would follow.

The Officers invited question from Members of the Committee and the public as follows:

1.  The focus appears to have changed from accessibility to broader road safety matters.

The initial consultation work had shown that up to 80% of drivers fail to observe the 20 mph limit and with additional housing expected in the area, other road safety options were being explored.

 

2.  Both the carriageway and pavement of Queen Edith’s Way had been in a poor condition for years. Members of the public might question why there had been no funding available for repairs whilst major projects could be delivered.

 

There had been concerns over road safety in an area so frequently used by school children. However, it was hoped that funding for resurfacing would be found.

 

3.  Why install a cycle lane when the area already had 20 mph speed restrictions?

 

Cycle lanes would narrow the carriageway and this would slow the traffic down. The current wide road encouraged drivers to ignore the speed limit.

 

4.  The public were confused by the different funding streams and needed to know where the money was coming from when projects were proposed.

 

5.  Could courtesy cameras, that told drivers how fast they were going, be considered for Queen Edith’s Way.

 

6.  Could Church End be considered for similar speed reduction works?

 

The County Council hoped to look at the wider area to understand traffic flows. Proposed junctions for land north of Cherry Hinton were poor and it was hoped that these could be improved and would be funded by the developer.

19/28/SAC

Environmental Report- SAC pdf icon PDF 3 MB

Minutes:

The Committee received a report from the Enforcement Team Leader.

 

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 South Area Committee.  The report identifies the reactive and proactive service actions undertaken in the previous year, including the requested priority targets and reports back on the recommended issues and associated actions to be targeted in the following period.  It also includes key officer contacts for the reporting of waste and refuse and public realm issues

 

The Enforcement Team Leader responded to question from members of the public and Committee Members as set out below.

 

1.  Can any action be taken to prevent verge parking in Fisher Lane?

 

Enforcement action was difficult as this was verge parking rather than highways. Enforcement Team officers would monitor the situation.

 

2.  The number of needle finds across the City appears to have dropped dramatically over the last year. Is there a reason for the drop?

 

The numbers could be misleading as a large find in a single property or location would appear as a spike in the figures. On-going officers were not reporting any significant change to the pattern of needle finds.

 

3.  The recycling area in Wulfstan Way continues to suffer from misuse. Pest control had to be called recently. What action was being taken?

 

The area was being monitored and enforcement action was being pursued against known individuals and businesses abusing the facility.