Council and democracy
Home > Council and Democracy > Issue
Public Question
Members of the public asked a number of questions, as set out below.
1. Ms Tillson raised the following points:
i.
Suggested it would
cost £100 in mooring fees for people to visit Cambridge by boat.
ii.
There were a limited
number of temporary moorings that could be used by visitors.
iii.
Took issue with the
48 hour limit on temporary moorings; and asked for longer.
iv.
Asked for all
moorings to be treated as one legal area.
The Executive Councillor for Public Places
responded:
i.
The proposed changes to moorings
policy being discussed by Environment Scrutiny Committee aimed to stop people
abusing the temporary moorings by moving between them instead of using a
permanent mooring.
ii.
She hoped the proposed changes to
moorings policy had minimal negative impact on visitors.
2. Mr Fryer-Bovair raised the following points:
i.
Asked for details
regarding the moorings list administration process.
ii.
Asked if the council
had considered charging an administration fee to people joining the moorings
list.
iii.
People needed
forewarning regarding changing to moorings policy as it impacted on their lives
ie where they lived.
The Executive Councillor for Public Places
responded:
i.
Officers reviewed contacts on the
moorings list every six months to ensure it was up to date. This took a lot of
officer time.
ii.
A fee was being considered as part
of the policy change options proposed by officers.
The Asset Manager (Streets & Open
Spaces) said that named people on the moorings list were contacted when the
list opened/closed. Details were also publicised on the city council website.
3. Mr Tidy raised the following points:
i.
Thanked officers for
the work they undertook to manage the moorings policy.
ii.
Took issue with
closing the moorings list as a way to save officer time.
iii.
Acknowledged that
enforcement was a difficult balancing act, but suggested little visible
enforcement action occurred at present.
The Asset Manager (Streets & Open
Spaces) responded:
i.
Officers were looking at ways to
make management of the moorings waiting list less laborious.
ii.
A robust policy needed to be in
place prior to taking enforcement action. The Council currently took civil
action when undertaking enforcement action, this was not high profile.
Mr Tidy made a supplementary point that if the council did not take
legal action when enforcing policy, it’s only other alternative was to remove
people from the moorings waiting list. This sanction would be lost if the
moorings list was closed.
4. Mr Hyde raised the following points:
i.
Referred to comments
made by other speakers.
ii.
Queried the
definition of reasonable cause for not moving someone from a mooring.
The Asset Manager (Streets & Open
Spaces) responded that reasons for not moving people on included mechanical
breakdown and extenuating personal circumstances such as medical grounds.
Matter for
Decision
The Officer’s
report contained:
i.
Recommendations for amendments to, and the
management of, the Council’s River Moorings Policy.
ii.
Issues and options raised by stakeholders since
January 2010, when the policy was last reviewed.
iii.
Areas for further consideration and scrutiny
relating to fees and charges, the formulation of an enforcement policy and the
subsequent management of moorings.
Decision
of Executive Councillor for Public Places
Agreed to:
i.
Give delegated authority to
Officers to periodically close and review the River Moorings Waiting list when
the expected wait for a mooring position is in excess of 18 months.
ii.
Change the terms and conditions of
the 48-hour visitor moorings, so that if a boat that moors at any City Council
visitor mooring, the boat may not use any other visitor mooring in Cambridge
within 7 days (without reasonable cause).
iii.
Instruct officers to review the
River Moorings Licence pricing structure, fees and charges for 2014 and beyond,
to include an equality impact assessment, for future consultation and
consideration by Environment Scrutiny Committee. The recommendation is to
include a review of the discounts offered for sole occupancy and student status
(but not the discounts offered for those receiving means tested benefits or
pension credits).
iv.
Instruct officers to draft a River
Moorings Policy document reflecting the Executive Councillor decisions to date,
which would also include an enforcement policy. It is recommended that the
document be the subject of consultation and further approval by Environment
Scrutiny.
Reason for the Decision
As set out in the Officer’s report.
Any Alternative Options Considered and Rejected
Not applicable.
Scrutiny
Considerations
The Committee received a report from the Asset Manager (Streets &
Open Spaces).
The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:
i.
Availability of moorings has been an on-going
issue. This was an important long term issue for consideration as it impacted
on where people lived (permanent moorings). As was the lack of
visitor/temporary moorings.
ii.
The Council needed a process in place to stop
people abusing the moorings waiting list.
iii.
Moorings policy enforcement was an important issue.
iv.
Suggestions for policy considerations:
· Swapping moorings
permissions between boat owners already moored so they do not have to move
between moorings.
· Moorings that were
accessible for people with sensory/mobility impairments.
· Combining the
narrow and broad beam moorings lists.
· Clarify moorings
markings for enforcement purposes.
· Increasing the
number of temporary moorings.
In response to Members’ questions the Asset Manager (Streets & Open
Spaces) said the following:
i.
It was hard to determine if sufficient levels of
temporary moorings were available for visitors as many permanent users abused
the temporary moorings by using them.
ii.
Officers needed to clarify the definition of
reasonable cause for evicting people from moorings prior to taking future
enforcement action.
iii.
A moorings licence is not a tradable commodity. It
is just a licence to moor on the riverbank; a specific site is not identified.
iv.
The moorings policy did not allow people to moor
rented boats. If people sublet their boats, they breached the terms and
conditions of their moorings licence.
v.
Officers would review the facilities at different
moorings as they revised the River Moorings Policy, to make life more
comfortable for river users.
The Committee resolved by 5 votes to 0 to endorse the recommendations.
The Executive Councillor
approved the recommendations.
Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Executive Councillor (and any
Dispensations Granted)
No conflicts of interest
were declared by the Executive Councillor.