Issue - decisions

The Committee received a report from the Safer Communities Manager, as introduced by the Leader of the City Council.

 

The report outlined that following major budgetary reviews, the County Council proposed to dim street lighting and to turn off lights in a number of areas across the County overnight, with midnight to 6am the current proposed hours.

 

As the proposals would have a significant impact in Cambridge City, the City Council raised a number of concerns with the County Council around the safety of the public, if the planned lighting goes through as currently proposed.

 

The County Council have agreed to an extended consultation period and the input from the 4 Area Committees would be welcomed on the lighting proposal in order to inform the planned future negotiation with the County.

 

Members of the public asked the following questions in response to the report:

     i.        What energy savings would be made?

    ii.        What regulations allowed street lights to be dimmed or switching off?

   iii.        Queried the type of street lights to be used, such as LED.

  iv.        Asked if individual streets could pay to implement lights as a result of safety concerns due to lack of lighting.

 

The Committee made the following comments in response to the report:

     i.        Main roads were well lit, side roads were not.

    ii.        Expressed safety concerns due to a lack of light.

   iii.        The County Council had given assurances on light operating times, which it had gone back on.

  iv.        The County Council was not obliged to light all roads, so would concentrate on just the ones it had a statutory duty to light eg main roads.

   v.        New street lights should lead to 45% energy savings.

  vi.        LED lights were not being used as they were too expensive when the contract was drawn up eight years ago. This could be reviewed in future. The contract included penalty clauses for not implementing lights in a timely manner, which may deter the contractor from delaying the scheme to negotiate changing to LED lights, unless the County Council revised this contract clause. Councillors felt the project was being delivered late, so a short delay to negotiate moving to LED street lights was justified in order to get more efficiency savings.

 vii.        Third party financial contributions towards lights were invited from parish councils in rural area (to pay for their own street lights), but this scheme was not being implemented in the city.

viii.        It was desirable to avoid a two tier lighting scheme where affluent areas could afford more lights than others.

  ix.        Financial savings by the County Council switching off lights may lead to higher operating costs for other organisations eg more admissions to hospitals due to accidents.

   x.        An on-line consultation regarding lighting was planned in the next few months. In the meantime, members of the public could make representations to the County Council Highways Committee.

 

The Chair read a statement by Tom Blackburne-Maze, County Council Head of Assets and Commissioning:

 

It was not possible for a County Officer to come tonight.

 

The County have undertaken a period of three months consultation with local Councils, (over four months with the City Council), and were currently reviewing their responses. The County haven’t started wider public consultation yet. This is due to start at the end of the month and details will be provided on the County website and via the local media as soon as these are finalised. This will be the mechanism where individual residents may feedback their own personal views and comments to the County.

 

In response to comments from Councillors and members of the public the City Council Leader said the following:

     i.        Views would be fed back to the County Council, Police, Further and Higher Education institutions.

    ii.        The street lighting consultation was not well publicised until the City Council raised concerns to the County Council. People were encouraged to respond to it.

   iii.        The intention was for the City and County Councils to work more closely on lighting issues in future, without the City taking on County responsibilities.

 

Following discussion, Members resolved (unanimously) to note the Strategy and Resources Committee Report on the County Council lighting proposal and to comment on any areas of concern that they would like taken up with the County in the planned negotiations.

 

ACTION POINT: Councillor McPherson to invite Tom Blackburne-Maze (County Head of Assets and Commissioning) to attend next South Area Committee and speak about County's street lighting proposal.