Agenda item

Public speakers were invited to address the committee in relation to the proposed gating of Setchel Drove, Cottenham.

Councillors Frank Morris and Jonathan Graves both representing Cottenham Parish Council and the Local Member for Cottenham, Councillor Eileen Wilson were invited to address the committee. All spoke in support of a PSPO being introduced to restrict access to Setchel Drove, by means of a gate in order to disrupt and prevent fly-tipping. The speakers made the following points:

·         Fly tipping was a widespread problem in the Fens and local people had lost confidence in reporting this to the Council as they felt that fly tips were not cleared away quickly enough.

·         A long term solution to fly tipping was needed and a gate could be the start of this.

·         Gating the road was part of the solution and care was needed regarding where to situate it. It was suggested that the gate be installed further along Setchel Drove, so that those opening and closing the gate were less vulnerable when leaving their vehicles to doing so.

·         As Setchel Drove also provided access to a fishing lake, there was concern that a gate code for an automated gate might be distributed widely in the public.

·         The parish council was willing to manage an automated gate code as it already did so for the tennis courts in Cottenham.

·         The Drainage Board supported the gating of Setchel Drove as it felt this would prevent rubbish that would block culverts from being dumped, which would prevent flooding.

·         It was suggested that a physical barrier and surveillance cameras should be trialled.

Jackie Brand, Rosemary Jones and Jackie Smith speaking as local residents and farmers, were invited to address the committee. Rosemary Jones represented one of the largest landowners along Setchel Drove, which her family used every day to access their land and livestock. All spoke against the proposal to gate Setchel Drove and made the following points:

·         They raised concern about the safety of the farmers who had to use Setchel Drove to access their land and livestock, several times a day every day of the year. Farmers had experienced physical intimidation on Setchel Drove and they felt that a gate would put them in danger by having to leave their vehicles in order to open and close a gate. Rosemary Jones requested it be recorded in the minutes that if anything happened to anyone as a result of a gate being installed, she would hold the Council responsible for this.

·         Mrs Jones explained how fly tipping affected her family’s farming operations. She explained that most rubbish was dumped on verges and in laybys, which did not block the movement of machinery along Setchel Drove. It was not a frequent occurrence that they had to clear rubbish from the ditches. When large items of rubbish had to be cleared from the ditches, a daily rate had to be paid to the Drainage Board to do so, however this did not happen often.

·         A gate would not stop the fly tipping and would displace it elsewhere, potentially in front of the gate, which would make access to Setchel Drove more difficult and impact farming operations more negatively than the fly tipping currently did.

·         It was pointed out that farmers had to access Setchel Drove throughout the winter, when it was dark.

·         There was concern regarding veterinary access in the event of an emergency, during which farmers would be unable to leave their animals in order to open the gate.

·         There was concern regarding access at harvest time, with contractors needing to access Setchel Drove constantly at this time.

·         A gate would be vandalised, as had happened with CCTV shortly after it had been installed.

·         A gate would take away freedom of access by the village to Setchel Drove. The gate would prevent dog walkers, birdwatchers and other members of the public from having the enjoyment of and free access to the countryside.

·         They requested that the committee did not support the gating of Setchel Drove.

The Director of Health and Environmental Services presented the report. He explained that enforcement action had been difficult as this was an open area where there was not much opportunity for surveillance. A gate would be part of the solution. He informed the committee that there had been no recent prosecutions for fly tipping. According to the Council’s Enforcement and Inspection Policy, deliberate fly tipping should attract an immediate formal response in the form of prosecution or a Fixed Penalty Notice. Officers were keen to look at options for CCTV and advice had been taken on this from the Police Technical Unit.

The committee discussed the proposals, taking into account the public representations that had been made:

·         The committee asked the Director of Health and Environmental Services for a record of recent prosecutions for fly tipping in the district.

·         Members were keen that options for more covert CCTV which transmitted images immediately, be investigated.

·         Committee members expressed concern that those who used Setchel Drove most frequently, did not want a gate to be installed and would find this more of an inconvenience than the fly tipping.

·         Concern was expressed by some Members that installing a gate would not stop fly tipping, but would displace it.

·         Some Members were not convinced a gate would solve the problems and that detection and surveillance was needed first.

·         Similar experience was referred to in Bassingbourn, where the installation of a gate had not solved the problem of fly tipping.

·         Members queried how the success of installing a gate at Setchel Drove would be measured.

·         Some Members felt that that installing a gate would create a conflict between preventing fly tipping and the legitimate use of and public access to Setchel Drove. 

The Director of Health and Environmental Services informed the committee that the County Council had responded in support of the Public Space Protection Order. He also informed the committee that the Council would need authorisation from the Magistrates Court before it could install covert CCTV. The impact of this on local residents would be challenged when authorisation was sought, and an Equality Impact Assessment would be carried out.

Some committee members felt that the Police were not doing enough to tackle the problem of fly tipping and that the Police and Crime Commissioner’s response to the Council, which had been included in the agenda papers, was inadequate. Councillor Douglas de Lacey proposed the committee write to the Police and Crime Commissioner regarding this. This proposal was seconded by Councillor Daunton. Following debate of the proposal a vote was taken on it; six members supported the proposal and 5 members abstained from the vote. The committee therefore nominated Cllr Douglas de Lacey to write to the Police and Crime Commissioner on behalf of the committee.

The committee did not reach a conclusion on whether or not it supported the installation of a gate at Setchel Drove. Due to the complexity of the issue and the public interest in it, the committee supported the final decision on this issue being taken by Cabinet.