Grilling East Area Committee: The Forum

With no Conservative councillor to fight the corner for common sense at Last Thursday's East Area Committee I went armed with questions.

First off was The Forum on Tiverton Way.


There are a number of local issues on which local Conservatives and Labour ward members agree and this is one of them; we warned the city council of the issues early on but were ignored by the Lib Dems.

The previous committee's papers indicated that Anglia Ruskin University had at last agreed to have a meeting about issues with the student accommodation, which is sited amidst bungalows predominantly occupied by older residents. My own request for a meeting with ARU a while ago was refused. Knowing that a meeting was held a long time ago with council officers but without councillors I was keen to make sure that there was democratic accountability and so suggested that ward members should be invited (if they weren't already).

At this committee I asked what the outcome of that meeting was. It seems progress is going to be slow but with continued pressure on the owner and the former polytechnic small positive changes do get made, such as the night porter, who is still not up all night but it's a start.

In the context of low to nil reporting of problems last term with the council, not surprisingly resulting in the council claiming there were no problems, I asked if reporting had increased this term (knowing that residents have reported problems). The exact answer wasn't known at the time although the chairman did refer to a specific major recent incident - I would like to find out from the new officer handling such complaints. I hope that reporting reflects the incidents so that the council has no excuses not to be involved.

As a postscript it's worth reminding ourselves not to scapegoat all the student residents of the premises - as this comment on the earlier Cambridge News story confirms. Other blocks like Sedley Court seem to run a tighter ship and students benefit.

Alana, 19/09/2010

I have been at The Forum for a week and i just want people to know that not all students are like these despicable ones mentioned above. My friends and i were discussing only last night that some of the people make us feel unsafe. I was aware this used to be an elderly home and as my nan lives in one i am used to knowing to keep the noise down. I hope that i dont cause any disturbance to anyone as i would feel really bad. I try to keep my music or tv down after about 10pm and i would just like to say to all the residents that we arent all bad guys, all the people i have met so far have been lovely and quiet and kind but there are rumours of a "select few" which are causing a disturbance. It sickens me as i am fed up of getting a bad name for a being a teen/student when i dont drink or party i dont do drugs etc, so please people if you are angry about the noise just remember we are too and we are living with it and its horrible. I hope it will die down now as lessons start monday so i hope they will go to bed!!

Around Coleridge

Been a busy of couple of days with on-site meetings looking at some of the long standing ward issues:

Grass verges
The East area committee has allocated £25,000 to each ward including Coleridge to tackle problems with grass verges. Last night 2 of our 4 Councillors met (in the rain!) with a City Council officer, to talk about how we can use this very limited amount to help in the main problem area around Chalmers Road and Birdwood Road.

It won't be possible to repair all the verges, and the suggestion was that some of the money could be used for some yellow lining on Birdwood Road (especially round the junctions) that could allow some verges to be protected, and for some of the (much narrower) verges in Chalmers Road to be tarmaced, but with some new trees planted as well. Whilst there isn't the cash to pay for additional dropped kerbs (and it would be unfair on those that have had to pay for this work themselves), I suggested we look into whether a bulk deal on dropped kerbs could be negotiated to see if any residents would like to pay for improved access to drives, with the Council then being able to repair the verges with some hope of them surviving. Very early days, but hopefully plans for some improvements (if not a complete solution) should be forthcoming in due course for public consultation.

Perne Road Shops
As previously reported, the developer has put plans for the Perne Road shops redevelopment on hold until the finance markets improve. They are however working on putting hoardings around the site, and have offered to contribute to some artwork on the hoardings and building. Working with one of our other Coleridge ward Councillors, there was an on-site meeting today with teachers from Coleridge Community College, and a representative from Cambridge Curiosity and Imagination, a charity who work on community public art projects. The plan is for the school to work with the community and produce some public art. Hopefully the school will be taking this project forward with CCI, and with the support of local Councillors.

Tiverton House
Finally, at 7pm this evening, there is a residents meeting at St Thomas' Hall, Ancaster Way to talk about Tiverton House, with updates on the current (much improved) situation, actions since the last meeting, and a plan for the start of the next academic year. All local residents (including Tiverton House!) welcome.

Progress at The Forum, Tiverton Way

I was at the latest meeting organised by the Tiverton Estate Action Group for interested parties to review progress mitigating the impact of the new student residence, The Forum, which replaced Tiverton House.

Good progress was reported from the November meeting which I had also attended. In particular the owners, Whitfield Group, had made successful efforts at solving some of the problems at and around the site.

Coleridge Conservatives have found that residents of the estate still report a significant problem with students' cars parking (which is not permitted by Anglia Ruskin University), there are still some noise problems and it remains to be seen whether much of the improvement is simply down to the cold weather.

But things are clearly looking much better than they would have done had residents not taken such a strong lead in bringing together relevant groups to solve the problems that have resulted from the Lib Dems' failure to dispose of council property appropriately and a broken planning system that deprived local people of a say. Residents have also at last been granted an audience with ARU.

It is hoped that further planned measures will help with relations with students, particularly in the next academic year.

Well done to local residents and thanks to Whitfield Group for their cooperation.

Action meeting on The Forum

On Thursday night I attended a meeting held by the Tiverton Estate Residents' Action Group. The meeting of minds was called to try to get to grips with problems associated with The Forum, the ARU student accommodation block converted from the old Tiverton House residential home.

Coleridge Conservatives were represented by me on the panel, in place of Cllr Howell (who was representing the Conservatives in a public debate on student funding by prior arrangement) and also by Tim Haire, who has been working on this issue.

The panel included three city council officers, community beat sergeant Sgt Mark Kathro and a PCSO - I was impressed to see their commitment to the situation, which after all must be occupying a significant amount of their weekly work.

Sadly Anglia Ruskin University had refused to send someone to contribute to the meeting. We are of the view that proper engagement by the university with residents is essential to solving the problems at the site. ARU had already refused a request by Coleridge Conservatives for a meeting. It did transpire that ARU had met with council officers, but while this news was welcome, they need to be prepared to talk with residents and councillors.

Mr Ellis Hall of the Tiverton Estate Resident's Action Group outlined problems facing the community around Tiverton Way, divided into:

• road congestion
• litter and refuse
• lack of student facilities
• lack of guidelines & information for students
• lack of student supervision
• noise and sleep disturbance

It is crystal clear to anyone who was at this meeting, or prior meetings concerning the planning situation prior to conversion, that the residents around Tiverton Way welcome the students at The Forum and wish to have good community relations. No-one can accuse residents of scapegoating students; there is no 'fuddy duddy' reaction going on, it is just that a minority of students seem to be behaving without regard to their fellow students and residents.

To me it seems that the solution must involve annual briefings for students, the presence of senior students (non-first year, preferrably postgraduate, students who oversee their peers) in the building and the presence of a couple of student representatives on a consultative committee with other local residents.

We hope that ARU will start to engage with councillors and residents to solve this problem. Well done to the action group for their thorough work and for taking a balanced and non-confrontational approach.

Forum Trolleys Multiplying

The supermarkets cleared up the trolleys I reported round one side of The Forum, but it seems that round the other side there's another set, which I have reported to Sainsbury's today. I don't know whether it's the same set I reported yesterday at the same location, but residents have reported that this is a regular problem. I have suggested that the supermarket investigates, which I am sure they will if we make sure we keep reporting them, along the lines of the importunate widow - they are sure to tire of daily reports...

In other news, rats reported around refuse at The Forum, which apparently wasn't a problem when Tiverton House was a sheltered home. It's clearly time for ARU to exercise some authority over its students at this site.

The Forum Trolley Park

I found four supermarket trolleys outside The Forum yesterday. These have now been reported and will hopefully be removed soon. Please let us know if you live in the Tiverton Way area and are experiencing any other issues relating to this student accommodation formerly known as Tiverton House.

Second Tiverton House Public Meeting

There was a second meeting for local residents to discuss the latest situation with Tiverton House on Monday at St Thomas's Hall. All four ward councillors were present, as was the owner of Tiverton House. I was also present to learn from the experiences of the many residents who were present. A representative of the owner of the Perne Road shops site was also present.

Tiverton House
As Chris has explained in an earlier post, the current situation is that a planning application has been submitted for minor works (splitting the warden's house into two flats and adding extra cycle parking) but the bulk of the work in turning the building from a residential home to student accommodation, that has been proceeding apace, is not being submitted as a planning application.

We managed to tease out little by little some morsels of knowledge about the owner's plans so we now know more reliably that:

• The owner has a verbal agreement with Anglia Ruskin University such that they will nominate student tenants to rent all of the flats in the block. The owner stressed that the university's policy of no student parking would apply.
• There will be 96 bedrooms.
• 37 rooms are being built on the second floor, i.e. in the roof, despite these not being visible on the plans accompanying the application.
  

The council's planning officer has suggested that the owner obtain a certificate of lawful use in order to satisfy residents' concerns about his development, but this would not be possible within the time before students are expected to take up residence in the new building.

Chris Howell suggested a petition for a development control forum so that residents might be able to have a chance to challenge the overall intensification of the whole site in advance of the planning application being decided.

The deadline for responding to the planning application is tomorrow, Thursday 6th August.

Perne Road/Radegund Road Shops
The owners of the shop buildings on the roundabout between Perne Road and Radegund Road were represented at the start of the meeting and showed a drawing of the complete redevelopment that they would like to do of the site. It is a larger and taller building and would mean the loss of the current style of building at the site.

The overwhelming concern is that action is needed as soon as possible because the site is currently a mess and attracts antisocial behaviour, but there is also some affection for the style and profile of the existing buildings and some concern about the extent of the proposed replacement.

The leaseholder of one of the shops does not want to move and has rejected a compensation package that was offered if they could move. There is another offer on the table and the owners of the site will know whether they can proceed with full redevelopment or will just refurbish at the end of September.

Tiverton House Planning Battle Hots up

The planners at the City Council must dread opening their inbox when they see an email from Coleridge Councillors at the moment, but there are similar concerns to those expressed in the Mill Road Tesco situation over at Tiverton House. In both cases the developers, large enterprises that should know what they are doing, are just going ahead with plans that they arguably don't have permission for.

To recap - the new owners of Tiverton house are carrying out extensive works on the building, for which they have not applied for a certificate of lawful use, nor received any planning permission (yet).

What they have done is to work from very early in the morning, sometimes until 9.30pm at night, put velux windows in the roof, installed huge steel girders, created vast amounts of additional bedroom space, and the only planning application is to convert the warden's flat into 2 flats, and to create cycle parking for about a dozen bikes - they think they can get away without planning permission for any of the other works.

The developers wanted the Council's opinion on the relevant planning issues, so the Council has written to them and placed their response on the planning file. Some extracts from the letter and my comments:

"I see from the drawings submitted that there are more external changes than were suggested when we met. For all that, the changes to openings within the walls and the introduction of some glazing to existing doors (albeit that they were previously fire doors), appears to me to be minor and not to, “materially affect the external appearance of the building”. Clearly however, this can be a personal view and not one necessarily shared by others."

On its own maybe, but not immaterial in the context of all the other changes.

"The alteration to the roof by the introduction of the velux rooflights is, again, a change, but the issue is whether it is one that, “materially affect(s) the external appearance of the building”. The legal test is whether the change will be visible from a number of normal vantage points and the materiality of the change must be assessed in relation to the building as a whole and not to a part of the building in isolation. Having had the advantage of seeing the rooflights in situ, which clearly can be seen from a number of normal vantage points, I am personally of the view that given the expanse of roof involved, and the angles at which much of the roof is seen, the rooflights do not materially affect the external appearance of the building taken as a whole. However, as I said when we met, that is a personal judgement only and may not be shared by others, including Members."

Indeed, this member of the Council does think there is a significant visual impact.

"As a general matter, it would appear that there are inconsistencies between your earlier drawings and what is happening on site and it would be useful to have a correct set of drawings with the planning application."

It would indeed be useful.

"As the planning application already addresses the matter of some cycle provision, I am of the opinion that those matters could be included within the current planning application and considered by Committee on 3 September, provided the information is forwarded shortly. In saying this I am conscious that the current application shows very different provision from that shown on the plans that accompanied your letter.

It is also my understanding that the provision being shown is considerably less than that being suggested by Environmental Health colleagues and I have some reservations about location relative to some of the accommodation. In visiting other accommodation (albeit occupied by students), I have been very conscious of how much space is required and how a site can rapidly deteriorate when the proper provision is not made at the outset."

It is going to be very difficult to get appropriate levels of cycle parking, car parking and refuse collection areas on such a small site considering the increase in bed spaces planned.

"What is also at issue, however, is whether the changes being undertaken are an intensification of the use of the site that constitutes a change of use requiring planning permission. As I have said before, it is a matter of fact and degree. On the surface, the increase in numbers of bedspaces from in the order of perhaps 40 to 96 bedspaces would appear to be significant and would constitute a change of use"

I couldn't agree more - 40 bedspaces of sheltered housing to 96 bedrooms likely to be occupied by students - surely this intensification constitutes a change of use that requires a planning application covering the whole scheme, so that residents and Councillors can get across the view that what is planned for the site it totally inappropriate and shouldn't be allowed.

I hope there are some Lib Dem Councillors reading this - to understand how angry local residents are with their decision to flog off Tiverton House to the highest bidder with no regard for the use planned for the site, and see how the planning situation is now panning out, with local ward Councillors desperately fighting to ensure there is some form of meaningful input for local residents on the substantive plans for the site through the planning system.

Tiverton House Planning Application Received

Some stop press news - a planning application was received by the City Council late last week for work on Tiverton House, but it is only for very limited works - the conversion of the former warden's flat into two flats, and the provision of 12 new cycle parking spaces in the existing garden. (I think there may be a couple of formalities before it is accepted as a valid application, so can't find it on the planning portal yet)

Having read through the application this morning, it looks to me like the new owner of Tiverton House is not thinking of making any further planning applications, and is intending to re-open the whole of Tiverton House for 'private sector rental' if this application is allowed.

I am urgently seeking clarification with the planning department of what advice has been issued to the applicants about what will be permissible with and without planning permission - significant works have already been undertaken and we want an on site meeting to check every detail not covered by the new application is permissible - there was some correspondence during the election period that the officers couldn't discuss due to election rules.

We believe that this application should really be considered as a change of use of the whole building (all the plans accompanying the planning application are for the whole site), and the application judged accordingly.

We will be working with other ward Councillors to try and maximise the input allowed from local residents - I would like a follow up public meeting to get into the details of what is permissible under planning law, and will be requesting the application is determined by Councillors rather than officers - likely to be at a future area committee.

More details when we have them.

Meeting Building Control over Tiverton House

We did meet the Council Building Control officer last week to discuss building control. In the event, although we couldn't discuss the specifics of Tiverton House, it was still useful.

Where there is a 'material change of use', building control regulations apply in all the following areas:

B1 (means of warning and escape) 

B2 (internal fire spread - linings) 

B3 (internal fire spread - structure) 

B4(2) (external fire spread - roofs) 

B5 (access and facilities for the fire service) 

C2(c) (interstitial and surface condensation) 

F1 and F2 (ventilation) 

G1 (sanitary conveniences and washing facilities) 

G2 (bathrooms) 

H1 (foul water drainage) 

H6 (solid waste storage) 

J1 to J3 (combustion appliances) 

L1 (conservation of fuel and power) -dwellings 

L2 (conservation of fuel and power – buildings other than dwellings) 

P1 and P2 (electrical safety) 

Many of which could be relevant for the proposed conversion of Tiverton House into student accommodation. 

There are however two problems - firstly, depending on how the work is done, there may not be a material change of use in building control terms - we will be monitoring carefully what happens here.

However, perhaps more importantly, under the building control regulations, the new owners of Tiverton House can and have used external approved building controllers rather than the Council's own building inspectors. As a result, the building controllers only have to deposit with the Council formal notices such as an initial notice that works are about to start, and a notice indicating compliance at the end.

To make it clear, there is nothing to say the developer or building controller will do anything other than apply the building control rules correctly and comply with them, but if they don't, the options to challenge this for a member of the public appear to be limited to say the least. 

The Approved Inspector scheme is run by the Construction Industry Council, so you would need to go through their published complaints procedure (if you thought building control regulations hadn't been applied properly). Trouble is, it is hard to see how you would know the regulations hadn't been applied correctly, as none of the plans are public (in the absence of a planning application...), nor do the public have significant means of redress in this case.

In conclusion, building control doesn't sound like an effective approach to regulating the development on the site - that is what the planning system if for, but we haven't given up on this line of enquiry, and it did open up one or two others...

Meeting Building Control

I've arranged to meet up with a Building Control officer at the Council today to talk about building control, its role and powers etc, along with one of our Labour ward Councillors.

We would like to be discussing Tiverton House, and what the potential building control issues are for that building, but unfortunately the City Council's legal officers have advised that because another Building Controller is already working on the project for the developer, the Council's own officer can't even discuss the specifics of Tiverton House in any way. All I am trying to do is ensure that there is some way that local residents are given a voice over the future of Tiverton House - so it is a blow that as a local Councillor I can't get proper access to the information required, but hopefully we can get something useful out of the meeting today.

When I questioned the Executive Councillor for housing over Tiverton House at last weeks Area Committee, she was completely unaware that we can't talk to Building Control about Tiverton House, nor did she seem aware at all of the chaos her decision to flog off the building to the highest bidder had caused - we did however hear that the money that was supposedly required to complete the refurbishment program for other sheltered housing may not be enough - there is still no clear plan for the redevelopment of Seymour Court... I think the message may be starting to get through though that local residents aren't happy.

Tiverton House Update

I've spent a fair amount of time over the last few weeks working on the Tiverton House issue.

Tiverton House was built as recently as the 1980s as sheltered housing for the elderly. The Council has long needed to bring their sheltered accommodation up to modern standards, and in their wisdom the Lib Dems decided to flog off Tiverton House to the highest bidder, to fund improvements elsewhere in the City. 

At no stage in the process has the Council considered what effect unsuitable alternative uses would have on the local area, and pressed on with the sale in the midst of a recession regardless. Last December I wrote to senior officials pleading not to sell Tiverton House for student accommodation. I asked questions in Council - yes we need to bring it back into use after 14 months empty, but it needs to be a suitable use.

My pleas, along with those from other ward Councillors were ignored. At the end of March we were informed that exchange of contracts was imminent, the purchasers likely intended use was for student accommodation, and the Council was even going to let work start before contract completion in May.

Since then I have chased up concerns about unreasonable working hours, but mostly tried to understand what powers we as Councillors have to object to student accommodation, and to make sure local residents and Councillors get some say. About a week ago I had an irate phone call from the new owner of the site, wanting to know why I was criticising his plans, how do I know what local residents want, and I should stop opposing his plans. Having spoken to many local residents about this issue over the last few weeks, I am confident that high density student accommodation in this area is not what people want, and I will fight to ensure everyones voice is heard, not ignored as the Council has done to date.

This seems to be an issue we agree with Labour on, so on Friday, along with one of our three Labour Councillors, I met with a senior planning official to discuss the potential planning implications.

The situation is complicated by the fact that their has been no formal planning application submitted, but we are confident that a number of possible elements of the new owners plan (e.g. converting guest rooms or shared spaces into flats, creating new entrances) will require planning permission, and rest assured we will be doing all we can to ensure any such changes come before a planning committee so local residents and Councillors will have the best possible chance of opposing undesirable plans for the site, and make sure issues like parking and refuse collection are fully considered.

At the meeting on Friday we also discussed a number of other approaches to the problem and want to setup a series of meetings with other parts of the Council. We have also asked to see copies of the sale agreements and any other conditions of sale - if the Council has failed in its duty to protect local residents interests, we will be holding the Liberal Democrats to account, because it is their misguided decision to sell this property rather than refurbish it that led to the current intolerable situation.

Tiverton House finally sold

The City Council has exchanged contracts for the sale of Tiverton House, and is expected to complete the sale in mid-May. Unfortunately, the Council has ignored pleadings from Coleridge ward Councillors of all parties and has proceded with a sale to a new owner who we understand intends to use it for student accommodation.

The Lib Dem Executive Councillor took the decision some time ago to sell on the best possible commercial terms, and as a result requests not to sell the building for student accommodation without consulting local members were ignored. We think there was an opportunity to put reasonable conditions into the sale contract that may have helped avoid some of the problems with student accommodation that have occurred elsewhere in the City.

As yet it is unclear the extent of any works required on site - I don't think the new owner is looking to demolish completely and rebuild - although there will be some refurbishments in the immediate future. So we don't yet know if we will get a chance to challenge any plans through the planning process, although we will be scrutinising carefully any proposals the new owners bring forward.

Tiverton House

Last night at Full Council I again questioned the Council's policy towards Tiverton House, and urged the Council to come up with an alternative plan should they not be able to sell the property to bring it back into residential use.

The Lib Dem Executive Councillor for housing confirmed the scandalous situation that the property has now been vacant for 14 months, and refused to give any assurances that they would give up plans to sell it off, claiming they were again in negotiations with a purchaser. How are we supposed to pressurise owners in the private sector of empty buildings like flats above the Perne Road shops if the Council holds empty property like this?

I'm looking in to where they are with sales negotiations, to try and find out what any prospective new owners propose to do with the building.

Tiverton House still for sale

There has been some bad news on the empty property front - all the potential buyers of Tiverton House have fallen through, and the Council has now put the building, former sheltered accommodation for the elderly, back on the market.

Rather than make expensive refurbishments to bring up to current standards, the Council decided to try selling the building with a view to using the money to fund other refurbishments elsewhere in the City. A number of bidders proposing different uses were in the frame, but they are now back to square one.

I have raised concerns for a while that the Council wouldn't be able to sell the building, and was also worried about some of the proposed uses from potential purchasers. They better have a plan 'B' in place in case they can't sell at the right price, to bring the property back into use.

The Council leaving residential property empty makes it all the harder to put pressure on private developers, like the owners of the shops and boarded up flats on the Perne Rd/Radegund Rd junction. Clearly there are huge problems in both the residential and commercial property markets at the moment, but I am trying to (re)arrange a meeting with the owners via their agents to see what the prospects are for bringing forward a redevelopment scheme.

What next for Tiverton House?

I am currently trying to find out the latest update from the Council about interest from potential buyers in Tiverton House, but it looks very much like it is still for sale.

It could be worse, but the building is already covered in ivy, and I've just reported an abandoned fridge there.

The Lib Dems running Cambridge City decided to sell off the former sheltered housing on the open market some time ago. That decision was never going to be a great one, but it is looking worse by the day. If there is, as I suspect, a lack of serious interest in the site, the Council should be urgently coming up with a new plan. It is a travesty if the City Council is allowing one of its own properties to remain empty for long periods of time when there is such demand for housing in the City.

Tiverton House

In response to queries on the doorstep in the Tiverton Way area, I've asked the Council about future plans for Tiverton House, and in summary, this is the situation:

1) Disposal was approved in November 2007 by the Lib Dem City Council. A sales agent was appointed, and the final residents left in March. There has been some work going on to prepare sales materials.

2) The Council has not yet received any planning enquiries from interested parties but these are expected very soon as the full information packs are being sent to prospective purchasers

3) The planning officer is clear that there isn't any option other than residential use .There are two likely outcomes either the building will be retained and adapted internally to upgrade the flats and eliminate the design idiosyncrasies or it will be demolished and the site redeveloped residentially.

4) the Council as vendor would be unlikely to put constraints on the disposal as the main requirement is to maximise the sale receipt.In the case of internal adaptations and refurb the potential for nuisance for local residents should not be great . In the case of redevelopment there could be the normal impact associated with a building site but the Council as planning authority would can set working hours limits and require the developer to work to the considerate contractor scheme

So in short, it isn't clear yet what will happen to the building or the site, but I'll be keeping on the case when there is some more news to make sure the impact on local residents is kept as low as possible.