Present:
Tim Pogson (TP, Chair), Bob Hodgart (BH), Kaaren Haughton, Sakshika Raghav (minute), David Wood, Daniel Fisher, Philip McDowell, Alison Dickie (Councillor), Stephen Roger Benson, Joan Carter, Nick Oddy and two members of the public.
| Agenda item | Discussion | Action |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Welcome | The Chair welcomed all to the first discussion of the Community Council conducted online, and introduced Councillor Alison Dickie. | |
| 2. Councillor's report (Alison) |
2.1 Much day-to-day activity within the Council had stopped. National telephone helplines had been introduced for vulnerable people to help them during COVID-19. They had been shared on social media and elsewhere by the Council to reach out to people. 2.2 Alison mentioned that schools had shown good creativity towards online education and were offering support to vulnerable students. She mentioned patrolling by police has been increased to encourage people to observe the lockdown. 2.3 There has been an increase in Anti-social behaviour by drug users and drinkers at Nicolson Square which is leading to small crimes. Police have started patrolling more in this area. 2.4 An issue regarding the taping on the benches in the Meadows by police leads to problem for older people. Alison will look into and report back |
Alison |
| 3. Coronavirus Support (Philip) |
Philip gave the report that 14 volunteers had signed up on the SCC website to provide support in the community and through which 5 people have been helped so far.
The Grange association has 150 volunteers though they had leafleted. The concerned was raised whether we were reaching people in need and people being able to access online technology. |
4. City Mobility Plan |
4.1 Joe (member of public) supports the mobility plan but raised the concern whether current plan must be redrafted as it’s written before COVID-19. He suggests it needs to be reviewed in light of current pandemic. 4.2 KH raised the concerned about the resource budget for trams and suggested that a more balanced approach towards the trams plan might be needed. 4.3 Daniel mentioned references to electric vehicles were ambiguous and needed strengthening. 4.4 Joan suggested about changing the city plans by rearranging some priorities from 2030 to 2020 or vice versa to make it more effective. Nick suggested to focus on things which are important but more easily achieved. 4.5 Philip would like to see more reference to autonomous electric vehicles. This was supported by Daniel. 4.6 Bob mentioned about the people friendly streets (Home Zones) giving balanced priority to vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, etc. 4.7 Tim asked for views on tram expansion. Joe and others agreed that trams, and more environmentally friendly, vehicles in the city makes for less traffic on the roads. 4.8 Joan proposed emphasis on bus provision. Kaaren raised the issue of electrification of buses. 4.9 Tim will write up the notes of the discussion and circulate as the next step in agreeing our response to the City Mobility Plan by 30 April. |
Tim |
| 5. Date of Next Meeting |
Scheduled for Tuesday 12th May 2020, at 7:00pm. In light of continuing social distancing rules, a decision will be taken nearer the time whether a further discussion by Zoom is required. |
Tim |