Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Kevin Cuffley.

It was noted that this would be Anne Constantine’s last meeting of the Joint Assembly, further to which Councillor Roger Hickford, Chairman, took this opportunity to thank her on behalf of the Assembly for her commitment and valuable contributions.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting held on 2 June 2016 as a correct record.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 2 June 2016 were confirmed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members of the Joint Assembly.

Councillor Bridget Smith declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 8 as a trustee of the charity Forward Gamlingay, which had commissioned Form the Future to undertake a two year project.

Sir Michael Marshall wished to declare a pecuniary interest in any aspect of the Workplace Parking Levy that may be discussed at the meeting.

To receive any questions from members of the public.  The standard protocol to be observed by public speakers is attached.

Sir Michael Marshall had submitted a request for an update on the City Deal and

its funding in light of the result of the EU Referendum and devolution proposals.

Tanya Sheridan, City Deal Programme Director, firstly addressed the issue of devolution, stating that this was additional to the City Deal and that it comprised of new money with funding in relation to the City Deal agreement between the Government and partners having not changed.  The next step for the devolution deal was a public consultation on the proposed Mayoral Combined Authority.  She reminded the Joint Assembly that the City Deal was a partnership programme with joint governance arrangements and that City Deal partners would need to decide how it would fit with a new Combined Authority.  There were significant links and it would be important that the City Deal and devolution deal delivered sustainable economic growth for the benefit of local communities.

In respect of the EU Referendum, the outcome was having very significant consequences nationally and in the Greater Cambridge area.  Tanya Sheridan said it was too early at this stage to say exactly what the implications were nationally or locally, or for the City Deal.  Papers for this meeting had highlighted that the risk of a recession was much higher as a result of the outcome of the Referendum, which would mean a slower rate of housing delivery with implications for some City Deal funding streams.  She added that there was also some evidence already of implications for skills, but committed to continue monitoring the situation closely.

In terms of the security of City Deal funding, Tanya Sheridan clarified that the agreement with Government committed funding for Tranche 1 of the City Deal, with Tranches 2 and 3 on the basis of independent economic assessments.  She emphasised that the commitment from the Government in that respect had not changed but highlighted that the City Deal must be able to demonstrate that it was able to deliver and that benefits were realised in order to unlock future funding allocations.  It was noted that, to date, £40 million had been received through two instalments and the balance of Tranche 1 funding was due to be paid in three instalments of £20 million in April 2017, April 2018 and April 2019.  Assuming funding was made available for Tranches 2 and 3, following the independent economic assessments that would be undertaken in 2019 and 2024, those payments would be received in equal instalments each April.  In the case of Tranche 2 this would be in 2025-2029, with Tranches 2 and 3 both expected to make available up to £200 million each with the precise amount dependant on the outcome of the independent economic assessments.

The following questions by members of the public were asked and answered as follows:

Question by Robin Pellew

Robin Pellew was not in attendance at the meeting but asked, on behalf of Cambridge Past, Present and Future, whether the City Deal would share its traffic modelling of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

To consider any petitions received since the previous meeting of the Joint Assembly.

No petitions had been received since the previous meeting.

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly:

(a)        NOTED progress to date.

(b)        NOTED the forward plan for delivery of the first phase.

Consideration was given to a report which provided a progress update on the Smart City Management Platform that formed part of the Smart Cambridge project.

Noelle Godfrey, Programme Director of Connecting Cambridgeshire, presented the report and reminded Members that the aim of the Smart City Platform was to collect, process and make available data to help improve transport and reduce congestion in Greater Cambridge.  She acknowledged that a vast amount of data already existed which could be collected, with the main problem being that it was neither joined up nor readily available for the public or professionals to use.  The Smart City Platform would therefore seek to resolve this problem by:

·         collecting transport and transport-related data from many existing and new sources;

·         combining and processing this data;

·         making this data readily available to the public, planners and other IT developers.

Noelle Godfrey reported that work to date had proceeded well and that the first project stream was already underway and would be complete by April 2017, with a second commencing in January 2017 and scheduled for completion in April 2018.  A project plan and outline timescales was appended to the report.

Dr Ian Lewis, Director of Infrastructure and Investment at the University of Cambridge, took Members through a presentation appended to the report which provided an overview of the development of the Smart Cambridge Platform and the architecture associated with the platform.  The following approach to achieve the project’s objectives were noted:

·         informing travellers about their travel choices.  A portfolio of ‘apps’ for use by the public would emerge using data from the Smart Cambridge Platform itself through collaborative contributors in the region including the University of Cambridge and commercial partners;

·         supporting intelligent planning of the transport infrastructure in the future.  The Smart Cambridge Platform was already collecting the data which could contribute to a practical analysis of the impact of transport schemes and the richness of information would grow with time.  The University of Cambridge would also exploit this data for research analysis, which could benefit the region;

·         providing the framework within which the digitally connected city would evolve.  There was ongoing discussion regarding other sensor data that would inevitably become available in the region, from air pollution data to cycling and footfall sensors and other traffic data.  The platform was being designed from the outset to accommodate additional sources as they became available.

Anne Constantine asked whether this data had been used as part of the modelling undertaken on some of the transport infrastructure schemes.  Dr Lewis confirmed that this data had not featured as part of the modelling used for City Deal schemes, but made the point that Local Authorities undertook their own modelling which required slightly different data.

Councillor Noel Kavanagh sought more explanation over the use of air quality sensors.  Dr Lewis reported that 20 air quality sensors had been deployed which were able to be moved to certain locations in order that data could be collected to better understand the impact of traffic.  This  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly:

(a)        RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board approves the following three work packages:

(i)    research and data-gathering about why people make specific transport choices in the Greater Cambridge area;

(ii)   investigating the current legislative, commercial and other barriers and opportunities with regards to integrated ticketing and on-line ticket purchase in Greater Cambridge;

(iii)   conducting an initial feasibility study on the potential of running autonomous vehicle trials, using the unique aspects of the guided busway.

(b)       NOTED that in early 2017 the Board will be recommended to approve a fourth work-package, to support better digital way-finding in the City and to improve the experience of the travelling public for leisure, business and tourism purposes.

The Joint Assembly considered a report to seek endorsement and subsequent approval by the Executive Board to pursue three research and investigative work packages at a cost of £90,000 in respect of intelligent mobility.

Noelle Godfrey, Programme Director for Connecting Cambridgeshire, presented the report and reminded Members that intelligent mobility had been defined as ‘the convergence of digital industries, transport infrastructure, vehicles and users to provide innovative services relating to different modes of transport and traffic management’.  The three packages proposed for further research or investigation included:

·         research and data gathering about why people made specific transport choices in the Greater Cambridge area;

·         investigate the current legislative, commercial and other barriers and opportunities with regards to integrated ticketing and online ticket purchase in Greater Cambridge;

·         conduct an initial feasibility study on the potential of running autonomous vehicle trials, using the unique aspects of the guided busway.

Councillor Bridget Smith, in respect of the first bullet point, had assumed that this kind of research had already been undertaken as part of the early work in respect of transport infrastructure schemes and the recommended use of bus lanes.  She made the point that officers had consistently said that people would use buses if the infrastructure was improved, so questioned how they could make such a claim if they did not yet have the evidence.  In terms of modal shift, Councillor Smith made the point that engagement with people who had already made the change needed to take place, rather than with those people who indicated that they would make the change in the future. 

Noelle Godfrey reported that the proposal in the report came from extensive research undertaken by the Department for Transport and other key stakeholders about pinch-points for travellers, particularly in respect of multi-modal journeys.  She was therefore keen to correlate that for the Greater Cambridge area, particularly in view of the fact that a significant number of people cycled in Cambridge and its surrounding areas. 

With 12 votes in favour and 2 against, the Joint Assembly:

(a)        RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board approves the following three work packages:

(i)    research and data-gathering about why people make specific transport choices in the Greater Cambridge area;

(ii)   investigating the current legislative, commercial and other barriers and opportunities with regards to integrated ticketing and on-line ticket purchase in Greater Cambridge;

(iii)   conducting an initial feasibility study on the potential of running autonomous vehicle trials, using the unique aspects of the guided busway.

(b)       NOTED that in early 2017 the Board will be recommended to approve a fourth work-package, to support better digital way-finding in the City and to improve the experience of the travelling public for leisure, business and tourism purposes.

NOTE – Helen Valentine left the meeting at this stage of proceedings.

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly:

(a)        NOTED the progress of the service to date and its achievement against key performance indicators.

(b)        NOTED that the November six monthly report will share the findings from the interim evaluation and ask the Board to consider the future funding position for the service.

(c)        NOTED the significant changes that are due from April 2017 with respect to the transformation of apprenticeships (the shift from apprenticeship frameworks to employer led apprenticeship standards) and the introduction of the employer apprenticeship levy. 

(d)        RECOMMENDED the continuation of the Joint Assembly Skills Working Group, with any necessary additional resources allocated to it to support the Group’s work.

The Joint Assembly considered a report which provided Members with a six month update on the progress of the Greater Cambridge City Deal Skills Service.

Stella Cockerill, Skills and Careers Enterprise Manager at the Greater Cambridge Greater Peterborough Enterprise Partnership, presented the report.  She highlighted that the role of the Skills Service was to help achieve the City Deal objectives of promoting an additional 420 apprenticeships over the first five years of the Deal in areas aligned to Greater Cambridge’s growth sectors, and generally support the employability of young people.  It was noted that the Skills Service contract commenced on 1 September 2015 with the contract focussing on the following areas:

·         delivering events and activities that provided young people with information on the local economy and expectations of employers;

·         delivering apprenticeships events and providing information relating to apprenticeships to employers, young people, parents and staff in schools;

·         engaging employers and connecting them to schools and apprenticeship providers;

·         supporting the development of strategic relationships between schools and employers.

Stella Cockerill outlined the types of activities that had been undertaken in support of the above and reported that baseline recommendations for monitoring the progress towards the additional 420 apprenticeships had been set with the following parameters and in consultation with the Joint Assembly Skills Working Group, with 2014 serving as the baseline year:

·         apprenticeship starts for young people and adults had been included, recognising that the Skills Service focused on young people but that the apprenticeship target was not age specific;

·         progress against target included apprenticeship starts where the delivery location was within Cambridge or South Cambridgeshire;

·         the sectors to be included in calculating the total target were set out in the report;

·         the way in which the delivery of apprenticeships was delivered and monitored may need to evolve in the light of broader changes in skills policy.  For example, Area Based Reviews would begin in December 2016 and as part of this the Local Enterprise Partnership would produce an economic assessment and skills conclusion, which could lead to changing those sectors determined as priorities.  In addition, in April 2017 the apprenticeship frameworks would be replaced with the new apprenticeship standards, which would have to be developed and approved by employers.  It would then be necessary to decide which of the new standards would be included in the targets.

Councillor Tim Bick reflected on the work of the Joint Assembly’s Working Group and said that a lot of its work so far had been determining the definition of what was meant by the specific target of 420 additional apprenticeships.  He said that it had not been a simple matter to define the baseline and outlined the complexities that had been experienced with the stem subjects and how they were counted by the area the apprentice lived, where the training provider was based or the location of the employer.  Councillor Bick referred to the table in the report which provided a trajectory of apprenticeship schemes that had commenced in 2014 and 2015.  He  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly:

(a)        NOTED progress towards delivery.

(b)        REQUESTED that the Chairman of the Joint Assembly reports the concerns raised by Members of the Assembly at this meeting to the Executive Board in relation to the definition of rural exception sites for the purposes of monitoring the City Deal commitment.

The Joint Assembly considered a report which set out how a commitment in the City Deal to provide 1,000 additional dwellings on rural exception sites by 2031, in addition to the accelerated delivery of 33,480 homes, was progressing and the way it would be monitored.

Caroline Hunt, Planning Policy Manager at South Cambridgeshire District Council, presented the report and explained that the City Deal commitment was for homes on rural exception sites, which was in the context of another commitment to accelerate delivery of 33,480 planned homes at the time of the agreement.  As this was coincident with the 33,500 homes requirement for Greater Cambridge as part of Local Plans for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire, only once delivery exceeded the level to meet the Local Plan requirement could any eligible homes be counted towards the 1,000 additional home commitment.  It was therefore necessary to define the developments that comprised as eligible sites for the purposes of monitoring the Councils’ performance against the City Deal agreement.

Caroline Hunt referred to the report and advised that developments of traditional rural exception sites were currently not coming forward due to a lack of five year housing land supply.  She highlighted, however, that what was coming forward were developments in rural areas as exceptions to normal policy, which included an element of affordable housing as well as additional housing generally to meet the needs of the area.  Under the circumstances it was proposed that eligible sites be considered to be traditional rural exception sites and five year supply sites.

The Joint Assembly was referred Members to the appendices of the report which set out a list of eligible sites using this definition, as published in housing trajectory for 2015, together with predicted completions from eligible planning permissions permitted since the housing trajectory up to June 2016.  It was noted that on this basis 430 homes on top of planned housing growth could now be included towards the City Deal’s commitment of 1,000 additional dwellings, with a further 170 dwellings having recently received planning permission that would also be eligible. 

Councillor Roger Hickford, Chairman of the Joint Assembly, made the point that examination of the submitted Local Plans had been suspended with a significant number of speculative planning applications being submitted.  He was concerned that developments resulting from these applications in rural areas were being classed as being within rural exception sites for the purpose of meeting this City Deal objective.

Caroline Hunt explained that the adoption of the Local Plan would resolve the lack of five year housing land supply but that in the interim period the Council would remain open to speculative applications, but was taking all possible steps to deal with that situation as robustly as possible. 

Councillor Hickford said he understood that the City Deal’s commitment was for 1,000 additional homes on rural exception sites and that these should all therefore be affordable homes.  He did not think this was being delivered and felt that the original commitment was being  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly NOTED the report.

Consideration was given to a report which provided an update on progress with the establishment and development of the Housing Development Agency.

Alan Carter, Managing Director of the Housing Development Agency, presented the report which provided information on the Agency’s objectives, the changing environment as a result of the introduction of the Housing and Planning Act, achievements since the summer 2015 and the way in which the Agency operated in terms of its customers, its geography, how it added value and its unique selling point.  It also set out the land, scheme fees and operational budget and the Agency’s approach to the recruitment, retention and deployment of staff capacity, knowledge, skills and experience that it needed. 

Mr Carter reported that the existing programme up to 2018/19 consisted of approximately 800 to 820 homes, with progress in relation to those schemes set out in the appendix to the report.  Section 8 of the appendix outlined the strategy for delivering these schemes based on the following four themes:

·         working with strategic housing and planning colleagues to understand the range of new housing needed in terms of tenure;

·         optimising partner land opportunities;

·         working on funding models and testing the viability of mixed tenure schemes;

·         working with partners whose ambitions were aligned with the Greater Cambridge ‘growth’ agenda including other landowners.

The Joint Assembly NOTED the report.

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly:

(a)       NOTED the position of the Operational Budget and the Programme Budget for the 2015/16 financial year.

(b)       RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board approves the proposed Operational Budget to be carried forward into the 2016/17 financial year, as set out in section 4.2.1 of the report.

The Joint Assembly considered a report which provided Members with the outturn monitoring position for the financial year ending 31 March 2016.

Chris Malyon, Chief Finance Officer at Cambridgeshire County Council, presented the report.

Councillor Dave Baigent asked whether the costs associated with transport infrastructure schemes included any construction costs.  Mr Malyon confirmed that the costings in the report did not include any construction costs and solely reflected the amount spent on developing each respective scheme.

The Joint Assembly:

(a)       NOTED the position of the Operational Budget and the Programme Budget for the 2015/16 financial year.

(b)       RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board approves the proposed Operational Budget to be carried forward into the 2016/17 financial year, as set out in section 4.2.1 of the report.

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly:

(a)        NOTED the financial position as at 31 May 2016.

(b)        RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board approves an increase to the budgetary provision for the current financial year as set out in section 4.2.4 of the report.

Consideration was given to a report which provided the Joint Assembly with the financial monitoring position for the period ending 31 May 2016.

Chris Malyon, Chief Finance Officer at Cambridgeshire County Council, presented the report and explained that the original commitment was to provide reports on a quarterly basis.  Unfortunately, due to the timing and cycle of meetings for the Joint Assembly and Executive Board, the information being reported upon was out of date by the time it was considered at the respective meetings.  Mr Malyon therefore suggested providing all Members of the Joint Assembly and Executive Board with a copy of future monitoring reports via email as soon as they were available, as well as publishing them on the City Deal Website, on a monthly basis with them being formally considered at the appropriate meeting cycle.  The Joint Assembly unanimously supported this approach.

It was noted that a detailed report on the City Deal’s Financial Strategy would be reported to the Joint Assembly and Executive Board in October.

The Joint Assembly:

(a)        NOTED the financial position as at 31 May 2016.

(b)        RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board approves an increase to the budgetary provision for the current financial year as set out in section 4.2.4 of the report.

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly:

(a)       NOTED that the Executive Board agreed to adopt the consultation and engagement principles of Cambridgeshire County Council at its meeting on  9 June 2016.

(b)       RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board confirms the establishment of Local Liaison Forums for each significant City Deal scheme to develop the detailed proposals for consultation prior to statutory consultation on the Traffic Regulation Orders.

(c)        RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board confirms that all local elected Members from the three partner authorities, whose electoral Divisions or Wards are within the geography of the scheme(s) in question, will be invited to be members of the Local Liaison Forum, as set out in the published terms of reference for Local Liaison Forums.

(d)       RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board confirms that local elected Members and members of the public will be able to ask questions in respect of Traffic Regulation Orders at the Joint Assembly and Executive Board.

(e)       RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board agrees to invite the Chairman of each Local Liaison Forum to speak at the Joint Assembly and Executive Board when consideration is being given to that particular scheme.

The Joint Assembly considered a report which set out the proposed process to be adopted to ensure consultation took place with local residents, local elected Members and other stakeholders in the development and implementation of powers delegated by Cambridgeshire County Council as the Highways Authority.

Graham Hughes, Executive Director of Economy, Transport and Environment at Cambridgeshire County Council, presented the report and referred Members to the consultation and engagement principles, the terms of reference for Local Liaison Forums and the City Deal delivery process for larger schemes, all of which were attached as appendices.

The Joint Assembly unanimously:

(a)        NOTED that the Executive Board agreed to adopt the consultation and engagement principles of Cambridgeshire County Council at its meeting on  9 June 2016.

(b)        RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board confirms the establishment of Local Liaison Forums for each significant City Deal scheme to develop the detailed proposals for consultation prior to statutory consultation on the Traffic Regulation Orders.

(c)        RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board confirms that all local elected Members from the three partner authorities, whose electoral Divisions or Wards are within the geography of the scheme(s) in question, will be invited to be members of the Local Liaison Forum, as set out in the published terms of reference for Local Liaison Forums.

(d)        RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board confirms that local elected Members and members of the public will be able to ask questions in respect of Traffic Regulation Orders at the Joint Assembly and Executive Board.

(e)        RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board agrees to invite the Chairman of each Local Liaison Forum to speak at the Joint Assembly and Executive Board when consideration is being given to that particular scheme.

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly NOTED the progress report.

Tanya Sheridan, City Deal Programme Director, presented the City Deal progress report.

The Joint Assembly NOTED the progress report.

To consider the Greater Cambridge City Deal Executive Board’s Forward Plan.  Amendments made since the last meeting are purposely set out in tracked changes.

The Joint Assembly NOTED the Forward Plan.

Tanya Sheridan, City Deal Programme Director, presented the City Deal Forward Plan.

The Joint Assembly NOTED the Forward Plan.