Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies for absence were noted from Sir Michael Marshall, Mark Robertson and Andy Williams.

Claire Ruskin declared a non–pecuniary interest in relation to discussions regarding the Cambridge Promotion Agency.

To authorise the Assembly to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 18 January 2017 as a correct record.

The minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 18 January 2017 were agreed as a correct record.

The Chairman informed the Joint Assembly that seven public questions had been received, four of which would be taken at the meeting under agenda items six and eight. A new process would be implemented whereby a log of public questions would be published after each meeting.

Councillor Bridget Smith requested that the notice of public questions be sent to Joint Assembly members earlier than the day before the meeting. The Chairman informed members that the deadline for public questions was not long before the meeting and that the public question process was being ironed out and would become quicker in future.

No petitions had been received.

This agenda item includes updates on:

·         Update on Work with the Combined Authority

·         Six-Monthly Report on Strategic Risk Register

·         Forward Plan

·         Financial monitoring

The Joint Assembly NOTED the City Deal progress report.

Richard Wood was invited to ask his pre-submitted public question, as detailed in the notice of public questions.

The City Deal Programme Director presented the City Deal progress report and responded to Mr Wood’s question, informing him and the Joint Assembly that the City Deal would not become a Local Transport Authority under devolution proposals. This would be a role for the forthcoming Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority, which would inherit some but not all transport powers from the County Council.

Joint Assembly members discussed the report. The main points of discussion were:

·         In response to a query from the Chairman, officers confirmed that the City Deal was potentially a £1 billion investment programme.

·         The Joint Assembly was informed that the first phase of the City Deal’s website redevelopment project would be delivered in April/May 2017. A note to inform Joint Assembly members of the website project would be circulated.

·         In response to a query regarding what was meant by the City Deal investing in the Housing Development Agency, the City Deal Programme Director clarified that the City Deal was providing support financially to organisations delivering housing.

·         Councillor Bick pointed out that the score of Risk 2 in the risk register, should be 5.

·         The Joint Assembly was informed that a meeting would take place with Highways England on 10 March 2017, which the Chairman of the City Deal Executive Board would attend.

·         It was clarified that the Smart Cambridge workstream was an enabling stream of work and was not about creating jobs.

·         Councillor Bridget Smith requested that:

o   When talking about housing, the City Deal specify this is housing on rural exception sites and non local plan sites.

o   That the word ‘key’ be removed in reference to members as it was felt that all members were key and should be involved.

·         Councillor Smith felt that little funding had been secured for match funding and that this should be regarded as a higher risk. The Chairman advised that this would be kept under review.

·         Councillor Cuffley asked what direct input the City Deal had had in the growth of apprenticeships. In response to this, the Joint Assembly was informed that the City Deal’s main input had been in funding the events and outreach work of Form the Future, which linked students, employers and training providers. The outputs and benefits of these activities would be evaluated. Members were informed that Councillor Bick and Claire Ruskin were part of a skills group which monitored and evaluated the outputs of this work.

The Joint Assembly NOTED the City Deal progress report.

The Joint Assembly RECOMMENDED that:

1.    The Executive Board agrees to allocate additional or new resource to:

(i)    Developing up to 12 cycling ‘greenways’ in South Cambridgeshire (£480K for development work over 2 years (2017 – 2019)).

(ii)   City Access project – invest £5.045m to accelerate the delivery of the eight point plan. The need for significant resources was detailed in paragraph 13 of the January 2017 Board report. It enables the parallel and balanced progression of the eight delivery plans, including prioritisation of a parking strategy (£250K) and required staffing resources (£702K).

(iii)  Co-investment in electric vehicle charging points across Cambridge (£100K  one off cost in 17/18).

(iv) Travel audit to support case for Cambridge South Station and future transport requirements for the Biomedical Campus (£150K one off cost in 17/18).

(v)  Initial feasibility work on South Cambridgeshire Travel Hubs, including on key routes (£100k one off cost in 17/18).

(vi) Strengthening programme management, governance, strategy and coordination capacity and funding finance and Democratic Services support (£339K over 3 years, mostly up front investment).

(vii)Strengthening public engagement and communications by investing in better systems, capacity and expertise (£338K over 3 years).

(viii)               One year funding to Cambridge Promotions Agency to transition to fully-funded model (£40K).

(ix) Greater Cambridge strategic planning and transport framework – towards 2050 (£230K one off cost in 17/18).

(x)  City Centre spaces and movement framework (£150K one off cost in 17/18).

(xi)Scaling up the Smart Cambridge programme and attracting further investment in data and technologies (£1.640m over 3 years). It will focus on three aspects:(a) Better quantity, quality and use of data to improve information available to citizens, (b) Embedding digital solutions and emerging technology in City Deal work streams to ensure long term sustainable success, and (c) A collaborative approach that uses the power of digital technologies to galvanise  the business, community and academic sectors to work  together  and use their combined strengths to produce better outcomes for Greater Cambridge.

2.            That the Executive Board considers later in the year the following two indicative requests and to develop detailed business cases to enable Board decisions:

(i)    Implementation of Residents’ Parking Schemes within Cambridge City (indicative maximum of £1.0 m over 3 years).

(ii)   Scaling up original pilot skills work on stimulating business demand for apprenticeships and improving careers advice in schools into second phase of activity and investing in a wider reach (indicative maximum of £2.1m over 3 years).

3.    That the Executive Board notes:

·           The financial position, including that all partner authorities have agreed to contribute 40% of their respective New Homes Bonus (NHB) allocation from 2017/18 to 2019/20.

·           That if the proposed allocations are approved, this would mean an over-allocation of existing available resources of £4.8m, which would have to be treated as a managed  risk to be offset with either new Tranche 2 funding, other funding, or reductions in agreed schemes in future years. Given over half the Infrastructure Programme budget is forecast to be spent beyond 2020 this  ...  view the full decision text for item 7.

The City Deal Programme Director presented the Budget Setting 2017/18 report which Joint Assembly members discussed.

Councillor Cuffley commented that investment in the Smart Cambridge programme seemed low and asked if the budget could be reviewed. The City Deal Programme Director advised that the investment would do much to support the smarter aspects of the transport strategy and that for the time being, this was the investment that was needed. The Joint Assembly was informed that the £1.6 million investment had the potential to leverage further funding, including EU funding, and that further proposals coming forward would not be ruled out.

In response to a question from Councillor Smith, the Joint Assembly was informed that:

·         The revenue to fund the strengthening of City Deal programme management, governance, strategy and coordination capacity and funding finance and democratic services support, would come from the new homes bonus.

·         The operations and infrastructure budgets were kept separate.

·         The Gateway Review referred to in the report would be an economic assessment by the Government on City Deal and development schemes.

·         It was agreed in November 2016 that there should be allocations for finance and democratic services support for the City Deal.

·         Officers clarified that some schemes could go into either the operations or infrastructure budgets.

In response to concern raised by Councillor Smith regarding the short term nature of interim support to the City Deal, the City Deal’s Interim Chief Executive informed members that part of her remit was to look at the long term fit for purpose structure, and to plan for the future.

Councillor Smith requested an up to date list of all City Deal officers and their contact details be provided to Joint Assembly members.

Chris Tunstall was introduced to the Joint Assembly as the City Deal’s Interim Transport Director.

Councillor Smith pointed out that the risk of achievability of S106 receipts was only marked as amber on the risk register.

In response to Councillor Bick’s question regarding government triggers, the Joint Assembly was informed that the triggers were:

1.    Whether the City Deal was on track and on budget according to final business cases.

2.    If anything had already been delivered, whether it had delivered the benefits that were outlined in the project’s final business case.

3.    Whether investment and infrastructure delivered had delivered economic growth. The Government acknowledged that this was hard to measure.

In response to a question from Councillor Kavanagh, the Joint Assembly was informed that the £100,000 investment would deliver four electric vehicle charging points and that the City Council had put in place a strategy for affordable and convenient electric vehicle charging points strategy. Joint Assembly members expressed surprise and concern at the cost of the four charging points, which would only be for use by taxis. In response to this concern members were informed that the initial £100,000 investment would trigger further funding, which would result in 19 fast and 21 rapid charging points. Members were informed that the City Deal and City Council would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Report to follow

The Joint Assembly RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board:

a)    Notes the draft Consultation Report for publication on the GCCD website.

b)    Reviews the preferred options and approve further technical work to develop and refine the options, which improve public transport reliability, connectivity and access through park & ride expansion, proposals to deliver bus priority and increased cycling through improved infrastructure to support sustainable travel between homes and jobs, particularly:

i)          Road safety enhancements between Linton and Horseheath.

ii)         Improvements to signalised junctions and westbound bus lanes in Linton.

iii)        Measures to improve bus journey times through Linton High Street.

iv)        New and improved cycleways between Babraham and Great Abington / Granta Park.

v)         A new park and ride site near the A11.

vi)        A new westbound bus lane between the new park and ride site and Hinton Way roundabout.

vii)       A new segregated bus route from the Babraham Road park and ride site to the Cambridge Biomedical Campus (CBC). Further work alongside future City Deal prioritisation work will determine if this route is to be on road or a new off road route;

(c)          Endorses a second public consultation exercise on the preferred options  to commence in September 2017 after further workshops have taken place with Local Liaison Forums and councillors, and agrees a delegation to finalise consultation materials. [1]

(d)          Approves a one-off spend of £25,000 to undertake some transport modelling, as part of pre-Strategic Outline Business Case work on the dualling of the A1307 between Haverhill and the A11.

Antony Carpen, Robin Heydon and Jim Chisholm asked their pre-submitted questions, as detailed in the notice of public questions.

Graham Hughes, Cambridgeshire County Council, presented the A1307 three campuses to Cambridge report. The public questions were answered during the presentation of this report.

In response to his question, Mr Carpen was informed that a Cambridge-Haverhill railway line had been discounted for the following reasons:

·         Rail was a very expensive form of infrastructure to deliver. This scheme would cost £390 million, with a very low benefit to cost ratio (BCR). The scale of the scheme and likely benefit returned could not justify City Deal investment.

·         Capacity constraints of sharing light rail with heavy rail existed south of Cambridge station.

·         Parts of the track had been removed between Cambridge and Haverhill, making reinstatement difficult and expensive.

An overview of the public consultation responses was provided. It was explained that modelling in developing the proposed options, had included all planned growth and development to 2031.

In response to Mr Heydon’s question, the following points were made:

·         The need to provide high quality cycling standards was agreed with.

·         Design standards used were TA9105 and TA9005 along with Sustrans and Camcycle guidance.

·         The great benefit from working closely with Camcyle and other organisations was recognised, in order to develop and make changes over and above the design guidance.

·         Highways England was being worked closely with regarding the proposals to cross the A11. The City Deal would also like to work with Camcylcle in order to develop the concepts into more detailed schemes.

·         Mr Heydon expressed further concern regarding the 10 metre width of land to contain both bus and cycle facilities, advising that the strip of land should be 15 metres wide. In response to this, Mr Hughes advised that there was always a balance between funding and land available and the schemes that could be provided. This scheme was at the concept stage and therefore further debate would be welcomed in order to work out the balance with this scheme.

In response to Mr Chisholm’s question, the following points were made:

·         Decisions on projects were not only based on benefit to cost ratio (BCR).

·         Focus had been on the A1307 corridor, with the creation of infrastructure for this route thought to be logical and sensible.

·         Greenways if developed would be very attractive, however it was recognised that many cyclists wanted to get directly from their start point to destination and often this meant cycling on a road, so the routes proposed here were also considered necessary.

·         It was important not to see this package of measures in isolation, but to consider how it integrated with other schemes.

Councillor Tony Orgee, Chairman of the A1307 Local Liaison Forum (LLF), was invited to speak. Councillor Orgee updated the Joint Assembly on the LLF discussions regarding the A1307, making the following points:

·         Councillor Orgee informed the Joint Assembly that the A1307 report had only been made available three hours before the LLF meeting at which the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To note that the next meeting will be held on Wednesday 7 June 2017 at 2pm in the Council Chamber, The Guildhall, Cambridge.

The date of the next meeting, to be held on Wednesday 7 June at 2pm, was noted.

The Joint Assembly RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board:

a)    Identifies any key themes or issues that should be emphasised in the Greater Cambridge response to the Government’s Green Paper “Building our Industrial Strategy”

b)    Delegates authority to the City Deal Interim Chief Executive, in consultation with the Executive Board, to work with partners and stakeholders to develop a response to be submitted to Government by 17 April 2017.

The City Deal’s Interim Chief Executive presented the report seeking input to help shape the key themes that Greater Cambridge partners wished to emphasise in response to the Government’s Industrial Strategy.

Claire Ruskin advised that submissions from all organisations around Cambridge known to want to make a response to this strategy, be coordinated and aligned with and that submissions cross referenced other organisations.

Councillor Bick advised that as clustering had been a factor giving rise to Cambridge’s industrial success, this needed to be an important theme of the response. Councillor Bick also emphasised the importance of place base to the strategy.

The Joint Assembly was informed that the Head of Corporate Strategy, Cambridge City Council, would lead on this.

The Joint Assembly RECOMMENDED that the Executive Board:

a)    Identifies any key themes or issues that should be emphasised in the Greater Cambridge response to the Government’s Green Paper “Building our Industrial Strategy”

b)    Delegates authority to the City Deal Interim Chief Executive, in consultation with the Executive Board, to work with partners and stakeholders to develop a response to be submitted to Government by 17 April 2017.