Agenda, decisions and minutes

To authorise the Leader to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2013 as a correct record.

The minutes of the previous meeting, held on 12 September 2013, were AGREED as a correct record and signed by the Leader of the Council, subject to the deletion of the words ‘had the Scheme not been introduced’ in the last sentence of the second paragraph under minute number 18.

Councillor Nick Wright declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in minute number 34 as the proposed route of the A14 went through farmland that he owned.  Councillor Wright stated that he would address Cabinet as the local ward member for this item and leave the meeting room before any decision was made.  It was noted that Councillor Wright had received a dispensation from the Council’s Monitoring Officer to this effect.

No announcements were made.

No public questions had been received.

Cabinet AGREED the following as a response to the Highways Agency’s consultation in relation to the A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon improvement scheme, with the exact wording to be agreed by officers in consultation with the Leader of the Council: -

“Principle of the scheme

South Cambridgeshire District Council would like to highlight the importance of addressing improvements to the A14 as soon as possible.  Improvements to the A14 are necessary in order to deliver the local growth agenda, protect village amenity, and improve journey times and road safety for the travelling public. The A14 between Cambridge and Huntingdon is a vital route of international, national, regional and local importance, and needs to be improved urgently.

Alternative schemes

The alternative route utilising the A428/A1198 (option 6) is not supported by the Council. The A14 study shows that it would be less effective and have greater negative impacts on existing communities than the preferred option.

Tolling

With regard to the proposed tolling arrangements, local residents in Districts where the Council will be contributing towards the cost of the scheme should be exempt, or have the opportunity to purchase a season ticket at marginal cost (excluding locally registered HGVs). In effect these residents are being asked to pay twice. The toll should be capped and should be lifted once the scheme has been paid for.

The Highways Agency needs to fully consider the impact on surrounding routes such as the A428, particularly in combination with growth plans set out in the South Cambridgeshire Proposed Submission Local Plan and other emerging development plans. The Highways Agency should also consider the options for improvements to increase capacity on the A428 between Caxton Gibbet and the A1, which is also a priority. This route is already subject to regular congestion at peak times and could be worsened if used as an alternative to the toll route. 

Local Access Road

Provision of a Local Access Road is important to ensure local people can access settlements in South Cambridgeshire when the A14 has fewer junctions than at present, and to improve traffic flow on the A14. The Highways Agency should make allowances to enable upgrading in the future, if the single carriageway route proves to be insufficient. The Highways Agency should include cycling, walking and horse riding provision along this route, linking into cycling improvements planned in association with Northstowe.

The Council would like to stress the importance of supporting non-motorised users, and this should be a consideration along the whole route during the design process. This includes reinstatement of historic footpaths which were severed by the A14. This will support multi modal improvements envisaged by the original CHUMMS Report.

A1198 Junction

With regard to the inclusion of west facing slips (with eastern emergency slips) at the A1198 junction, the Council will support if the modelling demonstrates they are necessary. The Highways Agency is urged to explore the impact of providing these slip roads further on traffic generation and impact on local villages, including as a result  ...  view the full decision text for item 34.

Consideration was given to a report which provided Cabinet with an opportunity to agree the Council’s response to the Highways Agency’s consultation on the A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon improvement scheme.

It was noted that the Highways Agency had carried out appraisals of options and developed proposals for the Huntingdon to Cambridge improvement scheme.  The Agency was consulting on the scheme until 13 October 2013 and intended to make a Preferred Route announcement in late 2013, followed by further public consultation.  The project had been classified by the Planning Act 2008 as a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project and would require a Development Consent Order application, anticipated in late 2014, with construction to commence in 2016.  The scheme was estimated to take three to four years to complete. 

The proposed Scheme was fundamentally the same as the abandoned 2010 scheme, with some principle differences as outlined in paragraph 12 of the report.  It comprised the following four key elements as set out in the report at paragraph 14: -

·         Huntingdon Southern Bypass (A1 to Swavesey);

·         A14 online improvement;

·         Girton Interchange;

·         Cambridge Northern Bypass.

Councillor Ray Manning, Leader of the Council, presented the report and invited Members to consider the Council’s recommended response to the consultation, emphasising that this report did not address any financial agreements as these would be considered separately by Cabinet at a later stage.  

Councillor Mark Howell took this opportunity to oppose the introduction of a junction on the A1198 to the new A14 as he reported that the affected Parish Councils had objected to this proposal.  He also referred to a similar consultation in 2005 when the Council recommended that a junction should not be introduced in this area.  Councillor Nick Wright, speaking as local member, stated that the introduction of a major junction at St Ives, whilst retaining a junction at Swavesey, could facilitate this as well as maintain traffic flow.  As a result of doing this the cost of the Scheme may also reduce as the route could be realigned to save four flyovers and follow the route of the old road for longer, meaning less de-trunking would be necessary. 

Councillor Mick Martin was concerned about recommending major changes to the proposal at this stage of the process.  He felt it was important that the scheme was delivered sooner rather than later and any changes at this stage could cause delays and may even add to its overall cost.  Councillor Martin reflected on a recent briefing with the Highways Agency where he said it was clear that the Agency had significantly considered the options available.  The proposal had been scheduled to reflect the best flow of traffic, including forecasts from the Northstowe development.

Councillor Simon Edwards was completely against the principle of tolling and local contributions for a national road, but acknowledged the unique circumstances of the A14 in this instance and the necessity for tolling and local contributions to ensure that the scheme went ahead.  He added, however, that local residents in those  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.

None

No issues arising from the Scrutiny and Overview Committee were reported.

None

No issues arising from the Partnerships Review Committee were reported.

Councillor Simon Edward, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Finance and Staffing, informed Cabinet that he recently attended a meeting of the Horizon’s Board on behalf of the Leader of the Council.  He referred to the Board’s approximate £20 million rolling fund, reflecting on the general principle that it should be a rolling fund, but felt that this could perhaps be used as a contribution towards the A14.  He emphasised that this was a discussion that would need to be held at the relevant time.

No reports on Parish Council meetings were received.

No reports from Member Champions were received.