Agenda, decisions and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber - South Cambs Hall. View directions

Contact: Patrick Adams  03450 450 500 Email: democratic.services@scambs.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1.

Apologies for absence

To receive any apologies for absence.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Mark Reeve, Greater Cambridge Greater Peterborough Enterprise Partnership.

2.

Minutes of the previous meeting pdf icon PDF 320 KB

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting held on 13 November 2016 as a correct record.

Minutes:

The Minutes of the meeting held on 13 November 2016 were agreed as a correct record.

3.

Declarations of interest

To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Executive Board.

Minutes:

Professor Nigel Slater declared a pecuniary interest in agenda item 8: “Western Orbital – Public Consultation and Next Steps”, as his employer potentially stood to benefit from the proposed infrastructure improvements along the Western Orbital corridor. Professor Slater left the Chamber when this item was discussed and did not participate in the debate.

 

Councillor Lewis Herbert declared a non-pecuniary interest in question 5 of agenda item 4: “Public Questions”, as a resident of Hills Road.

4.

Questions by Members of the public pdf icon PDF 174 KB

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

Minutes:

Questions by members of the public were asked and answered as follows:

 

Question from Stephen Coates

Stephen Coates read out his pre-submitted questions:

·         Why did the City Deal Board state that Cambridge University has never supported a busway across the West Fields when its agents Carter Jonas are stating that development of the land North of Barton Road could provide land and funding for such a busway?

·         When the Board issued its response to Save the West Fields’ question on governance on 9 November 2016, why did you amend the statement of Cambridge University to exclude these key words which were said on October 13th  (even though it was described as University statement by Nigel Slater read out by the Chair at the Board meeting on 13 October 2016)?

·         In view of the fact Cambridge University and Colleges have now offered to part pay for the A428 busway by developing West Fields with housing, how can you argue they have not influenced a route over the West Fields since their consultation submission in November 2015?

·         Is it correct that Corpus Christi College, a member of the NBRLOG has offered Dumpling Farm as a site for a park and ride cycle facility, again offering an incentive for a location of the Orbital route East of the M11?

·         Can you say whether the City Deal as a body has ever threatened either an individual, a business or an organisation with legal action or taken legal action against any person, business or organisation? If so, who is responsible for authorising such action and what has the cost to date been for legal advice and intervention resulting from such action and what has the cost to date been, for legal advice and intervention resulting from such actions? If legal threats or action have been entered into by the City Deal as a body, are they prepared to make the details public?

 

Professor Nigel Slater explained that, as set out in its original response to the City Deal consultation on A428 Cambourne to Cambridge bus route submitted in November 2015, the University supported enabling further public transport accessibility to the West Cambridge Site, which is a major employment site, and which has submitted a planning application for further academic and commercial research developments.

 

Tanya Sheridan, City Deal Programme Director, explained that no such legal action had been taken, as the “City Deal” was a joint committee and not an organisation in its own right. Were there any consideration of legal action it would be that taken by one or more of the partner councils.

 

Stephen Coates stated that he did not consider that his questions had been answered. Councillor Lewis Herbert explained that he had been offered Stephen Coates a meeting and this offer still stood.

 

Question from Robin Pellew of Cambridgeshire Past, Present and Future

Robin Pellew read out his pre-submitted questions:

·         What arrangements are the City Deal and the County Council putting in place with the operators to create Enhanced Partnerships?

·         Does  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

5.

Petitions

To note that no petitions for consideration by the Executive Board have been received.

Minutes:

No petitions had been received for this meeting.

6.

Reports and recommendations from the Joint Assembly

To receive any reports or recommendations following the meeting of the Joint Assembly on 1 December 2016.

Minutes:

Councillor Roger Hickford, Chairman of the Greater Cambridge City Deal Joint Assembly, stated that he would report the recommendations of the Assembly under the relevant agenda items.

7.

City Deal progress report pdf icon PDF 351 KB

To consider the attached progress report.

Minutes:

Tanya Sheridan, City Deal Programme Director, presented the City Deal progress report, which updated the Executive Board on the progress that had been made on the various workstreams and provided a timetable for future work.

 

A428-M11 segregated bus route / A428 corridor Park & Ride / Madingley Road bus priority

Ashley Heller, Team Leader - Public Transport Projects, explained that workshops discussing the above project had been set up between January and July 2017.

 

Housing

Tanya Sheridan explained that if a wholly owned Local Authority company were to be established it would require that agreement of the full councils of all three local authorities.

 

Payment-by-results mechanism

Tanya Sheridan agreed to bring an extended report on this to the Executive Board’s meeting in June.

 

The Executive Board NOTED the report.

8.

Western Orbital pdf icon PDF 603 KB

To consider the attached report.

Additional documents:

Decision:

The Executive Board AGREED to:

 

      I.        Note the responses to the consultation on the Western Orbital bus infrastructure improvement scheme.

 

    II.        the next steps as set out in this report for the ongoing strategic assessment of the Western Orbital scheme as part of the City Deal programme to support related potential Tranche 1 schemes.

 

   III.        to take a key role in working with Highways England to establish clear priorities along the M11 corridor and for these discussions to form part of the next report on the Western Orbital, and arrange a meeting of City Deal Board and Assembly members and officers and local MPs with Highways England, the minutes of which will appear on the City Deal’s website, to press the case for firm commitments from them to improve the M11 west of Cambridge including:

 

(a)  Making that section of the M11 a “managed motorway” and seek a date for that, and

 

(b)  Improving the motorway junctions, including priorities for junctions 11 and 13.

 

(c)  Remodelling the Girton interchange.

Minutes:

Ashley Heller, Team Leader – Public Transport Projects, presented this report on the outcome of the consultation on future options for bus and cycle infrastructure improvements along the Western Orbital corridor.

 

Helen Bradbury gave a presentation on behalf of the Local Liaison Forum (LLF), which made the following points:

·         The plan to extend the current Park and Ride site at Trumpington was supported.

·         A new Park and Ride site at Hauxton was not supported.

·         The Park and Ride sites should be situated further from the City centre.

·         There should be a full assessment of the A428 Cambourne to Cambridge options to make best use of the existing infrastructure.

 

Councillor Lewis Herbert stated that recommendations regarding the Cambourne to Cambridge route did not form part of the report on the agenda and no notice of decisions had been published, so the Executive Board could not make any decision on those recommendations under this item. Helen Bradbury explained that these recommendations went to the Greater Cambridge City Deal Joint Assembly in September and so should have been available to the Executive Board. Councillor Lewis Herbert advised that a meeting would be arranged with LLF and resident representatives, where these issues would be discussed.

 

Councillor Bridget Smith suggested that the Park and Ride sites should moved further away from Cambridge so that traffic did not have to use a congested road to access the site. It was for this reason that the LLF supported the Scotland Farm site on the Cambourne to Cambridge route. It was suggested that residents could cycle to the Park and Ride sites. A five mile radius from the City Centre was suggested. Councillor Roger Hickford explained that the Park and Ride sites only had the capacity to be part of the solution.

 

Councillor Bridget Smith explained that she had revised her opinion on the need for bus hub at Foxton, as the village was already served by a train station.

 

Councillor Francis Burkitt stated that as the City Deal Portfolio Holder for South Cambridgeshire District Council he had contacted all the district’s parish councils, asking if they could suggest a suitable site for a bus hub. He would share the results of this consultation shortly. He expressed the hope that funding could be found for rural transport hubs.

 

Bob Menzies explained that the Western Orbital scheme was currently not in tranche 1, but that it was closely linked  by tranche 1 schemes.

 

Bob Menzies, Director of Strategy and Development at Cambridgeshire County Council, stated that Highways England were opposed to the inclusion of a bus only slip road on the hard shoulder of the M11. He also explained that whilst making a section of the M11 a “managed motorway” would improve traffic flow it could increase congestion closer to Cambridge, as many M11 journeys were local. Councillor Ian Bates recommended that the Executive Board contact Essex County Council to discuss the possible impact the M11 improvements would have on the southern parts of the motorway.

 

It was hoped  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

M11 Junction 11: Bus Only Slip Roads pdf icon PDF 748 KB

To consider the attached report.

Decision:

The Executive Board

 

AGREED        that the M11 Junction 11 south bound bus only off slip road concept should be integrated into the Western Orbital project ensuring that any strategic transport and economic benefits may be realised and that a sustainable phased proposal can be developed.

Minutes:

Bob Menzies, Director of Strategy and Development at Cambridgeshire County Council, introduced this report, which summarised the assessment of a southbound bus only off slip road at Junction 11 of the M11. He explained that uncertainties remained as to the long term plans of Highways England for the M11 as well as potential land use planning issues associated with Junction 11. He recommended that further works on this project should be integrated into the Western Orbital project to ensure that any strategic transport benefits could be achieved and full account taken of other issues on the corridor.

 

Councillor Roger Hickford, Chairman of the Joint Assembly, stated that the Assembly had endorsed the report’s recommendation. The Assembly had expressed concerns regarding the demand on Junction 11 from staff at AstraZeneca, which would increase when Papworth Hospital relocated.

 

Councillor Francis Burkitt suggested that work on Junction 11 should be carried out in 2017 and not have to wait for Tranche 2.

 

Councillor Lewis Herbert advised that the Police had the enforcement powers needed to prevent the use of private roads by through traffic wanting to access the Biomedical Campus site.

 

It was agreed that the Executive Board should liaise with representatives from the Biomedical Campus and also the Trumpington Residents’ Association regarding the local pressures due to increased traffic going to the Biomedical Campus and to Addenbrooke’s.

 

The Executive Board

 

AGREED        that the M11 Junction 11 south bound bus only off slip road concept should be integrated into the Western Orbital project ensuring that any strategic transport and economic benefits may be realised and that a sustainable phased proposal can be developed.

10.

Tranche 2 prioritisation pdf icon PDF 331 KB

To consider the attached report.

Decision:

The Executive Board

 

AGREED

 

(a)  that the headline objectives for the Tranche 2 prioritisation exercise are:

-        to prioritise transport infrastructure investments to prepare those which best meet the City Deal’s strategic objectives  for delivery when funding becomes available (City Deal strategic objectives, which include economic growth and maintaining quality of life, are set out at Annex 1);

-       to ensure that those investments support the growth strategy set out in the Local Plans and the supporting Transport  Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire; and

-       To ensure the prioritisation is aligned to wider work by the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) on the Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) and of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority.

 

(b)  To recognise dependencies between ongoing Tranche 1 work, the Local Plan examinations, the work of the Combined Authority, the Economic Assessment Panel, the Tranche 2 prioritisation exercise and Tranche 3 and agrees that potential alignment and synergies with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority be explored;

(c)  that the previously used criteria and methodology should be reviewed and built on and that Board, Joint Assembly and other stakeholder input be sought on assessment criteria and methodology and the ‘long list’ through workshops in early 2017;

(d)  to note existing commitments to consider particular schemes through the Tranche 2 prioritisation process and confirms these;

(e)  Agrees to receive a further report in June recommending the prioritisation methodology and criteria and long list process, as well as the potential for synergies with the Combined Authority and other bodies;

(f)   officers should explore potential use of a proportion of future City Deal funding to:

·         create a potential ‘rolling fund’ for investment in transport infrastructure/ measures to unlock early growth from which a future repayment revenue stream would follow (for example from s106 contributions) and /or

·         create a fund for smaller scale measures (likely to be those costing less than £500 000) that could be bid into to allow delivery of measures that unblock localised barriers to growth and provide strong economic benefits in line with City Deal objectives.

These options would be brought back to the Board with the proposed long list in September 2017.

(g)  To endorse the outline timetable for recommending  transport investment priorities for Tranche 2 and notes the key dependencies.

 

Minutes:

Mike Salter, Transport Strategy Manager, presented this report which updated the Executive Board on work prioritising transport infrastructure schemes for delivery in the second tranche of Greater Cambridge City Deal transport infrastructure programme from 2020 to 2025 and agree the next steps.

 

Councillor Roger Hickford, Chairman of the Joint Assembly, reminded the Executive Board that the Local Plans of Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire District Councils had not yet been agreed. He stated that there had been some concern expressed by the Assembly on how the funding would be managed, but the recommendations in the report had been endorsed, as it only called for officers to “explore potential use” of future City Deal funding.

 

Councillor Ian Bates stated that he supported the direction of travel, but recognised that there were several obstacles to overcome.

 

It was confirmed that the workshops scheduled for February/March 2017 would be jointly held with the Executive Board, the Joint Assembly, the business community and other stakeholders.

 

Councillor Francis Burkitt suggested that the Executive Board should ensure that some of the £200 million in Tranche 2 was kept in reserve, for new projects to be funded during the Tranche 2 period of 2020-25.

 

Concern was expressed about the potential to focus too closely on the traditional Benefit:Cost Ratio (BCR) at the expense of achieving the City Deal’s strategic objectives, and that prioritisation should be more wide-ranging that only traditional BCR measurement. Mike Salter assured the Executive Board that a multitude of criteria were used to assess which schemes should be prioritised and the BCR methodology was only one tool that was used.

 

The Executive Board

 

AGREED

 

(a)  that the headline objectives for the Tranche 2 prioritisation exercise are:

-        to prioritise transport infrastructure investments to prepare those which best meet the City Deal’s strategic objectives  for delivery when funding becomes available (City Deal strategic objectives, which include economic growth and maintaining quality of life, are set out at Annex 1);

-       to ensure that those investments support the growth strategy set out in the Local Plans and the supporting Transport  Strategy for Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire; and

-       To ensure the prioritisation is aligned to wider work by the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) on the Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) and of the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority.

 

(b)  To recognise dependencies between ongoing Tranche 1 work, the Local Plan examinations, the work of the Combined Authority, the Economic Assessment Panel, the Tranche 2 prioritisation exercise and Tranche 3 and agrees that potential alignment and synergies with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority be explored;

(c)  that the previously used criteria and methodology should be reviewed and built on and that Board, Joint Assembly and other stakeholder input be sought on assessment criteria and methodology and the ‘long list’ through workshops in early 2017;

(d)  to note existing commitments to consider particular schemes through the Tranche 2 prioritisation process and confirms these;

(e)  Agrees to receive a further report in June recommending the prioritisation methodology and criteria and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

11.

Department for Transport consultation on WebTAG pdf icon PDF 143 KB

To consider the attached report.

Decision:

The Executive Board AGREED

      I.        To submit a combined City Deal response to this consultation, in addition to responses that the partner organisations may wish to make individually.

    II.        That the City Deal response should be framed around the principles set out in paragraph 13.

   III.        To delegate to the City Deal Director, in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Executive Board and Cambridgeshire County Council’s Executive Director: Economy, Transport and Environment, responsibility for submitting a full response to this consultation in accordance with these agreed principles.

Minutes:

Mike Salter, Transport Strategy Manager, presented this report which asked the Executive Board to agree principles to be incorporated into a combined City Deal response to the Department of Transport’s consultation on proposed changes to the estimation of wider economic impacts in transport appraisal guidance.

 

The Executive Board AGREED

      I.        To submit a combined City Deal response to this consultation, in addition to responses that the partner organisations may wish to make individually.

    II.        That the City Deal response should be framed around the principles set out in paragraph 13.

   III.        To delegate to the City Deal Director, in consultation with the Chair and Vice-Chair of the Executive Board and Cambridgeshire County Council’s Executive Director: Economy, Transport and Environment, responsibility for submitting a full response to this consultation in accordance with these agreed principles.

12.

City Deal financial monitoring pdf icon PDF 257 KB

To consider the attached report.

Minutes:

Tanya Sheridan, City Deal Programme Director, introduced this report that provided the Executive Board with the financial monitoring position for the period ending 31 October 2016.

 

Bob Menzies, Director of Strategy and Development at Cambridgeshire County Council, stated that a report on the A10(N) study would be taken to June’s meeting.

 

The Executive Board NOTED the report.

13.

City Deal Forward Plan pdf icon PDF 107 KB

To consider the attached City Deal Forward Plan.

 

(Changes to the Forward Plan document made since the previous meeting are purposely highlighted using tracked changes).

Minutes:

Councillor Lewis Herbert introduced the discussion on the Forward Plan of decisions that will be taken at future meetings of the Greater Cambridge City Deal Executive Board.

 

It was agreed that the Communications Strategy, which was scheduled for January’s meeting, should instead be incorporated into the March budget item where it has resource implications.

 

It was agreed that the Cambridge to Cambourne busway should be put on the Forward plan to be discussed in either March, June or July depending on other developments.

 

It was agreed that the Executive Board should discuss a report on the impact of devolution and the setting up of the Combined Authority. It was suggested that this should be scheduled for March’s meeting, it was noted that the Combined Authority would have its first meeting in February.

 

Goodbye to Professor Nigel Slater

Councillor Lewis Herbert announced that this would be Professor Nigel Slater’s final meeting. He thanked Professor Slater for all work on the Executive Board on behalf of Cambridge University and looked forward to working with his successor.