Agenda item - City Access Strategy

To consider the attached report.

The Joint Assembly RECOMMEND the Executive Board:

a) Note the updates;

b) Note the feasibility studies and receive further reports in September on the findings and recommendations in respect of:

i. Use of Electric/ Hybrid buses; and

ii. A review of the Cambridge Traffic Signal network;

c) Agree to carry out further consultation and engagement with residents and the business community in both Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire on their transport needs and issues, as part of a wider ‘Travel Diary’ exercise, to help understand existing travel patterns, issues and incentives to change; including working with businesses to understand needs of employees from travel to work areas outside of the Greater Cambridge area; and

i. To determine local transport priorities that could receive funding were a Workplace Parking Levy (WPL) to be introduced, building on employers’ evidence of transport needs and in coordination with the Greater Cambridge Partnership;

ii. To coordinate with and, if feasible, form part of the GCP and the Local Enterprise Partnership’s broader engagement with the business community;

iii. To develop and provide practical support for employers and schools looking to manage their parking demand and provision working closely with Travel for Cambridge;

and report back the findings to a future meeting of the Board; and

d) Agree that the Director of Transport continues to negotiate a potential funding contribution for a Rural Hub Park and Ride service to be located at the soon-to-be-closed Papworth Hospital serving the Cambridge Biomedical Campus; and that a report be brought back to the next meeting.

The Interim Transport Director introduced a report to be presented to the next Executive Board meeting detailing progress with delivery of the City Access Strategy, which aimed to reduce traffic flows through the city, with the provision of more sustainable alternatives. He drew attention to plans to carry out further consultation and engagement with residents and the business communities in Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire. This would focus on their transport needs and issues and would form part of a wider Travel Diary exercise and inform further work on demand management. The report contained information on ongoing discussions about the implications and potential impact of a Work Place Levy (WPL) and studies commissioned to look at electric hybrid busses; a traffic signals review and on-street parking. The Interim Transport Director also highlighted ongoing proposals for a Rural Hub Park and Ride service to be located at the soon to be closed Papworth Hospital, serving the Biomedical Campus.

The Joint Assembly was invited to consider and comment on the recommendations being presented to the Executive Board. The main points of discussion are summarised below:

· Councillor Tim Bick, while welcoming the diverse report, commented that it demonstrated that when it came to having an overall strategy for the city center, there was much more work to be done. Members had heard from the professionals time and time again there was a need for carrots and sticks and it was clear stronger leadership was required to take the difficult decisions needed. He welcomed plans for electric busses which he saw as an interesting and exciting development. While this wouldn’t in itself solve the problem it would make the congestion ‘more healthy’ and also perhaps make the public transport option more attractive for people to take. He asked for more discussion on the commissioning model before this was adopted and suggested there were benefits of getting a mix of models and manufacturers. Councillor Bick drew attention to reference to locating a charging point at Drummer Street and questioned whether this was appropriate given Drummer Street was already exceeding maximum capacity. Alternative options on the perimeter of the network should be sought. He asked for clarification of reference to the proposed Papworth bus service being a planning requirement. Responding to the questions raised the Interim Transport Director confirmed that the task and finish working group would look at other demand measures and a report on this would be presented to the Joint Assembly and Executive Board in due course. He agree that Drummer Street was not a suitable option, but noted this suggestion had come from the consultants. Other possible sites were being investigated.

· Councillor Bridget Smith asked about Nottingham’s WPL. She also highlighted the importance of letting employers know what they were getting in return for the levy. With reference to the Papworth bus service she stressed it was important to recognise that the proposals were based on the needs of existing staff which would change over time. This should therefore be seen as a more short to medium term solution. In response the Interim Transport Director clarified that Nottingham was the only location to implement WPL and this had been introduced as a revenue raising measure as opposed to a way of addressing congestion. Officers were talking to businesses about how the levy would be spent if it was decided to go down this route. He confirmed that the Papworth proposals were short term and GCP’s funding had been limited to 3 years.

· Sir Michael Marshall suggested that the option of introducing a congestion charge should be considered again because the WPL would fall very unevenly, would cause huge problems for employers and there had been mixed reactions to it. Most of the impact would be on big companies on the edge of the City rather than those located in the middle.

· Councillor Dave Baigent welcomed the report, in particular plans to reduce congestion in Cambridge and improve air quality. He was concerned that lack of clean air was killing people and put future generations at risk. Councillor Baigent also welcomed the proposal to invest in electric busses and suggested that the GCP should purchase some busses to run itself as a small experimental bus company. In response, the Interim Transport Director explained that the GCP could not deregulate bus services. He pointed out that the Mayor could have the power if he wished. It was however possible for the GCP to provide buses for the park and ride schemes and this was under consideration.

· Councillor Noel Kavanagh welcomed the recruitment of additional project staff to support the Cycling Provision workstream and referred the roll out and expansion of the Ofo bike sharing scheme. He asked whether there was a danger that welcoming a scheme like this would reduce the availability of secure bicycle parking, which was already in short supply. In response, the Interim Transport Director confirmed Opo was a private enterprise outside GCPs control, but he was aware that the City Council had been involved in discussions with them.

· Dr John Wells drew attention to reference in the report to electric busses bringing significant decarbonisation and suggested there was a need to be careful about the language used. It would be more prudent to evaluate busses using grid average Green House Gas emissions’. Dr Wells stressed this was not to say that the proposals did not improve localised pollution and may bring benefits in terms of greenhouse gasses, but we shouldn’t overstate the benefits. In response, the Interim Transport Director acknowledged that there was a lot more work to be done on busses. He pointed out that the plan was to move towards green electricity, but accepted the points raised by Dr Wells. He added that the only emission free busses were hydrogen busses, but the cost of these was extremely high.

· Councillor Tim Wotherspoon sought clarification of reference to plans to build a 600 space multi-story car park at the Cambridge Biomedical Campus not proceeding. He also drew attention to reference to urban traffic speeds being among the lowest in the country (page 212 of the agenda pack) and suggested this may in part be as a result of there being 184 individual sets of traffic signal in Cambridge; around half the total within Cambridgeshire. In response, the Interim Transport Director confirmed that the multi- story car park would not proceed. Planning requirements involved the production of a travel plan, but there was no requirement for Papworth to provide funding. However they were part of the Cambridge Biomedical Campus, with whom discussions about funding were taking place.

· Claire Ruskin welcomed the report which detailed a number of actions, but there remained much to do before improvements were seen on the ground. There was an urgent need to improve city centre access recognising lots of employment and businesses were based in the centre of town. She suggested some businesses were moving out because of the lack of access to their sites. Ms Ruskin expressed concern that Ofo’s plans to expand its operation could impact on small independent operators already in Cambridge.

· Councillor Kevin Price reported he had discussed with the Mayor the possibility of him taking action on bus deregulation and had not received an outright no. Mayor Palmer had indicated that he needed to investigate this further, which would suggest there was scope for the GCP to lobby him on this matter if it was considered appropriate.

With 11 votes in favour, 1 abstention and 1 with one member taking no part in the discussion due to a non-pecuniary interest, the Joint Assembly agreed to RECOMMEND that the Executive Board: