Agenda item

Rapid Mass Transport Strategic Options Appraisal

 

To consider the attached report.

Decision:

The Executive Board AGREED unanimously:

 

a)    To commission a high quality, independent strategic options appraisal study into rapid, mass transport options for Cambridge City and the surrounding travel to work area in conjunction with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority to deliver by November 2017.

 

b)    A total budget allocation of £150,000 in 2017/18 for the delivery of the strategic options appraisal study.

 

Amendment to officer recommendations shown in italic text.

Minutes:

The Executive Board considered a report seeking approval to proceed with a Strategic Options Appraisal into rapid, mass transport options for Cambridge City and the surrounding travel to work area in conjunction with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority.

 

The Chairperson reported that the Joint Assembly had supported the proposal but had suggested amendments to the recommendations, which had been agreed unanimously and are show in italics below:

 

a)    Commission a high quality, independent strategic options appraisal study into rapid, mass transport options for Cambridge City and the surrounding travel to work area in conjunction with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority to deliver by November 2017; and

 

b)    Agree a total budget allocation of £150,000 in 2017/18 for the delivery of the strategic options appraisal study.

 

The Chairperson reported that Councillor Rod Cantrill had asked to speak on this item as local member and invited him comment on the proposals.  Councillor Cantrill referred to his question, which had been submitted in advance of the meeting and included in the list of public questions set out as Appendix A to the minutes and indicated he had no further comments to add.

 

At this stage in the proceedings the Chairperson invited Roger Tomlinson to ask his question, which had been submitted in line with the provisions of Standing Orders.  He explained that a response to the questions asked would be covered in the officer presentation on the report.  Details of the questions and answers are set out in Appendix A to the minutes.

 

The Interim Transport Director explained that it was proposed to appoint a consultant to provide expert independent advice on the most appropriate form of rapid, mass transit for Cambridge City and the surrounding travel to work area.  Work would involve a strategic options appraisal of a range of underground and over ground rapid transport modes, including light rail, monorail, bus rapid transit and affordable very rapid transport.  This would enable the GCP Executive Board and Combined Authority to determine the most appropriate form of rapid, mass transit to meet Greater Cambridge’s future transport needs.  The cost was estimated to be in the region of £150,000, half of which was expected to be met by the Combined Authority.  The cost to the GCP would therefore be approximately £75,000. [Later in the meeting it was confirmed that the Combined Authority, which was also meeting that morning, had approved the proposal and agreed to fund half of the cost.]

 

The Executive Board was invited to consider and comment upon the proposals, taking into account feedback from the Joint Assembly and questions from a local Member and the public and officer responses.  The response to questions of clarification and main points of discussion are summarised below:

 

·         In response to a question from Councillor Bates, it was confirmed that the work would be completed in time for the report to be presented to the November meeting of the Executive Board.

 

·         With reference to the map on page 18 of the agenda pack, the Chairperson asked for clarification of the area to be covered by the proposed study.  The Interim Transport Director confirmed that the options appraisal would look at what was most appropriate for Cambridge and would not at this stage look at any particular mode of transport.  It would also look wider than just Cambridge itself and would incorporate the wider travel to work area, which went beyond the Greater Cambridge area.  Particular routes would be the subject of further reports.

 

·         In response to a question from the Chairperson it was confirmed that the proposed options appraisal would cover all of the potential solutions listed in paragraph 3.1 of the brief [page 18 of the agenda pack].  The Interim Transport Director confirmed that the consultants would be asked to provide an independent assessment of anything and everything that they felt would suit a historic area such as Cambridge.

 

·         The Chairperson also asked for further information on the proposed procurement process.  It was confirmed that normal, well established procedures of the elected authorities would be followed.  Consultants would also be asked to identify any connection with schemes, individuals or companies in the area.  In response to a related question from Councillor Herbert, it was confirmed there would be a single lead officer responsible for this work.  This would be a matter for the GCP and Combined Authority to agree and details had yet to be confirmed.

 

·         With reference to the proposed project board, referred to in paragraph 7 of the brief [page 21 of the agenda pack] it was confirmed that its composition was subject to confirmation, but was likely to involve the Chairperson of the GCP Executive Board, the GCP Portfolio Holder for Transport, the Mayor, the Combined Authority Portfolio Holder for Transport and possibly the Chief Executives of the two organisations.

 

·         With reference to the major development site adjacent to the A141 in St Ives identified on the map on page 18 of the agenda pack, Councillor Bates explained that this site was not being recommended for development as part of Huntingdonshire District Council’s Local Plan, which had recently been issued for consultation.

 

·         In response to a question from Councillor Herbert it was confirmed that this was a two zone study and the brief referred to an inner and outer hinterland.  Councillor Herbert suggested this was not immediately apparent from the map on page 18 of the agenda pack.

  

·         Councillor Herbert asked for and received an assurance that there would be very clear references to and clarity about the synergy and integration with rail, taking into account the potential investments in rail within this geography.

 

·         Commenting on the proposal, Councillor Herbert drew attention to the fact that the GCP had already discussing a study similar to this because Tranche 2 needed to include a radical look at different options.  This would need to be an evidence based analysis and he was happy with the proposed amendment from the Joint Assembly and supported the suggestion that there should be no prejudgment of the outcome of the study.  In response to the questions raised, he was not convinced that there was a case to be made for a delay to the Cambourne to Cambridge busway project, but this could be considered as part of the discussion on this item later on in the meeting and in the context of input from the Local Liaison Forum (LLF).  With reference to the question about the neutrality of the consultants, Councillor Herbert explained that clearly he would expect this to be the case.  He hoped that the proposed timetable would allow sufficient opportunity to pursue other issues about the fundability and deliverability of some of the potential options.

 

·         Councillor Bates highlighted the importance of ensuring any study was independent and confirmed he was content with the assurances given by officers.  He was also supportive of the amendments proposed by the Joint Assembly.

 

·         Professor Allmendinger supported the comments made by other Executive Board members.  With reference to Councillor Cantrill’s question about clarity on the way forward, he did not accept that there was lack of clarity and emphasised the importance of distinguishing between routes and the modes of transport to go on those routes. He was of the opinion that it was important to continue with the evaluation of various routes while this study took place.  He asked that the study result in a range of different approaches to transport in Cambridge over quite a long period, some of which would be implemented and then be superseded by an alternative solution.  It was important to adopt an approach that incorporated interim solutions that allowed for evolution towards a longer term solution.  The Chairperson supported this approach and highlighted the fact that this was about delivery both now and in the future.

 

·         The Chairperson also expressed his support for the proposal and confirmed the importance of options being grounded in deliverability and affordability.  He reported that Mark Reeve, who was unable to attend the meeting, had confirmed that the Local Enterprise Partnership supported the recommendations as amended by the Joint Assembly.

 

The Executive Board AGREED unanimously:

 

a)    To commission a high quality, independent strategic options appraisal study into rapid, mass transport options for Cambridge City and the surrounding travel to work area in conjunction with the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Combined Authority to deliver by November 2017; and

 

b)    A total budget allocation of £150,000 in 2017/18 for the delivery of the strategic options appraisal study.

 

Amendment to officer recommendations shown in italic text.

Supporting documents: