Agenda item

The Executive Board AGREED unanimously:

1.    To note and take into consideration the results of the feasibility report, future parish consultation with residents, local knowledge and planning considerations to approve Oakington and Sawston as pilots to be taken into Phase 2 as part of the Rural Travel Hubs project.

2.    That, in respect of Whittlesford:-

(a)  A Master Transport Planning exercise be undertaken at a cost of £50,000 which can be met out of existing funding.

(b)  A contribution of £70,000 be made for the provision of additional cycle parking for 200 bikes.

3.    To note that the three villages referred to above will be pilots and based on the evaluation of the success of these pilots, further waves of Rural Travel Hubs could be investigated in the future.

The Chairperson invited Councillor Simon Edwards to ask his question. Councillor Edwards stated that he was addressing the Executive Board in his capacity as a South Cambridgeshire District Councillor for the Cottenham ward, although he was also a member of Oakington and Westwick Parish Council.  He noted that the report at paragraph 2.1 invited the Executive Board to take account of parish consultation with residents and of local knowledge and in that context, rather than asking a question, he wished to use the opportunity to bring Board members up to date with the views of the Parish and local community.  He said that the Parish had been encouraged by the “bottom up” process adopted by the GCP to the potential development of rural travel hubs and had been keen to examine the opportunity presented.    Councillor Edwards reported that a workshop had been hosted locally involving both the Parish Council and the local transport action group in order to try to establish what measures would be acceptable and what would not be acceptable to the Parish and local community in order to guide the GCP.  He said that universal agreement had been achieved between the two parties on a number of measures (including lockable cycle storage; a path and cycleway to Oakington; real time information and wi fi access).  However two key issues had been hotly debated.  In terms of parking, consensus had not been achieved at the workshop and had been further considered at the Parish Council, which had taken the view that it would be willing to accept the level of parking indicated in the report before the Executive Board.  The other key issue agreed by both parties was the need for the Citi 6 bus service to be extended up to the site. He therefore wished the Executive Board to be aware at this stage, that Oakington would not support an option that did not include the Citi 6 bus link.  Finally, Councillor Edwards noted the indication given in the report that the construction at the pilot sites would initially be more temporary in nature and following monitoring, if deemed successful, a more permanent design solution would be developed.  Whilst recognising the merit in opting for a temporary solution pending demonstration of the success of a site, Councillor Edwards urged the Executive Board to make the construction of the pilot sites permanent, prior to bringing any other sites on board.

The Chairperson thanked Councillor Edwards for his contribution and commented on the value of adopting the “bottom up” approach and being attuned to community feedback about proposed schemes.  In terms of the specific point raised, he noted that Mike Hill, Director of Health and Environmental Services at South Cambridgeshire District Council, who was present at the meeting, was leading on this aspect and asked him to take the points raised by Councillor Edwards on board. Mr Hill said that he would.

The Interim Director of Transport introduced the feasibility report on the development of Rural Travel Hubs in South Cambridgeshire.  The report sought approval to proceed to phase two of the project.  Phase two would involve the preparation of full business cases for the pilot sites; a detailed analysis of planning considerations; refined costings of construction and an outline of the evaluation method to review the success of the pilots.

He referred to the expectation that the allocation already agreed by the Executive Board should be sufficient to complete Phase 2, and said that if it appeared that this would not be possible, officers would come back to the Board to advise accordingly. 

During discussion upon the report:-

·         The Executive Board drew attention to the considerable work put into reviewing other potential hub locations and said that it would be regrettable if that work was lost.

·         The Chairperson concurred that these should be regarded as the first wave of pilot travel hubs and that the work done on other potential locations should be held in reserve in the expectation of investigating development of further hubs in future.

·         A question was raised as to whether the Citi 6 bus was subsidised or a commercial service as this might influence the business case for Oakington.  The Transport Director was asked to get back to the Transport Portfolio Holder with the answer.

·         It was acknowledged that the outcome of the Combined Authority’s bus review might also be of relevance.

·         Following comments regarding the Executive Board’s earlier discussion about the further exploration of a travel hub at Foxton, the Chairperson indicated that, regardless of the differing terminology used in the reports, it was his view that the GCP was exploring the development of  four travel hubs; namely Oakington, Sawston, Whittlesford and Foxton.

·         Whilst noting that there had been some reservations expressed at the Joint Assembly about the potential for rural travel hubs to create additional traffic, the Executive Board referred to the potential positive advantages of the hubs in securing better public transport provision.

·         Building on the previous comment, The Executive Board referred to the aspiration for the rural travel hubs to enable public transport to spread further out, rather than to just start at the edge of Cambridge.

The Executive Board AGREED unanimously:

1.    To note and take into consideration the results of the feasibility report, future parish consultation with residents, local knowledge and planning considerations to approve Oakington and Sawston as pilots to be taken into Phase 2 as part of the Rural Travel Hubs project.

2.    That, in respect of Whittlesford:-

(a)  A Master Transport Planning exercise be undertaken at a cost of £50,000 which can be met out of existing funding.

(b)  A contribution of £70,000 be made for the provision of additional cycle parking for 200 bikes.

3.    To note that the three villages referred to above will be pilots and based on the evaluation of the success of these pilots that further waves of Rural Travel Hubs could be investigated in the future.